Gives new meaning to the phrase "cut and blow".

Why not pass a law prohibiting the practice? Because that would be unconstitutional.

So you mean it's not just Gentile blood there after?

Maybe I should of listened more to Cedarford when he was speaking truth to the power of the Israeli blood hungry baking lobby

I've got to say this sort of helps David Icke's "blood-sucking reptile space alien" thesis.

I'm sorry, but what the fuck?

No wonder Mohels get so many tips.

Remember the SNL skit on mohels?

Watched Europa Europa (again) last night, fantastic film, couldn't recommended it more strongly. Anyhow, at the beginning of the film is Solomon's bris (sp.) The mohel in the scene uses a glass pipette to suck the blood away.

Um...I could have gone all day without knowing that little tidbit. Just because Allah sends them to you doesn't mean you have to run them, you know.

Bleah.

Jeez, Ace, you could have passed on this one. Brewfan just sent his application in to the Brooklyn College of Mohel Knowledge.

Who cares, man. I'd much rather go through life with a German helmet than a turtle neck.

Only the ultra-Orthodox do that sort of thing (metzizah bi peh.) Most mohels use other devices for such things now.

Most mohels use other devices for such things now.

What other devices?

Ace,

Did you take a look at your Google ads?
They are headlined:

Questioning circumcision

The Circumcision Center

Jewish Baby Gifts

Well, yeah... Google spiders every page for keywords and puts up articles based on those words.

Well, yeah... Google spiders every page for keywords and puts up articles based on those words

What, no ads for blood sucking mohels??

Is this possibly where that whole bloodsucking, baby eating myth came from?

Google better work on their inference engine. All the ads on the page now are targeting MoveOn types! lol!

Sheesh, and they talk about Catholic Priests having problems....

What other devices?

Just a rubber syringe thingie attached to a clear plastic tube. It's sterile and safe.

Well, if any of you guys ever decide to go back to a turtle-neck there are ways. Hat tip (or tip of something at any rate) to Sobek.

"Cervical Health Info"? Well, I guess that need include something for women when targetting a page discussing brit milah.

For an Orthodox Jewish perspective on metzitzah b'peh, one should read the statement by the Rabbinical Council of America (an Orthodox institution) on this matter. People make a huge to-do because on the one hand, the practice is listed in the Talmud (as the statement indicates, in Mishnah Shabbat 19:2). Not only is it just listed, it is listed as, basically, part of the brit milah ceremony, one of Judaism's most ancient and most important rituals. (Indeed, I think it's the only Jewish ritual adhered to by all Jews (concerning their sons) regardless of observance or denomination.) I guess the reasoning is that:

a. If this is not performed, the brit milah ritual is invalid, and thereby the child is not Jewish. Or the community is guilty of not performing what G-d demanded.

b. If the Talmud says it, it shall be done. No ifs, ands, buts, or other compromises. It may be argued that Jews do not have a right to change G-d-given laws, even if they were passed down through the Oral Law (torah she-be'al peh). This could also be a reaction to institutions that are seen to be flagrantly throwing out unpleasant laws with impunity, such as kashrut, taharat hamishpacha, tzeniut, no marriage with goyim, etc. Perhaps some fear banning this practice might set Jews on a slippery slope to throwing away mesorah and Torah, resulting in the end of Judaism (as they see it).

It seems that this practice (and the debate over it) is confined mainly to haredi societies. Which is futile anyway: they're not going to change.

On the other hand, an article by a Reform Jewish organization informs us that Mishnah Nedarim 32a says this practice is not mandatory:

In his responsum on the subject of metzitzah ba-peh, the Chatam Sofer based his ruling on several Jewish legal texts. He noted that the foundation for the ritual of metzitzah b'peh is found in Mishnah Shabbat 19:2, which lists metzitzah b'peh as one of the four steps involved in the circumcision rite. The Chatam Sofer observed that the Mishnah states that the rationale for this part of the ritual was hygienic - i.e., to protect the health of the child. He also cited a passage in Nedarim 32a as a warrant for the position that metzitzah b'peh was not an obligatory part of the circumcision ceremony.

As a result of these texts, the Chatam Sofer contended that Jewish tradition instituted metzitzeh b'eh solely to prevent danger to the infant and stated that metzitzah b'peh was not a required part of the circumcision ceremony. In light of the rationale for this part of the ceremony, he concluded that a sponge or other instrument that could soak up the blood and safeguard the child could be employed instead. Those numerous Orthodox rabbis who have not insisted on metzitzah b'peh in the past two centuries have essentially followed his reasoning on this matter.

In light of the unparalleled prestige that the Chatam Sofer enjoys as a legal authority within the world of Orthodox Judaism, a puzzle remains as to why a number of Orthodox rabbis have dissented from his position and maintained that metzitzah b'peh is an inviolable part of the circumcision ritual.

In my opinion, based on my understanding of Judaism, if it has been proven that metzitzah b'peh can cause serious harm, if not death, the practice should be banned. Preservation of life (pikuach nefesh) is very important in Judaism, so much so that one is commanded to break the Sabbath in order to save a life. (And in the old days, breaking the Sabbath was punishable by death (although, I should add, such a punishment was rarely applied), as ordered by the Torah.)

Back to reading about Jewish oral sex, as my sister cringingly described it.

OK, Muslihoon, do you think that the theological opinion of a guy who knows only one Lynyrd Skynyd song should be taken seriously?

You got me there, Michael. I hang my head in shame.

That one song better be Gimme Three Steps...

Here's an idea: don't hire mohels with herpes.

I think this is something that self-policing could take care of. The communities who have a direct interest in this could demand the mohels pass tests for various infectious diseases, such as TB, herpes, HIV, what-have-you. Jeez.

Here's another idea:

Don't suck little kids dicks right after you cut their foreskin off and then drink their blood and give them herpes or AIDS or other orally communicable diseases.

That activity is pretty much gonna just get you a bunch of bad publicity and not much else.

I could really care less if it's in the Talmud, in the Jewish tradition, or in Penthouse Magazine; just as I could really care less if the Qur An "says" that if your daughter has sex before she's married, you should kill her, for, you know, the "honor of the family."

People interpret their "bible" in many ways; many of these ways are outlawed and it's perfectly Constitutional.

I'm gonna go puke now.

Gotcha one better, Right#1: Let the boy choose, when he's of age, whether to have half his penile skin (and 1/3 his penile nerve endings) destroyed.

Sound reasonable?

Rittenhouse,

You mean I could actually have been 1/3 more sensitive if I was intact?

I'm not sure that would be a good thing.

I thought you meant "model" (not "Mohel") and I was thinking "Wow, getting blown by a model as an infant... no wonder everybody is always jealous of those jews..."

LogCabin,

lol! I was thinking the same thing.

Rittenhouse,

Like Fernando, "I would rather look good than to feel good."

No blood for mohel.

Fractions work different each way. Circumcision takes 1/3 of the nerve endings. But an intact male has 50 percent more nerve endings than a cut one.

Would food taste better with half-again more taste buds?

Honestly, it's *much* nicer sucking an intact organ.

Mmmmmm.... :)