The grandmother carried the sleeping infant boy on a white pillow toward the synagogue’s altar, and passed him to her son. Her son carried the infant toward the mohel, or Jewish ritual circumciser, who stood amid a cluster of chanting men.
The mohel lifted the infant’s clothing to expose his tiny penis. With a rapid flick of a sharp two-sided scalpel, the mohel sliced off the foreskin and held it between his fingers. Then he took a sip of red wine from a cup and bent his head. He placed his lips below the cut, around the base of the baby’s penis, for a split second, creating suction, then let the wine spill from his mouth out over the wound. (via)this prompted me to immediately stop reading and text thomas wilhelm (obviously), who replied with:
"oh yeah. you didn't know about rabbi baby dick sucking? grossest thing."the most insane part is that the act itself wasn't even the newsmaking portion of the article. it turns out there is somewhat of an epidemic of mohels (baby d s-ers) transitting herpes to unsuspecting jewish infants. the city is attempting to pass legislation that will
a few hours later, i still cant stop thinking about this. so i wanted to see what joel thought about it:
me: i need to ask you a very serious questionso?!? what are YOUR thoughts?
Joel: go on
me: did you know that THIS happens? (link)
Joel: i didnt know about the jewish infant vampire blowjob
me: isnt that alarming
Joel: yeah
why take the risk
and ok, its an important tradition. whats the big deal with getting the parents to sign a consent form.
why isnt there ALREADY a consent form?
me: my question is
do they insist on tradition when circumsizing a grown man
how is it not a criminal activity in today's modern society
if a regular gentile man did that to a gentile baby
they would lock him up and throw away the key
Joel: its stupid and gross and sick and dangerous
and shouldnt be protected because it is "religious"
what if my religion said that i should kill any babies born with a vagina sorry, its my religion
i think we should use our platform on 2pz to facilitate an internet discussion
me: good idea
5 comments:
happy rosh hashana everyone!
If a regular gentile man did that to a gentile baby for a religious purpose, it would be just as protected by separation of church and state.
Also, it's a tradition practiced by a minority of Jews, so who cares.
Objecting to this because it is unhygienic is one thing, but to insinuate that it is sexual seems a tad perverse.
P.S. I am terrified of the jokes that will result from making this comment.
you should be. because now, in addition to killing innocent animals, everyone is thinking you want to put your gentile mouth on baby dicks. where does it end nsikan? where does it end?
so there exists a minority within a minority group that adheres to this unhygienic practice.
maybe it doesnt matter because only 2 babies died in the past 10 years and a only a very small number of people actully participate in the practice, but the idea that a consent form is somehow an infringement on their rights is absurd.
the article says that both the grandmother who carried the little boy to his circumcision and the 22 year old mother of the boy weren't really informed about the practice. make them sign a consent form and maybe everyone involved will know what is happening.
and for the record: im much more inclined to agree with denmark and germany. ban circumcision altogether. it is a totally unnecessary and dangerous practice.
let little a little boy keep his penis intact instead of giving a piece to a creep who wants to be buried with thousands of foreskins.
Post a Comment