SYNAGOGUE OF SATANS FAVORITE PART OF THE JOB
Sama_El
Published on Sep 9, 2022
https://en.intactiwiki.org/index.php/Metzitzah_b%27peh#:~:text=The%20practice%20of%20metzitzah%20b%27peh%20was%20alleged%20to,Israeli%20infants%2C%20one%20of%20whom%20suffered%20brain%20damage.
Metzitzah b'peh is a very dangerous Jewish practice that puts the health of the infant boy at risk from infection. Holt (1913) reported tubercular mohelim were infecting infant boys with tuberculosis.[1] In more recent times, boys have been infected with herpes and some have died.
(The following text or part of it is quoted from the free Wikipedia article Metzitzah b'peh (oral suction):)
The ancient method of performing metzitzah b'peh (Hebrew: מְצִיצָה בְּפֶה), or oral suction[2][3]—has become controversial. The process has the mohel place his mouth directly on the circumcision wound to draw blood away from the cut. The majority of Jewish circumcision ceremonies do not use metzitzah b'peh,[4] but some Haredi Jews use it.[5][6][7] It has been documented that the practice poses a serious risk of spreading herpes to the infant.[8][9][10][11] Proponents maintain that there is no conclusive evidence that links herpes to Metzitza,[12] and that attempts to limit this practice infringe on religious freedom.[13][14][15]
The practice has become a controversy in both secular and Jewish medical ethics. The ritual of metzitzah is found in Mishnah Shabbat 19:2, which lists it as one of the four steps involved in the circumcision rite. Rabbi Moses Sofer (1762–1839) observed that the Talmud states that the rationale for this part of the ritual was hygienic — i.e., to protect the health of the child. The Chasam Sofer issued a leniency (Heter) that some consider to have been conditional to perform metzitzah with a sponge to be used instead of oral suction in a letter to his student, Rabbi Lazar Horowitz of Vienna. This letter was never published among Rabbi Sofer's responsa but rather in the secular journal Kochvei Yitzchok.[16] along with letters from Dr. Wertheimer, the chief doctor of the Viennese General Hospital. It relates the story that a mohel (who was suspected of transmitting herpes via metzizah to infants) was checked several times and never found to have signs of the disease and that a ban was requested because of the "possibility of future infections".[17] Moshe Schick (1807–1879), a student of Moses Sofer, states in his book of Responsa, She’eilos u’teshuvos Maharam Schick (Orach Chaim 152,) that Moses Sofer gave the ruling in that specific instance only because the mohel refused to step down and had secular Government connections that prevented his removal in favor of another mohel and the Heter may not be applied elsewhere. He also states (Yoreh Deah 244) that the practice is possibly a Sinaitic tradition, i.e., Halacha l'Moshe m'Sinai. Other sources contradict this claim, with copies of Moses Sofer's responsa making no mention of the legal case or of his ruling applying in only one situation. Rather, that responsa makes quite clear that "metzizah" was a health measure and should never be employed where there is a health risk to the infant.[18]
Chaim Hezekiah Medini, after corresponding with the greatest Jewish sages of the generation, concluded the practice to be Halacha l'Moshe m'Sinai and elaborates on what prompted Moses Sofer to give the above ruling.[19] He tells the story that a student of Moses Sofer, Lazar Horowitz, Chief Rabbi of Vienna at the time and author of the responsa Yad Elazer, needed the ruling because of a governmental attempt to ban circumcision completely if it included metztitzah b'peh. He therefore asked Sofer to give him permission to do brit milah without metzitzah b’peh. When he presented the defense in secular court, his testimony was erroneously recorded to mean that Sofer stated it as a general ruling.[20] The Rabbinical Council of America, (RCA) which claims to be the largest American organization of Orthodox rabbis, published an article by mohel Dr Yehudi Pesach Shields in its summer 1972 issue of Tradition magazine, calling for the abandonment of Metzitzah b'peh.[21] Since then the RCA has issued an opinion that advocates methods that do not involve contact between the mohel's mouth and the open wound, such as the use of a sterile syringe, thereby eliminating the risk of infection.[5] According to the Chief Rabbinate of Israel[22] and the Edah HaChareidis[23] metzitzah b'peh should still be performed.
The practice of metzitzah b'peh was alleged to pose a serious risk in the transfer of herpes from mohelim to eight Israeli infants, one of whom suffered brain damage.[8][24] When three New York City infants contracted herpes after metzizah b'peh by one mohel and one of them died, New York authorities took out a restraining order against the mohel requiring use of a sterile glass tube, or pipette.[7][25] The mohel's attorney argued that the New York Department of Health had not supplied conclusive medical evidence linking his client with the disease.[25][26] In September 2005, the city withdrew the restraining order and turned the matter over to a rabbinical court.[27] Dr. Thomas Frieden, the Health Commissioner of New York City, wrote, "There exists no reasonable doubt that ‘metzitzah b'peh’ can and has caused neonatal herpes infection....The Health Department recommends that infants being circumcised not undergo metzitzah b'peh."[28] In May 2006, the Department of Health for New York State issued a protocol for the performance of metzitzah b'peh.[29] Dr. Antonia C. Novello, Commissioner of Health for New York State, together with a board of rabbis and doctors, worked, she said, to "allow the practice of metzizah b'pe to continue while still meeting the Department of Health's responsibility to protect the public health."[30] Later in New York City in 2012 a 2-week-old baby died of herpes because of metzitzah b'peh.[31]
In three medical papers done in Israel, Canada, and the US, oral suction following circumcision was suggested as a cause in 11 cases of neonatal herpes.[8][32][33] Researchers noted that prior to 1997, neonatal herpes reports in Israel were rare, and that the late incidences were correlated with the mothers carrying the virus themselves.[8] Rabbi Doctor Mordechai Halperin implicates the "better hygiene and living conditions that prevail among the younger generation", which lowered to 60% the rate of young Israeli Chareidi mothers who carry the virus. He explains that an "absence of antibodies in the mothers’ blood means that their newborn sons received no such antibodies through the placenta, and therefore are vulnerable to infection by HSV-1."[34]
Add to
Flag Video
Rate video
Rate video
Up next
Autoplay
Recommended
-
Watch Later
57:05Job 9: Job Responds to Bildad the Shuhite | Pastor Roger Jimenez
338 views 1012 days ago -
Watch Later
00:01 -
Watch Later
00:01SATANS PLAN 4U - THE VOYNICH MANUSCRIPT DECODED - A WORLD WARNING - part 1 (SUBTITLED)
207 views 199 days ago -
Watch Later
01:53:16Latter Day Satans: Mormons Exposed (Official Documentary)
945 views 1654 days ago -
Watch Later
01:53:16Latter Day Satans | Mormons Exposed Official Documentary 2018
425 views 1416 days ago
