quote:Stone-Wolf, you may be missing the fact that circumcision is a practice that originated and is considered religiously necessary by Jewish people.
Didn't miss it. Don't care. I'm not being crass...I believe that circumcision has a medically decent reason to exist because of my personal experience, so if people want to continue it for religious purposes, I don't think it has any impact.
If it was FGM and there was a religious purposes, I'd have something to say about it.
If I believed that male circumcision was cruel or had zero medical reason, I might feel differently.
I don't think Syn has anything against Jews either, she sees this particular issue from a humanitarian/emotional side. I'm glad we have people like her who care about the well being of our babies, even though I don't agree with her 100% (or even 50%)
The Jews are a tough people, and they have had to deal with change throughout their entire history, and I'm sure that including some antiseptic and having a doctor look over the should of the Rabi (or whichever is his name is, can't remember) will not offend God or fundamentally change who they are.
Anyway, my point is that one can be against circumcision and not be antisemitic, this is not a foregone conclusion.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:But hey, I guess as long as Sa'eed is trumpeting men's issues, you don't have to pay attention to the trivialization of FGM (he didn't withdraw the comparison), or the thinly-veiled anti-Semitism (he wasn't talking about *Communion*) until Yiu get the sort of standard of proof necessary in criminal court.
Sa'eed has had very little input into this discussion, he has been discussed more then he ever added.
He isn't the only one who compared male circumcision and female genital mutilation, and other then him and Syn, everyone shot them down, but unlike Syn, he admitted it was over the top...what else do you want?
Also I have no idea what this: "or the thinly-veiled anti-Semitism (he wasn't talking about *Communion*) until Yiu get the sort of standard of proof necessary in criminal court." means.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of course one can. I think that most people in this thread that are against circumcision are not antisemitic. That is not the case for Sa'eed who does seem to attack Jews and women - sometimes with a reasonable point, but just as often without.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
*snort* So just to be clear-and I say this as someone who wouldn't be opposed to across-the-board medical requirements-you say they'll be just fine with it religiously on...what basis exactly? Your extensive knowledge or Jewish culture?
Perhaps it would be wiser not to say to a certain religion, "This'll be fine according to your standards," when you obviously know little of those standards.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:...you say they'll be just fine with it religiously...
You know Jeff, if you focused a bit more of your attention on your reading compression skills instead of your snarky comeback skills you might get into less arguments on the internet.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:...you say they'll be just fine with it religiously...
You know Jeff, if you focused a bit more of your attention on your reading compression skills instead of your snarky comeback skills you might get into less arguments on the internet.
quote:The Jews are a tough people, and they have had to deal with change throughout their entire history, and I'm sure that including some antiseptic and having a doctor look over the should of the Rabi (or whichever is his name is, can't remember) will not offend God or fundamentally change who they are.
In this case, it's being pointed out to you that when you say "I'm sure" what you're really saying is "I'm totally assuming that ..."
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Perhaps you are right Samp, but I feel it safe to assume that if the Jew's culture can survive generations of slavery, they can handle a bit of numbing goo and an observer.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: Perhaps you are right Samp, but I feel it safe to assume that if the Jew's culture can survive generations of slavery, they can handle a bit of numbing goo and an observer.
That could a bit like saying, they can handle a BLT. We don't know (till one of them rings in) whether that would be prohibited or not. Or whether the requirement to have an observer make ritual circumcision practically impossible.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's not all you said. You said you were sure that this course of action wouldn't offend God in the eyes of Jews.
I pointed out (using as my basis the fact that you didn't even know the name of the guy who *does* it among Jews) that you have very little basis for making the claim.
And for the record, it doesn't matter how much input Sa'eed had on the conversation, either: you were also wrong when you said he backed off the initial comparison. He said it was 'a bit much' and then *went right on* comparing them. That's not backing off. I'm enjoying some snippy comebacks in this case inky because your own words, well, don't actually have support in what you've said.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Boots...the BLT thing...isn't applicable as what we eat is entirely voluntary, where as minor surgery has a governing body in this country. If some traditions have to be slightly modified to meet the need of having a medical professional there, then tough. My point is that the Jews as a people have overcome more hardship then this times a million.
Rakeesh...r-e-a-d-i-n-g c-o-m-p-r-e-h-e-n-s-i-o-n. I said I was sure it wouldn't offend God and that it wouldn't fundamentally change who they are.
