Brit Milah Ceremony Text


Mohel Facing Legal Action For Circumcision Tweets

It would be hard to overstate the importance of circumcision in Judaism. It’s not just a religious ritual; it’s a fundamental part of being Jewish. Unfortunately, that doesn’t mean everyone involved with the circumcision process is happy about it. In fact, there are a growing number of mohels facing legal action for what they’ve been saying on social media about circumcision. Some of these tweets are downright gruesome, and some may even violate defamation laws. If you or someone you know is involved in the circumcision process, be sure to keep your comments civil and within the bounds of the law.

Background of the Case

Background of the Case

The man accused of Tweeting about a mohel he plans to sue for circumcision tweeted, “He’s not circumcising my son. I’m going to sue him.” The tweet has since been deleted. According to the New York Post , the man, who is unidentified and lives in upstate New York, plans to file a lawsuit against the mohel, who is also unnamed. The Post reports that the man believes his son was not circumcised properly and may have suffered from a medical problem as a result. A spokesperson for the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) told the Post that they have not yet received any complaints about this particular mohel, but they are monitoring the situation.

The Arguments Against Mohel circumcision

There are a number of arguments against male circumcision, which is the most common form of religious circumcision. These include the fact that it is an elective procedure that can be done without the consent of the person being circumcised, and that there are serious risks associated with it. One such risk is that circumcising someone incorrectly can result in fatal blood loss. Additionally, there is a significant body of research demonstrating that circumcision does not reduce rates of sexually-transmitted infections (STIs) or HIV transmission. In fact, circumcision has been shown to increase rates of STIs and HIV infection in some cases. Some people also argue that male circumcision violates the human rights of boys, as well as their right to bodily integrity.

The Arguments For Mohel Circumcision

There are many arguments for circumcision, but here are five of the most common:

1. hygiene. One of the main reasons circumcision is recommended is because it is considered to be a relatively easy way to keep men clean. It’s estimated that up to 90% of cases of urinary tract infections in boys can be prevented by circumcision.

2. prevention of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). Circumcision has been shown to be a successful way of preventing STD infection in both males and females. The AIDS virus is less likely to spread through contact with the foreskin, and there is evidence that it can even help prevent some types of cervical cancer.

3. child sexual abuse prevention. Circumcision can help protect children from being subjected to sexual abuse, as circumcising boys reduces the risk of male-to-male rape. Additionally, studies have shown that circumcised men have a lower incidence of HIV infection than uncircumcised men.

4. increased sexual pleasure for both partners. Circumcision can improve sexual satisfaction for both the man being circumcised and his partner(s), by reducing friction during intercourse and providing additional exposure to theerectile tissues on the foreskin. It has even been suggested that circumcision may increase a man’s overall chance of achieving an orgasm.”

5. religious beliefs or cultural tradition. Some people believe that circumcision is a religious obligation or part of their cultural tradition, so they choose to have their son circumcised despite any medical risks


Mohel Eliyahu Hershkovitz is facing legal action for tweets he made about circumcising babies. Hershkovitz is being sued by the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, which claims that his tweets were defamatory and amounted to libel. The lawsuit comes just days after a New York court ruled that circumcision must be allowed as part of religious exercise under the state’s human rights law. It will be interesting to see how this case plays out, as it raises some important questions about free speech and religious freedom in America.

Visit :

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *