. Jewish identity is defined by rules Circumcision is one of the main rules Maybe you would like to create a league with five bases, two outs per inning etc but it won't be called baseball
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @time2reclaim @realChaim_Rubin and
The original description of the Covenant (Genesis 15 in the Jahwist text) had no reference to
#circumcision. That story was revised only after the Babylonian Captivity (& moved to Genesis 17) by priests who thereafter pretended the circumcision reference had always been there.2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @cooney21 @realChaim_Rubin and
Then, 100s of years after the Baylonian Captivity, the rules of the Covenant were changed again to require the entire foreskin to be removed. Until then, only the small part of the foreskin that always overhangs the glans was deemed necessary to remove.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @cooney21 @realChaim_Rubin and
Each of us can (& does) believe what he or she would like. But there simply is no historical or other support for the idea that infant
#circumcision always has been an immutable requirement for Jewish identity, & so no basis for the idea it couldn't be changed yet again.#i22 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @cooney21 @RockerMan_198 and
. The Torah has been increasingly validated by historical research &material findings &never once invalidated Any contrary statement is unsupported speculation All academic work is loaded with suppositions &qualifiers Bottom line is universal Jewish practice on the ground
3 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @realChaim_Rubin @TeddysMom8 and
What have we here? More Penis trolls, obsessed with the foreskin division? Has only been helpful - never hurtful - gives identity and community - no harm, no foul. Kindly butt out.
2 replies 2 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @bellewriter @realChaim_Rubin and
We oppose child
#circumcision b/c destroying another person's healthy body part is inherently wrong (for more on why: http://www.beyondthebris.com/2011/06/to-mohel-who-cut-me.html …). It's circumcisers who've picked the body part to become obsessed with attacking. Of course it's harmful: https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2015/10/26/secrecy-questioned-about-babys-death-after-circumcision.html …#i23 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @cooney21 @bellewriter and
I would question the validity of this the result of circumcision. If a child is circumcised at 14 days old, but does not die until 8 days later, there is obviously some other underlying condition While the death of an infant is tragic, something else was going on with this child
5 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
If you think a child DYING from an unnecessary, elective surgery doesn't make the case for why that surgery is inherently unethical, then it can only be because you don't understand the first thing about #bioethics. #FirstDoNoHarm #i2 #HisBodyHisChoice #tweetiatrician
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.