Skip to main content

Movement to ban circumcision reignites debate - CTV News

When I was lucky enough to visit the Holy Land 10+ years ago, most of the Jewish men I met would wince when they heard my name. That's when I discovered that 'Moyle' (my family name) is pronounced the same as 'Mohel', the title of the Jewish Rabbi who performed ritual circumcisions.


Nevertheless, this is an issue of religious and parental rights. Circumcisions are performed for both health and religious reasons and should not be banned by the state.

All of this makes me wonder: why is it OK to pierce the bodies of small children with earrings and various studs but it is not OK to for parents to decide to have their sons circumcised? Makes no sense to me!

Movement to ban circumcision reignites debate - CTV News


  1. LOVE the little t-shirt, Tim! ;D

    I'm with you on this...leave it up to the parents. None of the circumcized men of my acquaintance have any memory or issues with their lack of foreskin. Unlike what is done to girls (which is not circumcision at all, but mutilation for the purposes of control and denial of her sexuality), circumcision causes no harm.

  2. Good point, Lady Janus. Losing that bit of skin as a baby boy does not rank up there with the most traumatic events in my life, a non-event really. If I were a girl and underwent what truly amounts to mutilation would be a source of serious trauma.

  3. The infuriating part of this issue is that is was de-listed in Ontario, and not covered by OHIP any more. So, if parents truly want to have a "CHOICE", it is certainly not a free choice.
    My uncle was circumcised, for medical reasons, at the age of sixty. You gotta guess that that hurt!
    I think that this is just another political issue, where common sense gets thrown out the window. If nothing else, (and as the mother of three sons) I just found that it made good hygienic sense.
    I find it sadly ironic that abortions (up to the last second of the last day of the ninth month) are all fully funded, and yet the hot button item of circumcision is not.

  4. Anonymous28 June, 2011

    I had a fellow worker that was adamant that circumcisions were unnecessary and cruel. She would have been all for banning the procedure. Ironically her uncircumcised boy went through a week of severe pain when he became infected at 3 years old. The doctor said the best way to prevent a return of the infection was a circumcision.
    Many men are uncircumcised and never have a problem but the argument that there is absolutely no therapeutic value to the procedure is clearly flawed.


  5. Anonymous27 July, 2011

    All medical studies have found that the benefits and risks of circumcision are approximately equal. However, the British Journal of Urology has found that circumcisions cause the most sensitive parts of a circumcised male to be far less sensitive than the top 5 parts of an uncircumcised one. That means that the only remaining reason, if your child is healthy and lacks medical complications, to have your child circumcised, is for your religion, which the kid may end up not accepting. Is that really how you want your kid's first impression to be of Judaism to be? It makes sex less pleasurable and is unfair to the infant. There is no disadvantage to letting the kid decide for themselves whether or not to be circumcised later in life. As for the piercing statement. Piercings, if not too extreme, are able to be undone by simply removing the earring. A circumcision, however, is not.

    If you care to discuss this further, please email me at Ronnocerman(at) I would love the chat.

    Peace for you,

  6. Connor, though what you say is interesting, as a circumsized Catholic male, I can attest that being circumcised has not diminished my sexual enjoyment, nor that of my wife. One thing though is that a circumsised penis is easier to keep clean than one that is uncut, and can result in less vaginal infections for one's spouse.

  7. Anonymous28 July, 2011

    Good enough for Jesus!


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sisters of Life

Here is an excellent website for any and all interested in the pro-life cause. The Sisters of Life are a religious order than began in New York City under the authority of Cardinal Jon O'Connor (RIP) in the 1980's. Their traditional religious lifestyle and clear charism have led them to grow much faster than many other orders. As a result, these wonderful women are moving beyond the boundaries of NYC and have opened a convent in Toronto. Here is a link to a news account from LifesiteNews which explains in greater detail their history and mission in Toronto. The Sisters of Life count among their numbers a woman from our Parish here in Mattawa who is soon to take her final profession. This is one of the greatest blessings that we have received as a parish. Anytime a religious vocation comes forward from a parish community, many graces flow back to the local church. I can only pray that as the Sisters of Life establish their ministry in Canada that more and more women will join

Canadian Euthanasia Information

The May 2010 Euthanasia Prevention Coalition Newsletter can now be found at: Bill C-384 was soundly defeated by a vote of 228 to 59. Check how the Members of Parliament voted at: On June 5, 2010, we are co-hosting the US/Canda Push-Back Seminar at the Radisson Gateway Hotel at the Seattle/Tacoma Airport. The overwhelming defeat of Bill C-384 proved that we can Push-Back the euthanasia lobby in the US and Canada and convince people that euthanasia and assisted suicide are a dangerous public policy. Register for the Seminar at: The Schindler family are being attacked by a Florida television station and Michael Schiavo. The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition is standing in solidarity with the Schindler family. My blog comments: