Forced circumcision--in the United States, 2009

[Jack]

AN URGENT APPEAL FOR YOUR HELP
TO PROTECT A 12 YEAR-OLD BOY

Those of you who are serious about protecting children from non-therapeutic
circumcision have a unique opportunity to assist with a legal case in
Oregon. An Oregon father, (an attorney), claims to be in the process of
converting to Judaism and wants his now 12-year-old son, 'Misha', of whom he
has custody, circumcised against both the child's and the natural mother's
express wishes.

Sadly, a physician, a fellow congregant of the father, has already been
found willing to ignore the child's wishes. The father claims a rabbi has
insisted on the child's circumcision. The father's motives might even be
sheer spite toward Misha's mother; we can't know.

An attorney working pro bono publico has donated more than $20,000 of his
time to assisting the mother by attempting to block the circumcision in the
courts. The case is now on its way to the Oregon Supreme Court after losses
at both the trial level and an intermediate appellate court. Judges have
affirmed without opinion or testimony that a non-medical circumcision of a
12-year-old is 'within the discretion of a custodial parent.' There is no
medical necessity alleged at all by anyone. The circumcision would be purely
cultural, even merely spiteful.

If you could possibly assist; I urge you to make a tax-deductible donation
to Doctors Opposing Circumcision, in Misha's name, to be used only for his
legal fees and costs. I will supply you with much more detail by pdf if you
have a sincere wish to help. Even small sums, the cost of a restaurant meal,
$25, $50, will help if enough people chip in, but if you can afford more,
that would be deeply appreciated by the boy and his mother who cannot afford
to oppose the attorney-father.

This is the clearest case of a parent's claimed religious beliefs trumping a
child's right to an intact body that I have seen in 26 years of practicing
law. It fairly screams out for justice, but justice costs, even when most of
the legal help has so far been provided pro bono. (Those of you with an
interest in reading how the US Supreme Court balances children's bodily
rights vs. a parent's rights to the free practice of religion might
considering reading Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 US Sup Ct 158: "Parents may
be free to become martyrs themselves. But it does not follow they are free
to make martyrs of their children.")

PLEASE feel free to re-post this at websites and bulletin boards where
concerned and sympathetic souls browse.

And please note that my bona fides, and that of the attorney in Oregon, Clay
Patrick, are both verifiable at the Oregon and Washington state websites
authenticating licensed attorneys. The progress of the case is easily
verified at the Oregon Courts website, though as a family law case, the file
may be partially sealed for the child's protection:

"In re the Marriage of James Boldt and Lia Boldt, Jackson County (Oregon)
Case No. 98-2318D3, Appellate Court Case No. A126175." (Affirmed 12/27/2006)
Verifiable at:
http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/info/appeal.html

[WindingHighway]

Post by Jack
AN URGENT APPEAL FOR YOUR HELP
TO PROTECT A 12 YEAR-OLD BOY

This histrionic and dishonest appeal for money from the so-called
"Doctors Opposing Circumcision" is several years out of date.

The case was taken up by the Oregon Supreme Court in January 2008.
The court unanimously and sensibly ruled that in the USA a custodial
parent has the discretion to circumcise or not circumcise a child, and
dismissed out of hand the mother's objections that circumcision is a
bad thing per se. That issue is now settled as far as ALL Oregon
courts are concerned.

However this case also involves a custody battle, in which the mother
demands custody because the child would allegedly be circumcised
against his wishes if he stays with the father. The court also ruled
that the child was 12 years old at the time and is now old enough to
express his own opinion on the subject. As the mother insists the
son does not want to be circumcised, and the father insists that he
does, the Supreme Court sent the case back for further review of this
issue, and this issue ONLY, to determine whether there are any grounds
for a hearing on a potential change in custody. In such a custody
hearing the boys wishes on circumcision would be taken into account,
but would not be determinative.

The possible outcomes are:

1. The boy wants to be circumcised -- the father will keep custody
and the boy will be circumcised.
2. The boy has no strong opinion either way -- the father will keep
custody and the boy will probably be circumcised
3. The boy does not want to be circumcised -- the court may rule
that this is so important that the mother should have custody, hence
the boy will not be circumcised; or it may rule that this is not
sufficient grounds to change custody, hence the boy may or may not be
circumcised depending the wishes of the father.

