Indeed, the modern version is truly vicious a very expanded version of what was. God never requested circuмcision like they do today. But without the ritual background, the history, there is no circuмcision at all. Its roots are religious only. Just because they call it a "medical procedure" doesn't mean it is a "medical" procedure. Circuмcision has no medical purpose whatsoever. For that reason, intent behind its resurrection (sic) becomes obvious. Circuмcision is a ritualistic, religious practice foisted on us more barbaric than imaginable, and as such, it is an emblem of the power and intent of the Occult Jєωs. Why else would huge percentages of baby boys be circuмcised if it wasn't religious?
.
Of course it has religious roots, no argument there. But at a certain point, the intent behind some action along with the accompanying rituals (or lacktherof) attached to the action make it no longer religious, or at least certainly on a predictable basis make it so emptied of religious content that it is not religious.
.
There are loads and loads of things today that had an initial religious "root" in some way or another that are quite obviously, as usually used, not religious. Fish fries on Friday in 2017 have virtually nothing at all to do with businesses catering to Catholics who were following Church law; most Catholics today who eat fish on a Friday don't even
know they're supposed to be abstaining from meat, so how on earth can we say that if they go to a fish fry they're observing a religious law? Unleavened bread has its origin at the passover, but you can make unleavened bread without celebrating a Jєωιѕн feast. So on and so forth. The Old Covenant rite of circuмcision was a religious ceremony that involved the removal of a small amount of the male child's foreskin. If you
remove the religious ceremony from the event, you're not
left with a religious ceremony. Even
if medical circuмcision was the same
materially as the Old Covenant form of circuмcision (which it isn't, but supposing it was), medical circuмcision would still be a medical procedure, not a religious ceremony.
.
I find it somewhat difficult to buy the idea that Occult Jєωs are behind the medical push for circuмcision, for two main reasons. First, they don't
want the goy, so why on earth would they orchestrate efforts to incorporate him into the Jєωιѕн community? And secondly, the trend of circuмcision is
dying and was, so far as I can tell, relatively short-lived. Can we name a Jєωιѕн conspiracy that the Jєωs have
abandoned as they've apparently abandoned the circuмcision conspiracy (as evidenced by its significant drop in popularity and the virtual wholesale admittance of the medical community that it provides no health advantages)?
.
It's highly objectionable and we agree on that-- and it's definitely something about which the word needs to be spread. Parents should
not be (medically) circuмcising their boys; if anything, the procedure physically
disadvantages them and wounds their generative faculties. I would agree that it is a form of mutilation, and a very sad one at that given the helplessness of the child. I am disagreeing simply with some of the reasons you are putting forth.