You need to be logged in to do that, please login or register.

Should anaesthetic be used in circumcision?

Selected Version - Version 5 (Current Version) : 07 Mar 2010 | 06:13 | NADIA999

<< Older version | Newer version >>

All versions

Key

  • Text coloured Greenhas been added snce the previous version
  • Text marked red and striked-throughhas been deleted

Changes from Version 4 to Version 5

On the point: We need to be beyond reproach

It takes no time and no risk just to dab some cream which numbs the vital area!

I don't understand why mohels can't do this. We must preserve circumcision, and its under attack by so many people.

We can't allow it to be made illegal so if we were to use anaesthetic and use doctors then we are beyond any criticism.

I wouldn't go as far as a general anaesthetic, much too dangerous!

If Judaism - or any other faith, for that matter - shouldn't have to change in order to be accepted by those of other faiths or atheists, should we also reinstate metzitzah b'peh? What would the rest of the world think about that? A large part of the reason why it no longer (or at least, very rarely) takes place is that it's just too controversial. If we stopped that, why not unanaesthetised britot?

Since when should religion change its rules in order to be accepted by other religions, or even atheists? Circumcision is not illegal for males. It is part of the religious and cultural spectrum of being Jewish. Why should such a practice be watered down in order to cater for people in other religions? Why should Jews have to live their practices in such and such a way that pleases other people? The answer is they do not have to and therefore they should not.not. 
 
http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/html/std/std-bris.shtml 
-some mohelim use a glass tube to suck blood away from the laceration; I`m reminded of pipettes.  
 
There`s no law or restriction as such stopping people from practicing metzitzah b'peh, because it`s a religious custom.  
 
If most Jewish people prefer getting their babies` parts anesthetized for the procedure ; great for them However people who choose not to use anesthetics should not be legally liable because it is a religious custom.  

Yes, because... We need to be beyond reproach

 

No, because...

It takes no time and no risk just to dab some cream which numbs the vital area!

I don't understand why mohels can't do this. We must preserve circumcision, and its under attack by so many people.

We can't allow it to be made illegal so if we were to use anaesthetic and use doctors then we are beyond any criticism.

I wouldn't go as far as a general anaesthetic, much too dangerous!

If Judaism - or any other faith, for that matter - shouldn't have to change in order to be accepted by those of other faiths or atheists, should we also reinstate metzitzah b'peh? What would the rest of the world think about that? A large part of the reason why it no longer (or at least, very rarely) takes place is that it's just too controversial. If we stopped that, why not unanaesthetised britot?

 

Since when should religion change its rules in order to be accepted by other religions, or even atheists? Circumcision is not illegal for males. It is part of the religious and cultural spectrum of being Jewish. Why should such a practice be watered down in order to cater for people in other religions? Why should Jews have to live their practices in such and such a way that pleases other people? The answer is they do not have to and therefore they should not.

http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/html/std/std-bris.shtml -some mohelim use a glass tube to suck blood away from the laceration; I`m reminded of pipettes. There`s no law or restriction as such stopping people from practicing metzitzah b'peh, because it`s a religious custom.

If most Jewish people prefer getting their babies` parts anesthetized for the procedure ; great for them However people who choose not to use anesthetics should not be legally liable because it is a religious custom.