[David Z]

This story has been addressed before in the alt.circ newsgroup.

There are many articles on this story on the Internet from legitimate news
outlets. The real question is -- why does Jack, the Loon post a version of
this story from a propaganda/misinformation/advocacy website? Obviously,
his motive is not to have an intelligent discussion of the topic.

Post by Jack
AN URGENT APPEAL FOR YOUR HELP
TO PROTECT A 12 YEAR-OLD BOY

This histrionic and dishonest appeal for money from the so-called
"Doctors Opposing Circumcision" is several years out of date.

The case was taken up by the Oregon Supreme Court in January 2008.
The court unanimously and sensibly ruled that in the USA a custodial
parent has the discretion to circumcise or not circumcise a child, and
dismissed out of hand the mother's objections that circumcision is a
bad thing per se. That issue is now settled as far as ALL Oregon
courts are concerned.

However this case also involves a custody battle, in which the mother
demands custody because the child would allegedly be circumcised
against his wishes if he stays with the father. The court also ruled
that the child was 12 years old at the time and is now old enough to
express his own opinion on the subject. As the mother insists the
son does not want to be circumcised, and the father insists that he
does, the Supreme Court sent the case back for further review of this
issue, and this issue ONLY, to determine whether there are any grounds
for a hearing on a potential change in custody. In such a custody
hearing the boys wishes on circumcision would be taken into account,
but would not be determinative.

The possible outcomes are:

1. The boy wants to be circumcised -- the father will keep custody
and the boy will be circumcised.
2. The boy has no strong opinion either way -- the father will keep
custody and the boy will probably be circumcised
3. The boy does not want to be circumcised -- the court may rule
that this is so important that the mother should have custody, hence
the boy will not be circumcised; or it may rule that this is not
sufficient grounds to change custody, hence the boy may or may not be
circumcised depending the wishes of the father.

[Blackwater]

Post by David Z
This story has been addressed before in the alt.circ newsgroup.

There's a NEWSGROUP for this subject ???????????????????????????

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????!

Oh my .......

Some Rabbis must cut all the way up to the brain :-)

[Jack]

Post by WindingHighway

Post by Jack
AN URGENT APPEAL FOR YOUR HELP
TO PROTECT A 12 YEAR-OLD BOY

This histrionic and dishonest appeal for money from the
so-called "Doctors Opposing Circumcision" is several
years out of date.
The case was taken up by the Oregon Supreme Court in
January 2008. The court unanimously and sensibly ruled
that in the USA a custodial parent has the discretion to
circumcise or not circumcise a child,

In the case of a 12 year old, his wishes are taken into account as well.

Post by WindingHighway
and dismissed out
of hand the mother's objections that circumcision is a
bad thing per se. That issue is now settled as far as
ALL Oregon courts are concerned.
However this case also involves a custody battle, in
which the mother demands custody because the child would
allegedly be circumcised against his wishes if he stays
with the father. The court also ruled that the child
was 12 years old at the time and is now old enough to
express his own opinion on the subject. As the mother
insists the son does not want to be circumcised, and the
father insists that he does, the Supreme Court sent the
case back for further review of this issue, and this
issue ONLY, to determine whether there are any grounds
for a hearing on a potential change in custody. In such
a custody hearing the boys wishes on circumcision would
be taken into account, but would not be determinative.
1. The boy wants to be circumcised -- the father will
keep custody and the boy will be circumcised.
2. The boy has no strong opinion either way -- the
father will keep custody and the boy will probably be
circumcised
3. The boy does not want to be circumcised -- the court
may rule that this is so important that the mother should
have custody, hence the boy will not be circumcised; or
it may rule that this is not sufficient grounds to change
custody, hence the boy may or may not be circumcised
depending the wishes of the father.

[David]

I'd gladly give money to help the doctor do this boy's circumcision
and the circumcision of any boy that he finds that still has a
disgusting foreskin... better to clip them all clean and tight.

[anonymous]

Post by David
I'd gladly give money to help the doctor do this boy's circumcision
and the circumcision of any boy that he finds that still has a
disgusting foreskin... better to clip them all clean and tight.

Well, it is ironic that there is a charge for circumcision in most
countires. No wonder cultures get religous guys to do it where
medically the couldn't afford it.

