Young mum, inspired by the Bible to mutilate her son, faces assault charges

[cleanhippie]

Young mum, inspired by the Bible to mutilate her son, faces assault charges

A PORTLAND, Oregon, mum who tried to circumcise her 3-month old son after reading the Bible, is facing assault and criminal mistreatment charges.

Keemonta Peterson, 29, used box cutters and a pair of pliers in the botched attempt to ritually mutilate the child.

After the 3-month-old boy suffered two hours of uncontrolled bleeding, she called 911 and the baby was rushed to a hospital where he was initially listed in critical condition. According to this report, the boy appeared to have recovered with no permanent injury.

Peterson told police that she got the idea of circumcising kid from the Bible, then turned to YouTube to watch instruction videos.

http://freethinker.co.uk/2011/04/13/young-mum-inspired-by-the-bible-to-mutilate-her-son-faces-assault-charges/

-----------------------------------------

What. The. Fuck.

Perhaps she isn't a "true" christian, or something...

[Taverner]

1. Codified insanity, thy name is religion

[struggle4progress]

2. ... She told the Oregon Department of Human Services that in the past she has been overcome with

paranoia, and she and her children would stay inside. A month after the botched circumcision, she said she suffered “auditory hallucinations” and manic episodes that prevented her from sleeping for days.

She told authorities that she follows the “Hebrew” religion, but doesn’t attend services at any particular establishment ...

More details emerge about Portland mom who is accused of trying to circumcise her baby at home
Published: Friday, April 08, 2011, 7:35 AM
Updated: Friday, April 08, 2011, 11:03 AM
Aimee Green, The Oregonian By Aimee Green, The Oregonian
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2011/04/more_details_emerge_about_port.html

[cleanhippie]

3. “auditory hallucinations” = god was speaking to her?

We are in strong agreement that these beliefs ARE a mental illness.

[LAGC]

5. Religion + Mental Illness is never a good combination.

Like that sick fuck who kidnapped and raped 14-year-old Elizabeth Smart in Utah.

"God" told him to.

[struggle4progress]

6. "Keemonta Peterson told police she had watched YouTube videos on how to carry out the surgical

procedure"
Oregon woman 'used box cutter and pliers to circumcise three-month-old son at home... after learning how on YouTube'
By Paul Thompson
Last updated at 12:12 PM on 12th April 2011
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1375793/Oregon-woman-used-box-cutter-pliers-circumcise-son-home.html

In this case, mental illness + youtube doesn't seem a good combination

[LAGC]

7. YouTube was merely the tool, Religion was apparently the inspiration.

Would have she even been trolling YouTube looking for circumcision vids had she not gotten the idea planted in her head from a Holy Text in the first place?

[struggle4progress]

13. The reports suggest some defect in reasoning ability, but it is not immediately clear what

that defect is. For example, she didn't seem to understand policies regarding circumcision at the local children's hospital. Most people -- regardless of their religious views and whether or not they had access to any youtube videos on the topic -- wouldn't attempt such surgery at home and as amateurs. And if she had discussed this with anyone, religious or not, chances are that everyone would have been horrified by her notion and would have tried to talk her out of it. The woman clearly has some problem, but it isn't related to any standard religious tradition: she doesn't follow any standard religious tradition

... she was aware that pediatricians at OHSU Doernbecher Children's Hospital wouldn’t circumcise him because he was too old, she told police ... She told authorities that she follows the “Hebrew” religion, but doesn’t attend services at any particular establishment ... An OHSU spokeswoman said it's true that pediatricians at OHSU won't perform circumcisions on boys older than four weeks because of the increased pain, need for general anesthesia and greater risk of bleeding. But urologists at the hospital will perform the procedure on boys older than four weeks ...
More details emerge about Portland mom who is accused of trying to circumcise her baby at home
Published: Friday, April 08, 2011, 7:35 AM
Updated: Friday, April 08, 2011, 11:03 AM
By Aimee Green, The Oregonian
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2011/04/more_details_emerge_about_port.html

[LAGC]

15. Well, that's the problem with diseases like schizophrenia.

Those affected by it "latch on" to whatever inputs they have available at their disposal in their environment. They either think the T.V. is giving them orders or the radio is broadcasting their thoughts... or the Bible is part of some paranoid master plan for her family, in this case. I wouldn't be surprised if she's talked to God, and God has talked back (in her mind).

