Evidence of anti-Semitism lacking

To the editor:  

Let me thank you for publishing my letter in last week’s Press. In the tradition of the best journalism, you are willing to publish views differing from those in your editorial. 

And, at my suggestion, you added some items showing “evidence” supporting your suggestions of official government anti-Semitism in the Scandinavian countries. However, this “evidence” points out rather clearly that my assumptions were generally correct: (a) the newspaper stories describe incidents of anti-Semitism, apparently by individuals or small groups, as I noted these occur in every country; (b) it seems quite clear that the speaker of the Knesset objected to parliamentarians criticizing actions of the Israeli government. Although all-too-often confused (or improperly used?) by many people, such actions are not  anti-Semitism, but objections to specific aggressive, provocative and warlike policies of this government, with which objections I and many others happen to agree; (c) the opposition to ritual circumcision by the Danish and Swedish medical associations has nothing to do with religion (Jewish, Muslim, etc.). 

In contrast to the U.S., circumcision is historically rare in the Scandinavian countries. An aspect of the recent debate in these medical societies is that the procedure is done when the individual is too young to consent; during the debate it was suggested that consent might be obtained when the boy was about 12 years old. (There is precedent for this. You will recall that there have been worldwide objections to circumcision and other general procedures in African female infants). Actually, circumcision has been long debated by many medical societies for medical reasons, pro and con, most recently (but not always) with approval by the U.S. pediatric society. 

Again, my thanks for your openness and willingness to publish dissenting opinion. 

Gerson  T. Lesser, M.D.