I think it used to be free in Canada but now you have to pay for it, I
think, if you want your kid circumcised.

Don't know about the USA, though?

[Jack]

Post by David
I'd gladly give money to help the doctor do this boy's
circumcision and the circumcision of any boy that he
finds that still has a disgusting foreskin... better to
clip them all clean and tight.

You're one of those fetish people.

[e***@gmail.com]

Post by Jack
AN URGENT APPEAL FOR YOUR HELP
TO PROTECT A 12 YEAR-OLD BOY
Those of you who are serious about protecting children from non-therapeutic
circumcision have a unique opportunity to assist with a legal case in
Oregon. An Oregon father, (an attorney), claims to be in the process of
converting to Judaism and wants his now 12-year-old son, 'Misha', of whom he
has custody, circumcised against both the child's and the natural mother's
express wishes.
Sadly, a physician, a fellow congregant of the father, has already been
found willing to ignore the child's wishes. The father claims a rabbi has
insisted on the child's circumcision. The father's motives might even be
sheer spite toward Misha's mother; we can't know.
An attorney working pro bono publico has donated more than $20,000 of his
time to assisting the mother by attempting to block the circumcision in the
courts. The case is now on its way to the Oregon Supreme Court after losses
at both the trial level and an intermediate appellate court. Judges have
affirmed without opinion or testimony that a non-medical circumcision of a
12-year-old is 'within the discretion of a custodial parent.' There is no
medical necessity alleged at all by anyone. The circumcision would be purely
cultural, even merely spiteful.
If you could possibly assist; I urge you to make a tax-deductible donation
to Doctors Opposing Circumcision, in Misha's name, to be used only for his
legal fees and costs. I will supply you with much more detail by pdf if you
have a sincere wish to help. Even small sums, the cost of a restaurant meal,
$25, $50, will help if enough people chip in, but if you can afford more,
that would be deeply appreciated by the boy and his mother who cannot afford
to oppose the attorney-father.
This is the clearest case of a parent's claimed religious beliefs trumping a
child's right to an intact body that I have seen in 26 years of practicing
law. It fairly screams out for justice, but justice costs, even when most of
the legal help has so far been provided pro bono. (Those of you with an
interest in reading how the US Supreme Court balances children's bodily
rights vs. a parent's rights to the free practice of religion might
considering reading Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 US Sup Ct 158: "Parents may
be free to become martyrs themselves. But it does not follow they are free
to make martyrs of their children.")
PLEASE feel free to re-post this at websites and bulletin boards where
concerned and sympathetic souls browse.
And please note that my bona fides, and that of the attorney in Oregon, Clay
Patrick, are both verifiable at the Oregon and Washington state websites
authenticating licensed attorneys. The progress of the case is easily
verified at the Oregon Courts website, though as a family law case, the file
"In re the Marriage of James Boldt and Lia Boldt, Jackson County (Oregon)
Case No. 98-2318D3, Appellate Court Case No. A126175." (Affirmed 12/27/2006)
http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/info/appeal.html

Belated, however, if you forcibly circumcise for no medical reason someone who objects, you're a worthless cunt who is promoting the cultic stereotype aspect of Judaism and/or Islam, which kind of gives anti-Semitic groups a leg to stand on...
and for once I find myself supporting both anti-Semitic groups and anti-Semiotics groups, because this is nothing more than fucking butchery, there's no deeper meaning, there's shit here except a father who is a bitter bastard (James, by the way, I'd gladly face you in the arena of your choice, using the weapons of your choice, any day, because you sir are an ass and really despicable). Supporting those groups that are directly and overtly anti-Semitic makes me want to vomit, makes bile rise in my stomach, but then the thought of forcing a begging, screaming tween into restraints so you can circumcise him for no reason other than his father wants it done because OMG GUYS TE JUZ R PWNZRBALLS...makes me actually vomit, shake with rage, check to make sure my own foreskin is still there (my parents let it be my choice, and there was a time in my early pubic years when I wanted to be circumcised to look like everyone else, even though I actually almost never saw any of my circumcised fellow classmates naked, and the ones I did did not make fun of me for being circumcised, or say that I was in anyway mutated or different, but then I grew the fuck out of that when I realized how fucking awesome my foreskin is, pretty much around the age of 12-13...and when I was 9, I was dryhumping mattresses (never so much as to be a nuisance, so only when I was free to do so without aural or ocular observation) so much I probably carved the grand canyon in my bed...come up to me anywhere from 13-17 and 364 days and insist that my parents have the right to circumcise me, and I would have run at you with teeth, nails, fists, knives, glass, rocks and gladly, nae, gleefully ripped your throat out of your body as my surprisingly sharp knees crack your ribs because even though I'm only 14, I had my growth spurt early, along with other spurts, also quite impressive in height, just in case you were wondering (stains on the ceiling, yep), and then I'd gladly spend probably some time cooling my heels in Juvie, a mental ward, the Hague, if my full crazy as shit to protect me from getting circumcised plan were to come to full fruition, I'd be up for war crimes, unapologetic and proud and wearing the ears of my enemies around my neck and their circumcised cocks (and vulvae, of course, ladies, you're still included) would hang from my belt, creating a miniskirt of cocks to remind the world that YOU WILL NOT CUT ME.

