At 12:19 PM 4/12/02, you wrote: >thanks, not eating pork is always something i've wondered about. > >whats the exact religious reason? Laws of ritual purity when dealing with what you eat. Land animals have to have split hooves and chew their cud. Sea animals have to have fins and scales. Birds of prey (depending on claw configuration) are not allowed. Those are the basics. Also, blood is not allowed.
>-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: 12 April 2002 16:52 >To: CF-Community >Subject: RE: Circumcision article link > > >Pig is one of the animals specifically mentioned as being not allowed. Even >when I wasn't religious I didn't eat it (and I was just a kid). Closest I've >come is soy bacon. salty, but I love it. :) > >At 11:39 AM 4/12/02, you wrote: >>so as far as your concerned it's a commandment not to eat pork? >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>Sent: 12 April 2002 16:40 >>To: CF-Community >>Subject: Re: Circumcision article link >> >> >>Actually, a religious person (at least this one) looks at it and says that >>its a commandment and I'm doing it because its a commandment. If science >>says that the commandment has a physical effect, then fine and good. The >>physical effect is totally secondary to the spiritual effect. >>To say that the commandment or every commandment was done for a physical >>reason such as health opens the door to denial of the root of the >>commandment. Hey, not eating pork was because of trichinosis. If we cook it >>right then we wouldn't get the disease and we can now eat it. Same for all >>the other commandments. This is the rational of the reform movement and a >>rational rejected by religious Jews. >> >>At 03:51 AM 4/12/02, you wrote: >>>It seems that much of the old testament law, such as circumcision, what to >>eat and not to eat, etc., has a good basis in what is healthy, especailly >>given the lack of sanitary conditions of the times. >>> >>>A religious person might argue that this is God making up the lack of >>science of the time to protect people. A non-believer might argue that this >>is wise people coming up religious law to mirror their own observations >>about what makes a person sick. Either way, it demonstrates a good deal of >>wisdom in the old books. >>> >>>H. >>> >>> >>>---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- >>>from: "Braver, Ben" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 19:56:23 -0700 >>> >>>>Found a link to the original article on circumcision & risk of cervical >>>>cancer - it's in the New England Journal of Medicine: >>>>http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/346/15/1105 >>>> >>>>Apparently, the foreskin is particularly susceptible to infection from >HPV >>- >>>>human papilloma virus - which is linked to cervical cancer. >>>> >>>>-Ben >>>> >>> >> >> > > ______________________________________________________________________ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