As to Sa'eed. I don't care. You can believe he is Hitler/Mao Tse-tung/the antichrist/that evil Brit chick from "Weakest Link" for all I care. I choose to judge him by his words. Here is what he said. "I realize that the comparison to FGM is a bit much, but that's like saying it's wrong to compare cutting off a tip of a finger to the total slicing of the whole thing. I particularly made the comparison to FGM because of the study I linked to in the OP: Circumcision removes the five most sensitive parts of the penis." He admits that comparing them as the same thing is wrong. I don't agree with his finger analogy, but he is not discussing the whole ramifications, but trying to bring up specific medical evidence.
Let's make this really simple:
Sa'eed:
Are you Clive Candy? Are you the Somalian? Do you believe that women are inferior? Do you believe that Jews are inferior?Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here's the thing: you don't make that decision for Jews, whether something will offend God. I guess I can go tell a Sikh, "Listen, buddy, remove your headwear. God won't be annoyed, right?"
Of course if I *did*, I'd be showcasing some huge presumption or some substantial ignorance. I read what you said. It was pretty foolish for the reasons I've described. Your assertion that you didn't say what you plainly said is funny, though.
As for your questions...heh. Yes, because after all, the way to find out if someone is a misogynist or antisemitic is to just ask them plainly. That'll work!
Nothing to see here people, Stone_Wolf's on the case! Move along.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you can't see the difference between "I'm sure God won't be offended" and "I'm sure that this course of action wouldn't offend God in the eyes of Jews" then you have bigger problems then reading comprehension...but if you really need me to explain it to you I'll be happy to, you big silly.
Meanwhile, mind explaining what this means as I asked you before?
quote:...or the thinly-veiled anti-Semitism (he wasn't talking about *Communion*) until Yiu get the sort of standard of proof necessary in criminal court.
posted
[sarcasm]Oh, and I'm sure that your concept of "assumption of guilt without evidence" is far less worthy of mockery then my "let's find out what he has to say for himself" approach. [/sarcasm]
Either way, good job with the open mockery, it becomes you.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: I can't even watch videos because they scream in HORROR over pain they don't need. It's not extreme to say, why can't the child grow up and decide for himself? There's quite a few Jewish people who don't agree with circumcision, a growing number, in fact. Even if they don't remember the pain, it doesn't mean it doesn't affect and shape them.
Synesthesia, you honestly don't know what you're talking about. They do not scream in horror. You're making that up. It is extreme to try and dictate to a nation that was civilized when your ancestors were probably painting themselves blue and hiding in trees that only you know what's moral and ethical.
As far as Jews who assimilate, it's a problem. But it's our problem. Mind your own business.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Stone_Wolf, there has been lots of evidence. It might make sense for you to check out some of the other threads where Sa'eed (under various names) has posted to understand some of the context. Or even just the ones he has started.
ETA: to give some examples. He is an admitted anti-Zionist (which would be not too bad in my opinion) but he crossed that line pretty often and is a bit obsessed.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Boots...if it's good enough for Papa Janitor, it's good enough for me.
I've said from the start that if people want to add a warning that this might be an attack on Jews/women judging by his past posts, that it would be fair.
No matter what he wrote before, claiming he is "thinly veiling antisemitism" in this thread is simply uncalled for, as I've read all four of his comments, and nothing about it is even remotely mentioned.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Explain it to me, then. Furthermore, if you were *only* saying, "I don't think this would offend God," well that's different. But then my question becomes, "What does *your* opinion matter? It's not your religion!"
You said that Jews have changed for bigger things than this, and that you're sure God won't mind and that this won't change them. *Why* do you get to make that call, anymore than I do about Sikhs? The answer is, you don't. It's absurd.
And, dude, we've had this discussion before. Please don't talk to me that way, "...as I've asked you before." You don't get to call me to account or something. Just ask your silly question, which by the way is obvious: that statement meant that it's thinly-veiled anti-Semitism for the reasons that have been explained (reasons that you haven't actually *looked in to*), and that your standard for whether or not Sa'eed is the other posters is silly too. Lisa's second post illustrates it.
But then, if your way of finding out it someone is misogynistic or antisemitic is to just say, "Hey, mister, are Jews inferior or subhuman or anything like that?" then I'm not surprised at the kinds of thing you need to hear before you believe it.
