In response to a case brought before a beis din in which a woman was fined 500 NIS daily for not having a bris performed on her son, the Hiddush organization wants the matter adjudicated by the nation’s Supreme Court.
The Hiddush statement reads “the controversy over circumcision further demonstrates the great harm that the rabbinic courts’ monopoly has caused Jewish life in Israel. These rulings provide one more example as to why secular Israeli society has come to reject the rabbinic courts’ legitimacy, and justly view these courts’ intervention in principled disputes as sheer religious coercion and stepping out of the bounds of their authority”.
Hiddush CEO Rabbi URI Regev noted that “this is a dispute which involves complex consideration of religious freedom and weighing the best interests of this child. Rabbinic courts are the last place where this delicate balance should be adjudicated. Therefore it is imperative that the case be urgently decided by the Supreme Court. Only the Supreme Court can stop this religious coercion and resolve the dispute by putting the child’s welfare first and foremost as is the case in democratic countries, rather than base the decision of narrow religious views, as one finds in fundamentalist theocracies”.
(YWN – Israel Desk, Jerusalem)
' } });
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
5 Responses
details as to why she didnt want to give a bris to her son?
This organization’s view is narrow, very narrow. They don’t take into consideration Olam Haba, the neshama of the child, his future among the community of the Jewish nation, and they don’t know how to fit G-d and His Torah in the equation of life. So, whose view is narrow? Their eyes have lenses with a high degree of opacity and a narrow field of vision.
They are right about one thing though. They reveal what they believe is the prejudice of Israel’s “high” court. It is the agenda of the Court to assist in weakening the Jewish character of the State. Same as their’s. Thank you.
Wouldn’t be surprised that this woman is another giyoret not converted according to Jewish law. A Jew so adamant against brit milah cannot be Jewish.
From the details in the secular press, this appears to be the result of a custody dispute, The mother had custody of the newborn, and the father wanted the bris. It had nothing to do with neshamas.
If you don’t like the idea of an ultra-secular Israeli judiciary leading the fight against Torah, perhaps consider the only credible alternative – an Islamic state with an autonomous Torah (I.e. hareidi) community.
TO Athought: your bias is showing again (what a surprise!) unfortynately, there are plenty of good,old-fashioned jews who oppose a bris milah. You are giving too much credit to jews and to little to good geirim.