Point is, if she had never picked up a Bible and read about circumcision, would have she attempted the procedure on her own?

I'm just trying to think of a non-believer with the same mental illness. What would they latch on to? Just seems like religion amplifies mental illness and really brings out the worst delusions in people who really believe.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cleanhippie]

22. Ah, so it youtube that is the problem and not a fundamental belief in religion?

I don't think so.

[struggle4progress]

36. I think I'll avoid speculating on the exact nature of the problem here: I'm not privy

to any personal background here or any detailed timeline or any professional evaluations

... a Close Street Supervision deputy ... noted Peterson ... had been attending mental-health counseling three times a week before she was booked in jail ... She has been allowed to see her four children, who are staying with family members, during supervised visits ...
Police: Oregon woman used box cutter to circumcise son at home
By Associated Press
Story Published: Apr 11, 2011 at 8:14 AM PDT
http://www.kpic.com/news/local/119479534.html

[laconicsax]

37. You never seem to have any problem speculating that it isn't a religious issue. n/t

[cleanhippie]

44. Bingo!

[struggle4progress]

45. Feel free to provide evidence that the real issue here is "religion." I provided links in

#2, #6, and #13, indicating: (1) the woman has some psychiatric problem; (2) the woman evidently did not understand the circumcision policies of local medical providers; (3) the woman felt competent to perform surgery herself after watching youtube; and (4) the woman had no definite recognizable religious affiliation and no regular connection to any local religious community

To form any substantiated opinion on the question -- Exactly how did she arrive this particular point? -- I would require more information than I actually have, (say) personal background or a detailed timeline or professional evaluation results

Of course if your intent is merely to snicker, you will be satisfied with considerably less information

And if you wish to claim that somehow the fundamental issue here is "religion," I think you have a further burden to meet: namely, How then do you explain the fact that the woman is being charged at all in this case? Although Oregon is not a particularly religious state (compared to the rest of the US), something like 70% of Oregonians self-identify as having a definite religious affiliation, but (as far as I can tell) the religious population of Oregon isn't rising up, outraged, to protest the fact that the woman has been charged

See:
August 7, 2009
Religious Identity: States Differ Widely
http://www.gallup.com/poll/122075/Religious-Identity-States-Differ-Widely.aspx#2

[darkstar3]

46. All of which means nothing.

1. Compatible (completely) with religion, and often exacerbated by it.
2. Unrelated.
3. Unrelated.
4. IIRC, she was reading the Bible in order to ascertain what her religious affiliation should be, and from such reading retained the belief that she should circumcise her son.

We don't know ALL the factors that led to this decision, just as we can't know ALL the factors that lead to ANYONE else's decisions. But you're simply using that as a smokescreen in order to ignore the fact that she chose to do something horrible to her son after reading the Bible and attempting to adhere to the religious dictates mentioned within it.

So let's see: She felt compelled to search for a religion. She felt compelled to ensure that her infant son would be a member of that religion. She came to her disturbing decision after reading a religious text often referred to as a "holy book". There's a common thread here, which you are trying to hide or ignore.

[struggle4progress]

48. Since most people who read these texts do not haul out their box-cutters and pliers,

there is perhaps something more involved here than the simple fact that she read the text. The fact, that she had an opinion about whether or not the local doctors would perform a circumcision, might suggest she had inquired into the matter and had not understood what she was told: that would, again, be relevant to her facilities and competence. Moreover, most people do not attempt surgery after watching a few youtube videos: that again would be relevant to facilitiues and competence. Finally, it is reasonable to think, based on available evidence, that most people (religious or otherwise) would not condone this, and I see no evidence of any religion-based outcry in favor of this incident

Again, you are free to make a coherent argument, but I don't see any coherent argument from you here

[darkstar3]

51. Specious.

The fact that what she did is not mainstream does nothing to address the common thread, nor does the fact that the local religious community is not defending her. This is nothing but more smokescreen. Deal with the issue, and stop projecting your lack of coherence.

[laconicsax]

52. Let him keep digging that hole he's in.

You know as well as he does that all religious people act exactly the same and have a singular mindset. You know, like straw men.

[muriel_volestrangler]

55. "more involved here than the simple fact that she read the text" = "religion + mental illness"

Seems to me the coherent argument was made back in post #5, but you tried desperately to fight against it, and are now pretending it wasn't made.