Heh. 'Judges by what he says.' Because if he doesnt answer that question with a yes, he must be neither misogynistic or antisemitic! Right? Right.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Put another way, if I were to say regularly how stupid and violent, say, African-Americans are and then started making a ridiculous over-the-top accusation about hip hop music, people would with justice claim it was thinly veiled racism at work. Especially if I didn't actually back off of the initial absurd comparison, like Sa'eed *didn't*.
Another example: "Circumcision is comparable to FGM."
*prompt criticism*
"OK, maybe that's a bit over the top. Here's another example of how awful circumcision is, comparing it again to FGM."
That's not backing off, or withdrawing, or any other synonym.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I realize that the comparison to FGM is a bit much, but that's like saying it's wrong to compare cutting off a tip of a finger to the total slicing of the whole thing. I particularly made the comparison to FGM because of the study I linked to in the OP: Circumcision removes the five most sensitive parts of the penis.
Stone_Wolf_'s interpretation: I agree that they are different but they both involve the same idea, cutting genitals, and I was trying to show that circumcision isn't just cutting off an "extra part" but instead trying to highlight this new medical evidence which indicates that the foreskin actually contains five most sensitive parts of the penis.
It isn't a matter of everything he said is right or that I agree with him. It's more a matter of it's wrong to disregard everything he says because he has said some crazy crap in the past.
As to me asking you to actually answer my questions, live with it. Or just answer my questions. Or admit you don't. Or do whatever you want like I will do whatever I want. What you said didn't make sense. If you don't mind that you aren't clearly communicating, great...but it begs the question why you are even posting here.
quote:Because if he doesnt answer that question with a yes, he must be neither misogynistic or antisemitic! Right? Right.
Well I'm glad you are taking up both sides of the conversation, it does save time. Although I wish you would ask better questions and give better answers, but hey, I don't want to interrupt your conversation.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Stone_Wolf, I think that if you read the threads I linked, you will see a pattern of very sly digs.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Boots...sorry I must have missed your post...I'll back track and look them over in the near future...folding laundry atm.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
They sure do scream in pain though. You can't deny that. It sounds heart wrenching to me and if you put it like that, "Mind your own business." it only makes quiet meek me rather mad. As babies kind of are my business....
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: I can't even watch videos because they scream in HORROR over pain they don't need. It's not extreme to say, why can't the child grow up and decide for himself? There's quite a few Jewish people who don't agree with circumcision, a growing number, in fact. Even if they don't remember the pain, it doesn't mean it doesn't affect and shape them.
Synesthesia, you honestly don't know what you're talking about. They do not scream in horror. You're making that up. It is extreme to try and dictate to a nation that was civilized when your ancestors were probably painting themselves blue and hiding in trees that only you know what's moral and ethical.
As far as Jews who assimilate, it's a problem. But it's our problem. Mind your own business.
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: As babies kind of are my business....
In what sense?
Are you also going to start objecting when parents immunize their children? Practice cry-it-out/Ferberize/whatever-it's-being-called-this-week?
There are medical benefits to circumcision. You feel they are not sufficient to justify circumcising a child? Great. Don't circumcise yours.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Stone wolf, I'll be sure to keep your new policy on requiring answers to questions in a presumptive way in mind. For, y'know, next time you don't. Which will be soon, if patterns hold.
As for angry, heh. Who between us has talked about punching people, about being so angry they'd like to torture, etc.? I'm pretty sure that was you! So please, by all means, refuse to address direct statements by claiming I'm angry.
It's fun how you can link to Sa'eed explicitly saying, "Maybe it was a bit much, but here's why the comparison was valid," and then continue to say he's backed off it! And then to say, "How do we *know* he's misogynistic and antisemitic?" and then the means you offer of finding out are...asking a question practically no one would say 'yes' to except the most flagrant bigots.
When that's pointed out to you, you laugh it off.
When you say to Jews, "Well I'm sure God won't mind," you bristle at accusations that you're trying to tell Jews about their own religion.
So, to sum up, the way to find out if someone is misogynistic or antisemitic *isn't* to ask, "Hey, do you think they're inferior?" but the way to find out what Jews think abou something in religious terms *is* to ask them. I see why you'd be confused. You got the two responses switched around.
(You *still* haven't asked, so far as I can see, "Hey, Jewish people...would this be cool according to your religion?" instead just assuming, "I'm sure God won't mind." Part of a habit of yours of assumptions, for example recently that words mean what you think they mean, even when it's clearly demonstrated that it means that *to you*. But hey, instead of acknowledging you might be wrong, just assume God's cool with it-it doesn't bother *you*, right?)
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
The Jews are a tough people, and they have had to deal with change throughout their entire history, and I'm sure that including some antiseptic and having a doctor look over the should of the Rabi (or whichever is his name is, can't remember) will not offend God or fundamentally change who they are.
Maybe putting it another way: whoever decides what would fundamentally change Jews concerning circumcision is *probably* someone who knows the title of the person who performs them. Just, y'know, throwing that out there.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Boots...I looked over the links...can you help a bit more...only a few things really catch the eye so far:
quote:Originally posted by Sa'eed: I made this thread because I didn't want to derail the Rick Sanchez thread and I think this is a topic that's worthy of discussion. Lisa's thread implies that I have a thing about "Jews." I do, as far as anti-Zionism is concerned. But that's it. I'm an irreligious person and religious bigotry is alien to me so I feel that Lisa's thread is really nothing more than the usual attempt to conflate anti-zionism with unjustifiable bigotry against Jews -- a tactic that usually works in making would be critics of Zionism fearful of speaking out.
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by Sa'eed: Israel's Palestinian population very well recognize its existence -- they live there. But as citizens in a democracy they have a right to disagree with how that country should be and this legislation is aimed to punish them (and perhaps create the excuse for their expulsion) for disagreeing.
Waah!!!! Waaaah!!!! Someone call the waaaaahmbulance!
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: It's not an argument for why Israel ought to be considered justified for doing it, it's an argument for why Sa'eed is a dishonest schmuck for only talking about Israel.
quote:Originally posted by rivka: There are medical benefits to circumcision. You feel they are not sufficient to justify circumcising a child? Great. Don't circumcise yours.
posted
No, vaccines are useful and actually prevent disease. Much of the so-called benefits of circumcision are being debunked left and right. The real reason why folks started doing that for non-religious reasons was to stop boys from masturbating, but they'd go on about how hygienic it is, how it cures epilepsy and prevents syphilis, pure bunk. 80% of men in the world are intact, yet they don't have exploding foreskins or infections left and right because it's a healthy part of the body that has a purpose. As for Cry it out, I'm against that too. Studies have shown it can cause brain damage and it can cause attachment issues. And it's actually kind of mean, not to mention annoying to just let a baby cry in their crib when people are supposed to pick them up and attend to them. All that baby training nonsense is just that, nonsense started by people who probably never even held a baby. But folks STILL keep pushing out that cry it out crap to new parents when it's the last advice they need. I'm also against spanking too and inflicting any kind of pain on a child they don't need. How could I possibly NOT get my son circumcised, but not care about other kids being forced to have surgery they don't need, that doesn't really have most of the health benefits folks rant about. Folks went without circumcision for ages, it's going out of favour all around the world. I just don't understand the point of not only altering a healthy part of the body in such a painful way but not giving someone a choice about it. Folks are learning more about the world and listening less to the Kelloggs and Ezzos of the world and doing more research about this and other issues. Rear facing car seats come to mind.
quote:Originally posted by rivka:
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: As babies kind of are my business....
In what sense?
Are you also going to start objecting when parents immunize their children? Practice cry-it-out/Ferberize/whatever-it's-being-called-this-week?
There are medical benefits to circumcision. You feel they are not sufficient to justify circumcising a child? Great. Don't circumcise yours.
posted
Rakeesh...I will give you a longer response later, as I am busy (I would have said the response you deserve, but that gesture isn't really available in the emoticons)...suffice to say, you misquote me constantly, put words in my mouth, generally don't read my posts closely and have an attitude. I'll point out these things later in detail...for now, I'm very comfortable saying, have a nice day.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd be delighted to hear where I misquoted you Stone Wolf. By that I mean actually saying you said something you clearly didn't say, rather than pointing to your words, showing how they say something objectionable, and you getting cranky about it.
Case in point, you saying, "This won't change Jews," and my saying, "You know little about Jews, but even if you did, how do you make that call?"
Words in your mouth! Cause you spoke em.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: It is extreme to try and dictate to a nation that was civilized when your ancestors were probably painting themselves blue and hiding in trees that only you know what's moral and ethical.
As far as Jews who assimilate, it's a problem. But it's our problem. Mind your own business.
Um, what do anyone's distant ancestors have to do with anyone right now knowing what is moral and ethical???? Because I can point to tons of ancient civilizations that weren't particularly moral or ethical by today's standards. That's just a stupid argument.
I'm not saying I agree with Samp. I do find ritual circumcision of little boys barbaric, and wouldn't do it myself. I also find piercing the ears of baby girls barbaric and wouldn't do that myself either. However, I do not consider either sufficiently harmful to think we need to overturn cultural traditions because of it.
And just so we're clear about who is making that statement, it's me, an American Woman who is just shy of 30. As for my ancestors, well, quite frankly I haven't the faintest clue what they were doing 5,000 years ago. I'm a mutt, so they were probably doing alot of different things, possibly including trying to kill one another!
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: The real reason why folks started doing that for non-religious reasons was to stop boys from masturbating
Wait, what?
Just to set the record straight, masturbation works just fine without a foreskin. Speaking as a young adult who still remembers puberty well, I can say it didn't even slow me down.
Circumcision has no impact on the pleasure of masturbation, foreplay, oral sex, vaginal sex, etc. It's in no way debilitating. I don't know how it compares to having a foreskin (Stone_Wolf could answer that more accurately, since he's experienced both), but if anything I wouldn't mind knowing I'm slightly desensitized. I can imagine it helps with the problem of going off early.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Syn, not to be mean, but claiming that people who advocate cry it out are people who have never held a baby when you are not a parent is a bit hypocritical. What I believed was the right way to parent before I had one of my own was very different than what I believed after my first. And what I believed after my first was very different than after my second- mostly in that I realized I know nothing. Also, you take the more extreme version and put it on everyone. Like with cry it out, it generally isn't advised until 6 months. Also, when you haven't slept for a very long time, eventually, cry it out happens- if only out of exhaustion.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lisa, how is a person or a couple thinking for themselves and possibly not agreeing with every part of judaism a problem? Im trying to not be antagonistic, this idea just bothers me. Im leaving my other problems with that post alone.
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I did not say people who ADVOCATE it have never held a baby. I'm talking about how you had a ton of so-called experts in the past saying this is how you raise kids, put them on schedules, don't hold them, don't breastfeed, ect. Most of these folks were men who probably never held a baby, yet they were trying to tell people how to raise perfect children by depriving them of what they need to survive in the first place, compassion and such.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
No one said it actually WORKED to prevent masturbation, only that it was the reasoning behind it. This is accurate btw, I think it was some Puritan who thought it up a long time ago. Of course, if the circumcision is done during adolescence it probably DOES stop masturbation, at least for a little while.
As for the more general observation, it probably is easier to masturbate with a foreskin than without because there is at least some in&out motion with the foreskin which probably provides some sensation. (Having neither a foreskin, nor a penis, I'm just guessing here...) I can't imagine it makes too much of a difference though, since both circumcised and uncircumcised males seem to do it quite easily.
quote:Originally posted by Dogbreath:
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: The real reason why folks started doing that for non-religious reasons was to stop boys from masturbating
Wait, what?
Just to set the record straight, masturbation works just fine without a foreskin. Speaking as a young adult who still remembers puberty well, I can say it didn't even slow me down.
Circumcision has no impact on the pleasure of masturbation, foreplay, oral sex, vaginal sex, etc. It's in no way debilitating. I don't know how it compares to having a foreskin (Stone_Wolf could answer that more accurately, since he's experienced both), but if anything I wouldn't mind knowing I'm slightly desensitized. I can imagine it helps with the problem of going off early.
posted
Do you work with children often, Syn? I confess I don't remember what your job is.
This is strictly out of curiosity. I try to avoid using a person's profession or personal life in arguments, because I hate arguments like that being used against me, and because it often turns into a pissing contest.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I used to... I practically raised my cousin from the time he was an infant to school age.
I exaggerate slightly, but yeah...
It's just there are certain cycles that need to die like the ones I grow up with....
Don't use those kind of arguments. I hate that... I don't have kids yet, that's beside the point. I WAS a kid and one day I will have kids...
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I don't know how it compares to having a foreskin (Stone_Wolf could answer that more accurately, since he's experienced both)...
Dude, I was 12...and that was nearly two decades ago...so suffice to say I wasn't gettin' any, and if I was boffing the bishop (who remembers exactly when that habit started), I couldn't tell you if there was a difference or not now, 19 years later.
Rakeesh...I don't care anymore...you just aren't important enough for me to invest my time arguing with you over stupid details. I used to find it entertaining, and now I do not. Prepared to be ignored as I see fit.
DDDaysh...I don't know if you want to know this or not...so if not, sorry...but even circumcised males can grip the outer skin and move it up and down like a dog's extra skin and masturbate thusly.
Syn...trust me when I tell you that until you have children, you don't know what you are going to do. I only became a father 20 months ago, and I had planned on what I was going to do and not do most of my life. All my well made plans went out the window the second my son was born. And like scholarette said, exhaustion can be a major factor in your decision making process.
I don't expect you to agree here, but I would really like you to do this: Remember what you are saying now, when you have kids, and then come back and give us a report. It might be a bit different then you imagined.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AchillesHeel: Lisa, how is a person or a couple thinking for themselves and possibly not agreeing with every part of judaism a problem? Im trying to not be antagonistic, this idea just bothers me. Im leaving my other problems with that post alone.
Are you sure you want me to answer this?
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I very much hope so, Stone Wolf. It'll make ignoring awkward questions that much easier if you're allowed to ignore them right off the bat instead of on a case-by-case basis like thus far:)
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know if you looked back over my posts and yours, I'd bet vs large odds that I would have admitted that other people have valid points and adjusted my point of view at least twice as often as you have.
I'm a stubborn person, and admit it freely. But I try and be reasonable and fair to everyone, even the people I do not like, and admit when I'm wrong.
At times I appreciate your voice in a discussion, and at other times I wish you would never post on these boards again, and the real difference between the two is when you are speaking your own mind and trying to convince someone that what they said is wrong. When it is the latter you are often holier then though, assumptive, snippy, sarcastic and a general pain.
You can keep assuming that my reluctance to talk to you is because my position is a weak one, and I know it and need a cop out, or you can take a risk and really believe me when I tell you that I really think that arguing with you is not productive or fun and your attitude is a major stumbling block to progress in a discussion.
Either way, I simply reserve the right to not address what you have to say.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: It is extreme to try and dictate to a nation that was civilized when your ancestors were probably painting themselves blue and hiding in trees...
And the amazing part is that this just went unnoticed. Nobody even said "boo".
Frickin' really, Hatrack?
Lisa, what wouldn't you say? I'm honestly wondering.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia: Much of the so-called benefits of circumcision are being debunked left and right.
Not really. If you meant that many of the medical benefits can be achieved by other means, I might agree with you. But "debunked" puts you right back in irrational-town.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know what's an even bigger impediment to discussion? The assumption that because you didn't *intend* to say anything wrong or presumptuous, you shouldn't be treated as though you have.
Case in point, again: who are you to assert that a government mandated oversight to circumcision would not 'fundamentally change' Jews and their religion? Still waitin' on an answer to that, or you can continue complaining about how mean I am without ever, y'know, *addressing* that. Or perhaps you can continue suggesting Sa'eed withdrew his comparison when what he *actually* said-and it's still there-was that it's a bit much, and then went right on standing by it.
You *kind* of addresses the problem I said your post had of telling Jews what they'd think was OK with God, I guess. But you still *haven't asked anyone who is actually Jewish* what the impact might be. You suggested your idea wouldn't be a fundamental change to Jews and you *didn't even know the word mohel*.
You could've asked, instead of...gasp!...assuming! So yeah, I 'assume' you're being presumptive. Just silly of me.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AchillesHeel: Lisa, how is a person or a couple thinking for themselves and possibly not agreeing with every part of judaism a problem? Im trying to not be antagonistic, this idea just bothers me. Im leaving my other problems with that post alone.
Are you sure you want me to answer this?
If you felt the urge to censor youself once already, yes.
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: It is extreme to try and dictate to a nation that was civilized when your ancestors were probably painting themselves blue and hiding in trees...
I understand this comment to be a racial slur, and as such a direct and intentional violation of the TOS.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[No No]](graemlins/nono.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
