fbpx

April 9, 2012

Report: N.Y. mohel apparently tested positive for herpes

A New York mohel who performed the circumcision of one newborn who died of herpes and of three other infants who contracted the disease apparently tested positive for herpes, The New York Jewish Week reported.

Yitzchok Fischer, who was ordered in 2007 to stop the circumcision ritual of metzitzah b’peh, in which the mohel orally suctions blood from the circumcision wound, refused, however, to submit to a DNA test to determine if he is a match to the viruses found in the babies.

The Jewish Week reported April 6 that a copy of the 2007 New York State Department of Health order obtained by the newspaper through a Freedom of Information Law request said that he tested positive for an infection that he was “capable of communicating to others.”

The department redacted the order to protect Fischer’s privacy, as required by law, and does not specifically mention herpes. But according to the newspaper, “both the context of the order and the facts surrounding Fischer’s case strongly suggest that the infection for which, according to the order, he tested positive is herpes.”

The order also describes the investigation carried out by the New York City Department of Health in the wake of three infections linked to Fischer in 2003 and 2004, The Jewish Week reported.

Several weeks ago, The Jewish Week wrote that it had obtained a tape recording indicating that Fischer may have continued to perform metzitzah b’peh after the order to desist was issued. Asked several weeks ago whether the state Department of Health would investigate Fischer in connection with a possible violation of the 2007 order, department spokesman Mike Moran would not comment.

The city health department has issued a warning against the practice. Haredi Orthodox leaders condemned the warning as an unnecessary and unwelcome government intrusion into their community’s religious practices.

Report: N.Y. mohel apparently tested positive for herpes Read More »

Teens arrested for implementing gender segregation on buses

Police arrested two secular Jewish teenagers hired to implement gender segregation on Jerusalem buses.

The teens, aged 16 and 17, reportedly stood at a bus stop near the Dung Gate in the Old City of Jerusalem on Monday and used a megaphone to call for women to board the buses leaving from the Western Wall through the back door.

They said they were hired by two haredi Orthodox men and were paid nearly $7 an hour for their efforts. Two haredi Orthodox men were later arrested by police, according to The Jerusalem Post.

Israel’s Supreme Court has ruled that while enforced gender segregation on public buses is illegal, voluntary gender segregation is permissible on public bus routes.

On Monday, the number of people visiting the Western Wall was higher than usual due to the Passover holiday.

Teens arrested for implementing gender segregation on buses Read More »

Egyptian gas pipeline to Israel attacked for 14th time

Egypt’s pipeline carrying gas to Israel and Jordan was attacked for the 14th time in more than a year.

The explosion occurred Monday morning at the entrance to El Arish in the northern Sinai Peninsula, Reuters reported. The attack comes days after a rocket fired from the Sinai struck a residential area in the southern Israeli resort town of Eilat.

The pipeline has been closed since a similar attack on Feb. 5. It has been blown up 14 times since uprisings began in February 2011 against Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, who was deposed. No arrests have been made in any of the attacks.

The supply of gas to Israel has been halted numerous times in the last year, leading to a scramble to find alternate fuel sources to produce electricity that are more expensive.

Egypt supplies Israel with more than 40 percent of its natural gas needs to produce electricity; electricity prices have risen by more than 20 percent in Israel since the attacks began.

Egyptian gas pipeline to Israel attacked for 14th time Read More »

Report: N.Y. mohel apparently tested postive for herpes

A New York mohel tied to the death from herpes of one newborn and to three others who contracted the disease, apparently tested positive for herpes, The Jewish Week reported.

Yitzchok Fischer, who was ordered in 2007 to stop the circumcision ritual of metzitzah b’peh, in which the mohel orally suctions blood from the circumcision wound, refused, however, to submit to a DNA test to determine if he is a match to the viruses found in the babies.

The Jewish Week reported April 6 that a copy of the 2007 New York State Health Department order obtained by the newspaper through a Freedom of Information Law request said that he tested positive for an infection that he was “capable of communicating to others.”

The order was redacted by the department to protect Fischer’s privacy, as required by law, and does not specifically mention herpes. But, according to reporter Hella Winston, “both the context of the order and the facts surrounding Fischer’s case strongly suggest that the infection for which, according to the order, he tested positive is herpes.”

The order also describes the investigation carried out by the city Health Department in the wake of three infections linked to Fischer in 2003 and 2004, The Jewish Week reported.

Several weeks ago, The Jewish Week obtained a tape recording indicating that Fischer may have continued to perform metzitzah b’peh after the order to desist was issued, according to the newspaper. When asked several weeks ago whether the state department of health would investigate Fischer in connection with a possible violation of the 2007 order, Mike Moran, a spokesman for the department, would not comment.

The New York City Health Department has issued a warning against the practice. Haredi leaders condemned the warning as an unnecessary and unwelcome government intrusion into their community’s religious practices.

Report: N.Y. mohel apparently tested postive for herpes Read More »

Ulysses Grant and the Jewish vote, and its 2012 parallels

Dr. Jonathan Sarna,  Professor of American Jewish History at Brandeis University, discusses his new book When General Grant Expelled the Jews.

What was Ulysses Grant’s motivation for issuing General Order 11, and how ‎long did it take for it to be rescinded?‎

Grant was deeply concerned about smuggling between the North and the South.  In his ‎correspondence, the word “Jew” and the word “smuggler” became almost synonymous. He blamed a ‎widespread problem on a visible group, and felt that by expelling that group from his war zone, ‎smuggling would be eradicated.  We now know that the occasion for his order was the discovery that ‎his own father, Jesse Grant, had conspired with Jewish clothing manufacturers to move cotton from ‎South to North.  This, for him, was the last straw, and he issued General Orders No. 11 as soon as he ‎made this discovery.  The order was issued on December 17, 1862 but took 11 days to reach ‎Paducah.  After that city’s Jews were expelled on December 28, it took but a week for one of them to ‎reach Washington DC.  On January 4th, upon learning of General Orders No. 11, Abraham Lincoln had it ‎revoked.‎

Were Jews really affected by the order, did they even know about it at the ‎time?‎

Jews in the vicinity of Grant’s headquarters were expelled on account of the order, and we possess ‎some stories of Jews who were mistreated in the process. As mentioned, Jews were also expelled from ‎Paducah where some 30 Jewish families resided.  The total number of Jews affected, however, ‎probably did not exceed 100.  Jewish newspapers carried news of the order, and one of those ‎expelled, Cesar Kaskel of Paducah, spread the story to the Associated Press.  Thanks to him, the story ‎went around the country.  Of course, the Emancipation Proclamation, issued on January 1, 1863, was ‎much bigger news.  Lots of people only learned about General Orders No. 11 years later, in 1868, ‎when Grant ran for president and the order became an election issue.‎

Isn’t it true that General Grant ultimately became a president with a fairly ‎favorable attitude to American Jewry? How did this change take place?‎

Grant apologized for General Order #11 following his election (“I do not pretend to sustain the order. . ‎‎. I have no prejudice against sect or race, but want each individual to be judged by his own merit.”)  As ‎President, he proved that apology genuine by appointing many Jews to public office and by displaying ‎sensitivity to Jews when they were persecuted in Russia and Rumania.  In many ways, he spent the rest ‎of his life, from 1868 to his death in 1885, living down General Orders No. 11 and proving, by his ‎actions, that he bore no anti-Jewish prejudices.‎

You state at the end of your book that “Ulysses S. Grant’s order expelling ‎the Jews set the stage for their empowerment” – how so?‎

Paradoxically, the order expelling Jews forced Jews into the political arena where they rapidly ‎achieved success.  Not only did they succeed in having Grant’s order revoked, they also managed ‎during the Grant era to use government as an instrument for improving Jewish conditions at home and ‎abroad. Government service taught Jews a great deal about political power, lessons that held them in ‎good stead in later years.‎

At some point you seem to suggest that Jews of the North share some ‎of the blame for Grant’s suspicions, because they were ‎questioning emancipation and expressed fear that free blacks might compete ‎with Jews for jobs. Is this not a problematic “blame-the-victim suggestion”?‎

It is easy to understand why, in the wake of General Orders No. 11 – coming as it did so close to the ‎Emancipation Proclamation – some Jewish leaders feared that Jews would replace Blacks as the ‎nation’s stigmatized minority.  It is also easy to understand why Jews, who as immigrants often looked ‎and sounded different from the majority of their countrymen, faced persecution and prejudice.  My ‎goal is not to blame the victim, but to explain why it was that Jews were victimized. ‎

In one of the many talks you gave on this book you’ve said that “there are ‎interesting parallels” to be made from the current political climate “to the 1868 ‎election” – namely, that Jews who might be hesitating to vote for President ‎Obama might be able to learn something from Grant’s transformation. What ‎exactly did you mean?‎

In 1868, Jews who had supported the Republican Party since Lincoln’s first term faced a difficult ‎conundrum.  Should they vote for the Democrats, a party they considered bad for the country, just to ‎avoid voting for a man (Grant) who had been bad to the Jews?  The Democrats sought to roll back ‎Reconstruction and disenfranchise Black voters.  Should Jews vote for them anyway, just to avoid ‎voting for a candidate who had expelled Jews from his war zone?  The question of loyalties – how ‎much should “Jewish considerations” sway Jewish voters, and how much should they vote on the basis ‎of what they see as good for the country as a whole – was hotly debated in 1868.  It seems to me that in ‎the 2012 election, Jews will face some of these same kinds of questions.‎

‎ ‎

Ulysses Grant and the Jewish vote, and its 2012 parallels Read More »

World powers to meet Iran in Istanbul this week

Nuclear negotiations between Iran and world powers will be held this week in Istanbul, European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton announced.

The talks announced Sunday are scheduled to be held April 14 in Istanbul and will include six world powers: the United States, Russia, China, France, Britain and Germany.

Also on Sunday, Iran said it will not close its Fordo nuclear power facility, which is built deep into a mountain near the holy city of Oom, and it will not give up higher-level uranium enrichment, which are reported to be key demands that the world powers will present at the meeting.

Those demands are “irrational,” the head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, Fereydoon Abbasi Davani, told ISNA news agency in an interview published Sunday.

“If they do not threaten us and guarantee that no aggression will occur, then there would be no need for countries to build facilities underground. They should change their behavior and language,” he told the official news agency.

The demands were revealed Saturday in a front-page New York Times article, which quoted anonymous United States and European Union diplomats.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Sunday that Iran is using the upcoming talks to “delay and deceive.”

He called for Iran to dismantle Oom, completely halt uranium enrichment and remove higher level enriched uranium from the country.

World powers to meet Iran in Istanbul this week Read More »

Hagee, Aish, and Interfaith Respect

What better occasion than the celebration of Easter/Passover this weekend to consider the limits and expectations of interfaith cooperation. The catalyst for this essay was the recent visit of pro-Israel Pastor John Hagee to Jerusalem, where he ” title=”written in this space ” target=”_blank”>written in this space that Jews should accept Evangelical support for Israel even if they suspect their motives for doing so. Interfaith relations have to be based on common decency and fairness, and I think that in this case the good pastor abused the trust of his hosts.

Mormons would be quite offended if a leader of a breakaway LDS sect made a short video promoting the glories of polygamy while standing on Temple Square in Salt Lake City. The Aish World Center in Jerusalem faces the Western Wall, Judaism’s holiest site, and is the worldwide headquarters of an organization (its name means “Fire of the Torah”) dedicated to promoting Orthodox Jewish learning. Given the rejection of Jesus’ divinity by rabbinic Judaism, it was highly inappropriate for Pastor Hagee to preach of every knee bowing to Jesus while standing atop Aish’s building. I would of course feel differently if he had asked permission from Aish to make the video, but it’s highly unlikely that Aish would have approved such a request.

Respecting Jewish sensitivities is also a theme of LDS-Jewish dialogues, which normally feature two prayers offered by a Mormon and a Jew. The Mormon will invariably ask the organizers how he should close the prayer, since LDS prayers always end “in the name of Jesus Christ.” There are some LDS leaders who feel that Jews come to such an event expecting to learn about another faith tradition, so in the interest of authenticity they prefer to have the Mormon close the prayer using the Savior’s name. Others try to be as considerate as possible of Jewish sensitivities, and prefer to close the prayer “in the name of the God of Israel,” “in the name of the God of Abraham,” or some other variation that is synonymous in LDS theology with Jesus Christ (who Mormons believe was both the God of Israel and the God of Abraham). I tend to prefer the latter approach, though I think that both are valid.

The most difficult talks for me to give are presentations on the LDS faith in a Jewish setting, usually a synagogue. As Joseph Smith said, “The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it.” If I were to make an honest presentation on LDS theology, I’d spend about 90% of the time talking about Jesus Christ. However, for obvious reasons I don’t think that would go over too well with the target audience. I usually mention that we’re a Christian church headed by Jesus Christ, whom we accept as the Savior of the world, then move on to other topics. I’m open to suggestions from Mormons who have made similar presentations on how to incorporate Jesus into the discussion without sounding too preachy.

In the spirit of interfaith understanding, I’d like to take this occasion to wish my readers a Happy Passover and a Happy Easter.             

Hagee, Aish, and Interfaith Respect Read More »