[laconicsax]

47. Thanks for proving my point. n/t

[struggle4progress]

49. What a cheap and lazy cop-out! I had hoped for better

[laconicsax]

50. What more did I need to say? You proved my point.

Feel free to keep digging that hole you're in, though.

[humblebum]

53. Don't hold your breath for a straight answer.

I am still waiting for an answer to my post #8.

[struggle4progress]

54. I think I engage in some discussions in this forum purely for the exercise and in hopes

on clarifying my own thinking

One can frequently learn something from these stories, though I seldom think that what one learns is closely related to the motives of the OP. My favorite example to date is this thread
12 self-immolate in bizarre ritual in Peru (set themselves on fire)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=214&topic_id=210631
where I learned, by investigating the story, that there was a widespread indigenous uprising in the area, not much covered by mainstream media, with police accused of murdering people and burning their bodies -- the sort of thing that might make one suspect the self-immolation story was a cover-up, reported inconsistently in multiple and conflicting versions. Naturally, for this attempt to unravel the story, I was accused of "spamming" DU. But as far as I can tell, no one here ever succeeded in resolving the contradictions: five corpses in a church? two live persons on fire in one room and ten dead in the next room? two persons on fire in one house and ten in the house next door? in Yurimaguas or a hundred miles away in Nueva Esperanza?

Similarly, we can learn something by investigating the story in this thread, though I do not think that what we learn is closely related to the motives of the OP, and I've tried to point in the directions of what I think we might learn from it: but, of course, the conversation itself is not very satisfying -- because almost nothing new is said

[laconicsax]

58. Let me get this straight...

You, struggle4progress, while consistently talking about substantive, productive discussion that takes into account proper historical context and the nuances of complex situations, don't actually post here to engage in such discussion, but as an intellectual exercise?

Between this and that time you posted your manifesto, I'm surprised you expect anyone to take you seriously. Really, you've now admitted to posting for the sake of seeing your fingers move and that you follow a script for changing the subject and how to respond when someone calls you on it.

Why should anyone take you seriously now?

[laconicsax]

56. You're waiting for me to answer a question directed at someone else?

That's funny. Especially since the person to whom the question was directed did respond and the ensuing subthread got deleted.

[darkstar3]

57. He's just sad his bait doesn't work like it used to. n/t

[humblebum]

59. Never claimed no one responded. I just never got an answer.

Only a smokescreen, blather, and insults.

[laconicsax]

60. Again, you're waiting for me to answer a question directed at someone else?

How droll.

[humblebum]

61. If you say so. nt

[WatsonT]

4. What a monster

I hope they lock her up for a good long while.

[humblebum]

8. Tell me hippie, was the Arizona shooter motivated by his

association to radical atheism, as he declared something like "In God I will not trust" or were the teenaged arsonists, who burned ten churches in Texas last year motivated by exposure to radical atheism? Or were these isolated cases simply a matter of mental imbalance independent of circumstance?

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cleanhippie]

24. Tell me bum, are you able to discuss anything else?

:puke:

[onager]

26. Just ask him about...

[humblebum]

28. Simply following your lead.

If you are going to constantly harp on one group of people then you need to be prepared for retort, comment, and criticism. Comes with the territory, bud.

[cleanhippie]

29. You are a follower, thats for sure.

But you are not my bud.

[humblebum]

38. Still cleanhippie 12, humblebum 0 nt

[laconicsax]

42. Wow, humblebum! You really take pride in that losing record!

:rofl:

[darkstar3]

41. Did you know you were undefeated?

:rofl:

[On the Road]

9. The Mother Seems to Have Been Suffering from Delusions

but she meant no harm to her child, and referring to circumcision as "ritual mutilation" betrays the author's anti-religious perspective.

[darkstar3]

11. You object to the characterization?

Why? It is, quite simply, genital mutilation by definition, and it was done in this case according to misunderstood ritualistic guidelines. I don't see how referring to it as ritualistic mutilation is anything but fact.

[On the Road]

12. When You Choose Words Like "Mutiliation" and "Ritual"

instead of the common description of circumcision, you are bringing in loaded words with connotations of strangeness and violence. It is the same thing that Fox News does every day.

Using this kind of depiction is acceptable on a blog because blogs have no expectation of being dispassionate reporters. It is OK for them to have an axe to grind. For that reason, I find it a little jarring but not actually objectionable.

