You come across as very militant in your apparent determination for baby boys to be mutilated at will - it seems very strange, and not a little creepy.
Or he comes from a background quite different to yours? Life is a lot simpler when we let it be.
Op. So I’ll give an example from my faith:
Here is how rulings on certain issues are prioritised in terms of hierarchy:
1- orders and mentions in the Quran
2- well referenced interpretations directly from prophetic sayings and narrated actions ( this could be confirmed or unconfirmed)
3- scholarly consensus
4- contemporary scholarly effort to derive rulings on modern issues based on expert advice
5- personal opinion
Not all those practicing the faith have knowledge of anything aside from the basics as they don’t engage in critical thinking much. It is often that fundamentals of the faith are confused with interpretations and replaceable narratives.
Why I mention this is because for example, in the issue of circumcision it is as follows:
1- it is mentioned in the Quran that we shall follow the example of prophets including Moses , Abraham and Mohammed. It doesn’t however mention circumcision as far as I’m concerned. Debating the authenticity of this source is quite disrespectful to a person adhering to that faith, unless it’s an invited debate. But you can debate the interpretations after you go through the filtering of the following hierarchy.
2- the prophet mentions that circumcision is required, in multiple narrations. He mentions that his brethren prophets were circumcised. ( there is no mention as to why or about cleanliness, it’s purely a requirement of god.) at this level there could be critical thinkng employee about whether those narrations are valid, debatable or none debatable based on authenticity. That won’t be disrespectful.
3- scholarly consensus. There is a consensus that circumcision for males is commendable based on interpretations of the above two sources. There is majority scholarly opinion about it being obligatory for males but not a full consensus. Therefore there is some room for debate. Scholarly consensus usually means the stance of prominent scholars which were at the time when this issue arises until valid consensus was reached (circumcision started as a topic since ever). There is majority opinion on this but no consensus. There is still no mention about medical reasoning or so forth. The prophet mentions that where there is no consensus it is usually a way to leave room for differences. There is no consensus that I’m aware of about which age circumsixion is to happen, so that’s totally up for recommendations. It could’ve been recommended by certain scholars but in our faith we don’t regard scholars as “unmistakable” and that so long as the ruling has not been clarified clear as day by the first two scriptures and so long as consensus hasn’t been reached then contemporary scholarly effort is required to tweak the details of the ruling to what fits circumstances.
4- scholarly effort to derive rulings. This is where contemporary efforts come in. So where there is lack of consensus, on a certain issue or on the application of certain issue, then modern scholarly effort is required. There is a huge amount of scholars to choose from and the idea is you can ask as many as you wish to ask and you settle with the one that you feel at ease with. In fact you are obliged to ask as many as you wish and can settle for none of them but what feels ok for u, so long as you haven’t dismissed the first 3 priorities in the hierarchy. The scholar asked should be well versed in the expert advice on the topic as well as on the different religious interpretations of that topic.. so medical advice is important here and any new medical findings. Because not necessarily the understanding of the application of certain things in the past was based on religious context but perhaps was based on a scholars recommendation which is not considered equal to the word of god in any way and must evolve based on new knowledge and circumstances.
Why am I mentioning this? I believe the OP should try her best to put effort to understand the background of her DH and his family, as it comes as a package with marrying into multicultural families... and when she puts effort she might automatically realise that a lot of what she “assumed” might be set in stone religious beliefs or fundamental practice to their family, might actually have a lot of room for respectable debate..
I do not know the background of her DH, but I’m sure many aspects in our lives are based around core principles and some side ones... it is easy to win people over when you remind them that you respect their core principles..
So while we don’t need to compromise what we have strong opinions about, but we do need to compromise on our attitude in how to handle our differences.. we might be able to work out that we aren’t as diffeeenr as we though.
To the pp mentioning about “sucking” the blood out of a circumsized genital, I’m sure this is not fundamental to the Jewish practice and I’m sure discussing how this practice is grim and leads to medical issues should be ok....
I can understand the debate about the age of conscent and body autonomy. This all still falls within the reason of what’s not just acceptable, but “welcomed” debate based on how my religious understanding is derived and many educated Muslims. However in the presence of medical evidence that can support each side of the debate, I can still refuse this interpretation being imposed on me.. but that’s personal belief. And I can be humble enough to accept i might be wrong- medically speaking. It’s not offensive to be told I’m medically wrong it’s simply a debate.
But to just disrespect circumcision as a whole and call it barbaric mutilation and bloody bla as a result of specific interpretation by a specific group, is ignorance. It’s disrespectful as you are fundemrnally disrespecting the second source of my faith for example.. which is quite an end to any fruitful debate because no one who adheres to this thinking will want to respect you more than their prophet.
I don’t know what set of beliefs derived your in laws understanding of circumcision but it really is worth your efforts to try listen.try look further into things.. ask opinions of those who are intellectuals but within that same culture as your DH not those who will just want to reassure you that you are “right”... not to entertain the possibility of circumcising your child but because this topic might open your eyes about them as people.. which will help you understand how to deal with many issues in the future where you might feel differently- understandably.
No one will force you. You are the mother... you get to make the final call with your DH. And your DH sounds mature enough to think outside the box since he married outside the box!!!
But don’t shut doors or building understanding and tolerance because you are asking the wrong crowd about a topic they know nothing about but what they hear on media.
Part of marrying your DH was to know that you had to at least respect his core values and beliefs... circumcising at birth might not be one of them.. but it sure is part of his core values that he looks up to certain things in his heritage and won’t appreciate you calling it barbaric. So won’t be able to tolerate any debate on side values .So won’t be solving anything.
I’m not saying you will be disrespectful. But this is an emotional topic for you and you are being egged on in this thread, I’m probably gonna have this debate with sil as she is very open with us so will save this on my notes .
You do owe it to your DH that if you want to make some “reform” to his cultural understanding - which isn’t a bad thing - that you at least first make an effort to understand it and find out the core principles that you must not disrespect.
And just because you have a strong opinion about something, doesn’t make it the right answer for someone else. You still need to debate respectfully.