And if asked, I'd gladly offer the same vigorous defense to anyone who requested it and, you know, had valid reasons to do so...
not that I'd be successful, I mean, I'm writing about this online and I'm assuming I'm capable of committing war crimes, which I'm not, my arms would get tired eventually, and then that'd fuck up my back, etc...it's a lot of work, but thankfully the threat has passed for now, and to quote a dear friend of mine "up yours Rabbi" if you think differently. People think differently, I respect that, hell, I fucking celebrate it. There is a difference between spiritual belief and letting a kid die of herpes from a pustulent moile or a three year old buy it due to anesthetic miscalculations for something that, turns out, is more than just a flap of skin, you disgusting cunts.

(I sincerely apologize to anyone who is offended by my use of the word "cunt,"
and submit only that I also loathe the word, and am using it mostly to show just how enraged this fracas makes me. I happen to love all the parts my lover has beneath her skirt, and if I compared you to her wonderful vagina (and vulva, etc), I'd be fucking praising you.)
In this case, I mean you are a sad heap of fuck whom I wouldn't piss on if you were on fire.

[j***@gmail.com]

Post by e***@gmail.com

Post by Jack
AN URGENT APPEAL FOR YOUR HELP
TO PROTECT A 12 YEAR-OLD BOY
Those of you who are serious about protecting children from non-therapeutic
circumcision have a unique opportunity to assist with a legal case in
Oregon. An Oregon father, (an attorney), claims to be in the process of
converting to Judaism and wants his now 12-year-old son, 'Misha', of whom he
has custody, circumcised against both the child's and the natural mother's
express wishes.
Sadly, a physician, a fellow congregant of the father, has already been
found willing to ignore the child's wishes. The father claims a rabbi has
insisted on the child's circumcision. The father's motives might even be
sheer spite toward Misha's mother; we can't know.
An attorney working pro bono publico has donated more than $20,000 of his
time to assisting the mother by attempting to block the circumcision in the
courts. The case is now on its way to the Oregon Supreme Court after losses
at both the trial level and an intermediate appellate court. Judges have
affirmed without opinion or testimony that a non-medical circumcision of a
12-year-old is 'within the discretion of a custodial parent.' There is no
medical necessity alleged at all by anyone. The circumcision would be purely
cultural, even merely spiteful.
If you could possibly assist; I urge you to make a tax-deductible donation
to Doctors Opposing Circumcision, in Misha's name, to be used only for his
legal fees and costs. I will supply you with much more detail by pdf if you
have a sincere wish to help. Even small sums, the cost of a restaurant meal,
$25, $50, will help if enough people chip in, but if you can afford more,
that would be deeply appreciated by the boy and his mother who cannot afford
to oppose the attorney-father.
This is the clearest case of a parent's claimed religious beliefs trumping a
child's right to an intact body that I have seen in 26 years of practicing
law. It fairly screams out for justice, but justice costs, even when most of
the legal help has so far been provided pro bono. (Those of you with an
interest in reading how the US Supreme Court balances children's bodily
rights vs. a parent's rights to the free practice of religion might
considering reading Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 US Sup Ct 158: "Parents may
be free to become martyrs themselves. But it does not follow they are free
to make martyrs of their children.")
PLEASE feel free to re-post this at websites and bulletin boards where
concerned and sympathetic souls browse.
And please note that my bona fides, and that of the attorney in Oregon, Clay
Patrick, are both verifiable at the Oregon and Washington state websites
authenticating licensed attorneys. The progress of the case is easily
verified at the Oregon Courts website, though as a family law case, the file
"In re the Marriage of James Boldt and Lia Boldt, Jackson County (Oregon)
Case No. 98-2318D3, Appellate Court Case No. A126175." (Affirmed 12/27/2006)
http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/info/appeal.html

