Circumcision is grievous bodily harm, German judges rule

[JackRiddler]

148. To check again, because this is important:

1) Are you saying a male with an intact foreskin cannot be Jewish?

2) Or are you saying that families who do not engage in the practice cannot be Jewish?

I need you to confirm those answers because these would be incredibly extremist beliefs.

In addition, you are entitled to believe any religious mythology you wish, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

Even if we accept the impossible tales of the Old Testament as true, the "covenant" between the possibly real historical figure, Abraham, and the mythical sky being Yahweh is no older than about 2,800 years, and not "5,000 years" as you have it.

This 2,000-year difference makes me wonder what else you're getting wrong.

"However, for a Jew to reject the coveant of circumcision is the same as a Roman Catholic rejecting the Holy Trinity."

Yes, the two are very similar. It's called Enlightenment.

However, Catholics can cease to be Catholic.

A Jew who "rejects" the "covenant of circumcision" ("denies" would be more accurate, since you cannot reject an offer that does not exist) does not cease to be Jewish.

Your fundamentalist views about agreements with non-existent sky beings do not give you the right to define who is a Jew on the basis of whether they engage in male genital mutilation, or to say that people must cut the foreskins off babies because some Iraqi tribesman once had a deal with a non-existent sky-god.