I hope the mother gets treatment. I hope the court adopts a different attitude from the author, and she does not go to jail or get her child taken away.

[darkstar3]

14. You labor under the false assumption that circumcision is not controversial.

[humblebum]

16. Male circumcision in ancient times was used as a health measure, and until

quite recently was still recognized as such. With today's condition of the greater degree of personal and public hygiene it is generally no longer considered necessary, and definitely not considered necessary to christianity, regardless of what you perceive. Circumcision has never been shown to affect sexual performance in any way. When done properly, it is of no consequence to a male's ability to procreate. The opinion that it causes a permanent trauma is debatable. Today there may or may not be any necessity for it depending on circumstance, but there was a time when it did indeed prevent physical maladies. Is it unnecessary cruel genital mutilation? Very debatable. Mostly a political football and another reason for peoiple like you to bash religion.

[darkstar3]

17. More bait?

Didn't get any engagement with your last dropping on this thread so you thought you'd try again?

Here's a song I'd like to dedicate to you: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WUD-nhsmkw&feature=related

[humblebum]

21. You're getting more predictable by the day.

Totally pathetic and dishonest.

[On the Road]

31. Of Course It's Controversial

and it can be described any way the author chooses. The choice of words, however, is anything but a neutral fact-based description.

[darkstar3]

32. Yeah, I'm gonna have to echo laconicsax in #34. nt

[laconicsax]

18. Do you have a definition of circumcision that doesn't involve ritually cutting genitals?

I admit I'm not an expert in making excuses for religious barbarism, but cutting someone's genitals as part of a ritual is generally known as ritual genital mutilation.

[On the Road]

27. OK, But What is the Ritual?

It's a religious requirement in Judaism, but AFAIK it's generally done as a medical procedure by an ordinary doctor in a hospital shortly after birth.

Mutilation has an extraordinarily negative connotation. If it's done intentionally, it suggests sadism. Piercings are technically mutilation, but if an article on piercing described enormous numbers of young adults mutilating themselves, you would be justified in concluding that the author had a ax to grind.

[laconicsax]

30. Google "bris"

Circumcision in Judaism is a ritual.

What would you call slicing off part of a child's penis as part of a religious ritual?

[Mariana]

20. This article is from the UK, remember.

Circumcision is not routinely performed on healthy, normal baby boys there, probably because it's widely considered to be a mutilation. It's not much done except for the relative few who do it as a religious ritual.

[On the Road]

25. That Does Put it in a Different Context

Thank you.

[WatsonT]

19. Def:

Ritual:
1 an established or prescribed procedure for a religious or other rite.
2 a system or collection of religious or other rites.
3 observance of set forms in public worship.
4 a book of rites or ceremonies.
5 a book containing the offices to be used by priests in administering the sacraments and for visitation of the sick, burial of the dead, etc.
6 a prescribed or established rite, ceremony, proceeding, or service: the ritual of the dead.
7 prescribed, established, or ceremonial acts or features collectively, as in religious services.
8any practice or pattern of behavior regularly performed in a set manner.
9 a prescribed code of behavior regulating social conduct, as that exemplified by the raising of one's hat or the shaking of hands in greeting.

Mutilation:
1 to injure, disfigure, or make imperfect by removing or irreparably damaging parts: Vandals mutilated the painting.
2 to deprive (a person or animal) of a limb or other essential part.

[On the Road]

33. Pulling Out the Dictionary Definitions is Not the Point

The issue is connotation. Choosing the words "ritual" and "mutilation" rather than the usual term "circumcision" has a very specific effect of making the circumcision appear bizarre, sadistic, and cultlike.

Imagine the reaction to doctor asking the parents of newborn if they wanted their child to be ritually mutilated.

[laconicsax]

34. What would you call slicing off part of a child's penis as part of a religious ritual?

[ZombieHorde]

35. Pure evil. nt

[WatsonT]

40. Apparently it's offensive to clearly label things as they are

she was thus not religious, did not cause permanent physical damage to the child, and was in no way acting out a religious ceremony.

[WatsonT]

39. So it's unfair to use words that perfectly describe the situation?

Rather than ritual, which it clearly was, you'd prefer what? Ceremony?

And rather than mutilation you'd prefer maybe renovation?

[trotsky]

43. "a very specific effect of making the circumcision appear bizarre, sadistic, and cultlike"

No, I'm pretty sure the PRACTICE of circumcision does that all by itself.