Belated, however, if you forcibly circumcise for no medical reason someone who objects, you're a worthless cunt who is promoting the cultic stereotype aspect of Judaism and/or Islam, which kind of gives anti-Semitic groups a leg to stand on...
and for once I find myself supporting both anti-Semitic groups and anti-Semiotics groups, because this is nothing more than fucking butchery, there's no deeper meaning, there's shit here except a father who is a bitter bastard (James, by the way, I'd gladly face you in the arena of your choice, using the weapons of your choice, any day, because you sir are an ass and really despicable). Supporting those groups that are directly and overtly anti-Semitic makes me want to vomit, makes bile rise in my stomach, but then the thought of forcing a begging, screaming tween into restraints so you can circumcise him for no reason other than his father wants it done because OMG GUYS TE JUZ R PWNZRBALLS...makes me actually vomit, shake with rage, check to make sure my own foreskin is still there (my parents let it be my choice, and there was a time in my early pubic years when I wanted to be circumcised to look like everyone else, even though I actually almost never saw any of my circumcised fellow classmates naked, and the ones I did did not make fun of me for being circumcised, or say that I was in anyway mutated or different, but then I grew the fuck out of that when I realized how fucking awesome my foreskin is, pretty much around the age of 12-13...and when I was 9, I was dryhumping mattresses (never so much as to be a nuisance, so only when I was free to do so without aural or ocular observation) so much I probably carved the grand canyon in my bed...come up to me anywhere from 13-17 and 364 days and insist that my parents have the right to circumcise me, and I would have run at you with teeth, nails, fists, knives, glass, rocks and gladly, nae, gleefully ripped your throat out of your body as my surprisingly sharp knees crack your ribs because even though I'm only 14, I had my growth spurt early, along with other spurts, also quite impressive in height, just in case you were wondering (stains on the ceiling, yep), and then I'd gladly spend probably some time cooling my heels in Juvie, a mental ward, the Hague, if my full crazy as shit to protect me from getting circumcised plan were to come to full fruition, I'd be up for war crimes, unapologetic and proud and wearing the ears of my enemies around my neck and their circumcised cocks (and vulvae, of course, ladies, you're still included) would hang from my belt, creating a miniskirt of cocks to remind the world that YOU WILL NOT CUT ME.
And if asked, I'd gladly offer the same vigorous defense to anyone who requested it and, you know, had valid reasons to do so...
not that I'd be successful, I mean, I'm writing about this online and I'm assuming I'm capable of committing war crimes, which I'm not, my arms would get tired eventually, and then that'd fuck up my back, etc...it's a lot of work, but thankfully the threat has passed for now, and to quote a dear friend of mine "up yours Rabbi" if you think differently. People think differently, I respect that, hell, I fucking celebrate it. There is a difference between spiritual belief and letting a kid die of herpes from a pustulent moile or a three year old buy it due to anesthetic miscalculations for something that, turns out, is more than just a flap of skin, you disgusting cunts.
(I sincerely apologize to anyone who is offended by my use of the word "cunt,"
and submit only that I also loathe the word, and am using it mostly to show just how enraged this fracas makes me. I happen to love all the parts my lover has beneath her skirt, and if I compared you to her wonderful vagina (and vulva, etc), I'd be fucking praising you.)
In this case, I mean you are a sad heap of fuck whom I wouldn't piss on if you were on fire.

Perhaps you need to collect your thoughts on this matter before commenting.

[Parker]

Post by j***@gmail.com
Perhaps you need to collect your thoughts on this matter before commenting.

Oh-oh, Jack is back on the bottle! He stumbled in and landed on an old page from 2009 and replied to it thinking it was recent! Or was it the pot this time, Jack? You once said you prefer pot to booze. Same old Jack -- booze booze booze, toke toke toke, then show up here and blather blather blather.