Orthodoxy vs Heterodoxy—Who’s the Heretics? Things I didn’t know…

How orthodoxy is damaging to children. The risk/benefit analysis.

Oral circumcision is immoral. All circumcision without medical necessity is mutilation. I don’t care who your god is, please have the decency to stand your ground defending your children’s well being and employ basic human morality to protect at least your own. If this life were truly a test, the ultimate show of integrity is to say no to your god when its wrong.

Oral circumcision is barbaric. Who the hell would suck the blood from an infants bloody penis but a religious zealot? Herpes in infants is a life-threatening pathology (yes, babies are contracting herpes from the mouths of rabbis) The smugness of orthodoxy is a cancer. Who are the heretics here?

Orthodox infant baptism (30 sec video) will make your skin crawl, but the parents just stand by, gullibly blind and trusting while a priest tortures their child. This type of religious fervor is abuse. Straight up!

The smugness of orthodoxy and the gullibility of believers is astonishing. These examples are only two kinds of proof.

  • These religions are immoral
  • People will allow another to abuse their child through faith, therefore will allow religion to dictate any facet of their life.

Author: jim-

One minute info blogs escaping the faith trap.

50 thoughts on “Orthodoxy vs Heterodoxy—Who’s the Heretics? Things I didn’t know…”

    1. I did a post a while back and psychologists deal gingerly with delusion and (healthy delusion) as not to offend so many. But it is considered a delusion by professionals that work in the field. It’s a touchy subject, but contrary to the religious’ beliefs, life is better on the more real side. What’s the big push to believe anything at all? I don’t get it

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Exactly! Why isn’t there more of a push to think and know rather than just believe something. Every single thing that happens in this life, we are literally applying a litmus test to it to determine whether it’s true but with religion, it gets a pass??? How and why??

        Like

        1. I really can’t say, but on an interesting note, religion demands total autonomy and freedom, but the fact that they then voluntarily sign up for a god figure that monitors their every move, their every thought, even when their dead, proves they are the ones that need strict liberal governing. Go figure…

          Liked by 1 person

  1. I had no idea that ‘oral circumcision’ existed. I’m stunned actually. But I guess it reinforces the notion of our society being utterly insane. That these people are passing on herpes viruses to babies….it goes beyond madness.

    The only thing I would say about ultra-orthodox Jews is that 1. they are an underclass in Israel; 2. they continue to protest against – rightly in my view – the genocide and ethnic cleansing committed by Israel against the Palestinians. Other than that I don’t have enough knowledge of their beliefs to usefully comment. I’m clear that oral circumcision is unjustifiable though. Even in ancient times they had sharp instruments and there would be no need to do this, other than perhaps for some perverse motives.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. PS I just read the article on oral circumcision and it isn’t clear on the procedure. I’d assumed the Rabbi did it with his teeth, but it appears it may be done using some instrument followed by the Rabbi ‘sucking the penis to draw out some blood’. Either way I agree, it’s pretty barbaric/ perverse

      Like

        1. I would have thought parents of such babies would be routinely charged under some sort of child abuse/ child endagerment law. You can’t do anything these days without getting a ticket for it.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. No doubt they were “under the protection” of the Catholic Church. Also … I tend to think this practice was not “publicized” to the outside world, which would make it less likely the legal community even knew about it. Just surmising.

            Liked by 2 people

    2. I hope this didn’t appear as ad hominem because that’s not the intent. It is to demonstrate two things, that most of religious archaism has no place anymore. We can do much better. Point two is that religion can get people to do things against their own, better conscience. Good insight Stephen, and thankfully this is not a widespread tradition. Thanks.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. No, it doesn’t come across as ad hominem. I can’t comment on other archaic practices as I don’t know of any. Unless you include Saudi Arabia’s decapitation, flogging and cutting off of hands etc. But they’re friends of the US and UK governments, so I guess that makes it ok….for our great leaders anyway…

        Liked by 1 person

  2. It passed into conventional medicine as removing the foreskin is good medical practice. My father in law who was Pa. Dutch never had it removed. It was simply not done. When my son’s doctor told me it had to be done – good medicine, my father in law rebutted him. So, we didn’t. Nothing happened medically to anyone……

    However, I strongly suspect it became mandatory because of religion.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I strongly suspect you’re right. Speaking of the dr, I learned this little tidbit over the past couple days. 6th-century Arabic Infancy Gospel of Our Savior claims that a “Hebrew woman” preserved Jesus’s foreskin in an alabaster jar of spikenard. It’s a story that lays the groundwork for the claims made by certain medieval churches that they possess the holy prepuce (foreskin). This is nuts! Pickling would be much more modern. Hehe. But what the hell?

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Years ago my good friend Neal, a recent convert to Judaism, watching his rabbi performing a bris on his infant son, did a face plant on the floor as the dude cut the skin. I’ll never forget his ashen face. The reaction of an empathetic man watching Primitivism in action pure and simple. C’est la vie.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Let me slip this in, right next to that horror story. The giant condom is to protect this man (an ultra-orthodox Jewish Cohen presumably from the Lithuanian-Israeli Haredi community) from the power-zapping effects of flying over graveyards.

    Liked by 1 person

        1. Ah, too obvious. I was looking for the deep meaning. But, as with all religion, there is nothing but sleight of hand tail chasing. I may be deconverted but still tend to look beyond the mark now and then.

          Liked by 1 person

  5. Shhhhh, Jim. You are not supposed to talk of such things. Don’t you know sex and sexual parts are forbidden conversation! Who do you think you are, shouting from the rooftops! Have some class, please. Go to your ex-church this Sunday and ask them why? (See, I don’t even know if Mormons practise such dirty deeds. If not, any synagogue will do!)

    Liked by 1 person

  6. That priest or whatever he was in the video should be arrested. He could do physical and/or neurological damage to that poor child. Did you notice the little girls in the background cowering in fear? Some adult in their lives will no doubt tell them it was for the baby’s good and, being small children, they’ll unfortunately believe it. It’s criminal.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. There are plenty of Greek Orthodox baptism videos that are worse than this one. Some do it head first, spin em around feet first, head first, feet first, just flippin the kids like rag-doll baby yoga. God is love

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Good god….. or rather, bad god! It’s hard to imagine it could be worse, but I’m sure it can.
        It seems to me the little girls’ reactions were the normal, rational reactions to what they saw. Too bad that rationality will probably be brainwashed out of them. 😦

        Liked by 1 person

      1. At the end of this video, it sounded like he was making an excuse or a joke about letting the baby drop out of his hands. Something like, “At least this time….blah, blah, blah.” Add insult to injury, why don’t you? Really pathetic.

        Liked by 2 people

    1. Research shows that it’s the other way around from what I can tell. Why not leave it alone, and if it’s problematic then remove it? It’s a religious ritual that has become mainstream, almost automatic. I certainly would leave it to a doctor and not a rabbi in an unsterile environment.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Curious — since we know that MAN wrote the bible and “god” doesn’t say much, what do you think actually prompted this ritual?

        Like

        1. This is part of what I know. “As for where it arose, “metzitzah b’peh” is a time-honored tradition codified in the most important Jewish scripts.
          We first encounter the practice in the Mishnah, the first compendium of laws of rabbinic Judaism (c. 200 CE): “We perform all the requirements of circumcision on the Sabbath: We circumcise, uncover, suck, and place a compress with cumin on it” (Sabbath 19b)
          This was largely changed in the 1800s after an outbreak of infant deaths linked to one specific Rabbi, and the discovery of germs.

          Like

          1. So essentially it goes back to what I was getting at — it was MAN that instituted the practice. As with most things religious, the excuse for the several inexcusable actions committed throughout the centuries always goes back to a commandment that warped minds are certain came from some ethereal entity.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. I just mentioned to Mak, famine, starvation, hallucinations, blood sugars, drought and siezures, dreams, siezures, all forms eliciting spectral evidence.

              Liked by 1 person

  7. Under the sofa in my office I found my Atheist’s Moral Compass. Ya didn’t know I had one, did ya? Well, being a ‘dirty old man’ entitles me to loosing it sometimes. Regarding circumcision, I would have said let it end with me, but I have two sons. Let it end with them.
    Nowhere on my godless heathen moral compass does it say to mutilate babies or woman, to kill anyone (believers or not), or to treat sojourners into my nation like shit. May the most high forgive this infidel’s incredulity.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. That is a stellar point. You have your own compass…and that is suficiente for the vast majority of people. Religion is designed by the worst, for the worst. But who lets a rabbi do that to their kid?

      Liked by 2 people

      1. if I performed a medical procedure that caused a baby to bleed like that and put my mouth on his or her genitals, I’d be lucky to make it to trial. But because it is religion, it’s okay. It shouldn’t be ok. Religion is no excuse for physical or mental mutilation. Have a vasectomy or tubes tied, and they call that mutilation. It is beyond hypocritical.

        Liked by 3 people

    1. It’s astounding what can be done in the name of religion. The circumcision is bad enough. The oral suctioning? That’s just sick. Things I wished I’d never learned, but can’t un.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Well, they didn’t have medical suction devices in the 1st century… Gotta use what you got I guess 😉 Keep in mind, what’s sexual in one culture may not be not in another. Never the less, I agree it’s GROSS!!! Not appropriate in the 21st century!

        Like

        1. Oh I didn’t think it was sexual at all. Incredibly stupid and careless. Even with modern medicine herpes is life threatening in infants. We know better now. How many kids have they killed this way over the millennia? Gods will, I guess.

          Liked by 1 person

    2. Females are being mutilated all around the world. Have you heard about female circumcision? They remove the clitoris. Have no doubt that atrocities are being performed on females as well.

      Liked by 3 people

          1. I guess I wasn’t clear enough… I didn’t mean to say it never happens to girls, just that it seems people are more apt to decry it and call it mutilation than for boys when I think both should be stopped…

            Liked by 2 people

    3. Dear LoR, what is female genital mutilation if not a form of circumcision? At least boys can still enjoy having sex after circumcision, girls cannot. An ugly, brutal, self-destroying practice if ever I have heard of one. There was a time (my time) when doctor’s routinely circumcised boys at birth, having been convinced by scientists it was a healthy choice, nothing to do with religion. That time is now past, but religion will never catch up.

      Liked by 5 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: