Jews and Muslims are joining forces in outrage over a German court’s decision that could prohibit parents from having their children circumcised for religious reasons. The court deemed the oft-religious procedure an act of “bodily harm” to children, according to German media reports.
The Tuesday ruling says doctors who perform the procedure for religious reasons could be charged with committing bodily injury, sparking a debate that pits parents’ religious freedom against a child’s right to self-determination. The court essentially ruled that circumcision is not in a child’s best interests, according to the German newspaper Der Spiegel.
So many questions remain, such as when does the right to follow religious law trump the right of a child to bodily autonomy?
Is legislation like this discriminatory toward Jews and Muslims?
Photo of newborns courtesy of Shutterstock
About Joanna Schroeder
Anybody else think it’s a little weird that this is the issue that brings Jews and Muslims together?
I think this person said it quite well:
And then on the other hand we have gems like these:
-source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/27/circumcision-ruling-germany-muslim-jewish?newsfeed=true
“Women’s rights groups and social policy makers also condemned the decision, but for the reason that it would have the effect of putting male and female circumcision on the same footing, when they were “in no way comparable”, said Katrin Altpeter, social minister in the state of Baden-Württemberg. Female circumcision she said, was a far more drastic act. It is already outlawed in Germany. ”
I really really hate groups like this. Feminists, if you want to know where anti-feminism starts, take a gander at this. Luckily I know this doesn’t represent all feminists but many aren’t so fortunate to meet other types of feminists. How dare the suffering of men ever be dealt with, they must keep suffering so it doesn’t detract from the severity of women’s issues!!1111!1
“How dare the suffering of men ever be dealt with, they must keep suffering so it doesn’t detract from the severity of women’s issues!!1111!1″
I think the error you’re making is that there is a disparity between what the feminist lobby says and what the feminist lobby actually believes. I don’t think the fear was that it detracts from the debate on a procedure, FGC, that is already broadly recognized as immoral and which is illegal almost of not everywhere. I think it is simply thinly veiled misandry.
This wonderful ruling gave me so much hope. Just a few days ago. How quickly things change.
Well, I can’t say I did not live in interesting times.
Circumcision is just religious barbarism. Should be outlawed.
“when does the right to follow religious law trump the right of a child to bodily autonomy?”
).
IMNSHO, no religious law should be allowed to harm anybody (and that includes your children, because children are NOT your property).
If we would allow that, we should allow stoning people and suicide bombers (hey, didn’t you know that religious laws can be THAT crazy?
As they say, your freedom ends where mine begins.
Thus, religious freedom cannot be a reason to allow any damaging behaviour – and even more on children, for God’s sake!
Through time, religions have committed the most hideous crimes. Something bad is bad no matter what, and religon is NO excuse for it.
If those barbarians are so eager to hack someone’s penis, they should hack their own. 8)
“Is legislation like this discriminatory toward Jews and Muslims?”
Yes, it is, and to hell with it.
If my religion would say I should go around naked (a mostly harmless thing), I still could not do it. Because law trumps religion – and that should apply to ANY religion.
Exactly. The notion that children are the ‘property’ of their parents, to do with as they see fit, is a vile one…. and trying to cloak it in the veneer of relilgion doesn’t excuse that.
And yet if a parent were to practice their religion and bring their child up in their religion by taking their child to one of those gay to straight conversion programs, some of the same people saying that parents have a right to circumcise their boys would be up in arms.
Great argument against abortion!
This is a great ruling. From what I’ve heard FGM was banned already, even the pinprick procedure (which is most likely less drastic than male circumcision), so it’s a good step to have both.
“What is truly sinister is the fact that with the foreskin’s removal, up to fifty percent of sensation in the glans penis is reduced…a condition no doubt as pleasing to the puritan American mother as it is to her co-conspirator, the puritan Jewish doctor who delights in being able to mutilate the goyim in the same vivid way that his religion (and mother!) mutilated him.” Gore Vidal, Myra Breckenridge.
Seriously, is cutting up your infant son’s peen really that important to your religious sensibilities? Is slicing of a piece of tender newborn skin on such a tender newborn body part really such an important and vital part of your existence that the whole weight of heaven will come crashing down if you don’t do it? If it is than at least wait until the kid is old enough to decide for himself, assuming he’s as mentally deranged as you, and we’ll see how widespread a procedure it stays among these groups.
Does anyone here think that just possibly, when a male child is born, if one of his very first experiences of the world is getting a smack on the butt & having a part of one his *most* sensitive, sensory nerve dense areas, most sacred parts of his body CUT OFF that his impression of this place may be that it’s not a very safe place to be? That these other big humans are not really looking out for him? Maybe that male child is even further denied comfort and safety by being denied his mother’s breast because she’s been convinced that it’s inconvenient, unhealthy or socially unacceptable to do for long, or it’s better to use infant formula. Does anyone here think that boy may possibly become, say… more aggressive? Anyone? If you wanted to grow a callous warrior, doesn’t this sound like a great way to start? Spank him and cut on his penis as one of his very first experiences? Doesn’t removal of the foreskin deny a level of sensitivity & pleasure in men? That has been my experience of observing circumcised vs. uncircumcised men. I am of jewish decent and I think it’s wholly barbaric and disgusting and am absolutely delighted to hear that a country is banning it. Hurray! If I had a baby boy and a doctor or religious person came anywhere my baby’s brand new penis with a scapel I would literally f-ing cut that doctor myself. I knew man who for some reason decided to get circumcised as an adult. Fine. He’s an adult and allowed to modify his body, but cutting on brand new baby boys is wholly, entirely barbaric.
“So many questions remain…”
Um, no questions remain. Unnecessary, circumcision should always be illegal. Period.
“…such as when does the right to follow religious law trump the right of a child to bodily autonomy?”
Never.
“Is legislation like this discriminatory toward Jews and Muslims?”
This questions doesn’t even make any sense. To discriminate means to treat differently. Providing a religious exemption would be the discriminatory act.
I think one thing being missed here is the right wing views here. Jew and muslims might believe this is another way for Europe to alienate them. They might jump on a slippery slope. I wouldnt put it past Euro nationalists to ban kosher and halal foods either (under the guise that it’s barbaric no doubt). Anders Breivik, Le Pen’s rise, and the Dutch government dissolving after losing support from the Right were not accidents either
Are you actually equating cutting flesh off an infant child shortly after he’s born with…. dietary restrictions?
If I was, would I use the term “slippery slope”?
So we should allow defenseless individuals to be victimized because someone else might theoretically potentially be victimized in the future? The option I would choose is to oppose the victimization of people whenever and wherever it arises. That sets just as strong a message and I believe sets the proper one.
Are we still going over that ??
Screw mutilation in the name religious freedom – I do not care if jews, muslims, christian cut off their foreskin in the name of the lord .
Never the less- if we allow circumcision for a religious reason , then we have to allow prearranged marriages for children, female circumcision etc – all in the name of religion – So why is the one better than the other ?
As a side note :
You monotheistic religions are the route cause of all hatred, war and evil in this world!
With your “ I have the better imaginary friend” concept- and if you do not believe in my concept “I kell you or you go to hell”.
So my point (finally) I do not care if it is important to you and an old tradition
Excellent decision – witchcraft and sorcery have no place in modern times. I do want to acknowledge the law of unintended consequences, and that it is important to keep an eye on non-desirable collateral damage.
Be gone religious stupidities and women’s rights political groups who never miss an opportunity to say something idiotic!
I really don’t get the amount of anti-circumcision anger on the web, it’s really something that doesn’t come up in real life, I find. Personally I’m thrilled to bits with my circumcised penis (for traditional, not religious reasons) and more sensation would be the last thing in the world I’d want. Most all circumcised fellas I know seem to feel the same way. There was that one bloke I’d met who’d had to have a circumcision in his 20s thanks to phimosis (apparently a painful and nasty business), and I think he wanted some reassurance. I was happy enough to give it.
It’s infant circumcision that people have a problem with. I take it the bloke had no problem getting it done as it should be when you’re an adult. Glad you’re happy with yours, but guess what, it doesn’t really matter because you couldn’t do shit about it anyway.
Bully for you. Nobody is talking about outlawing circumcision. We’re talking about outlawing slicing a boy’s flesh off without his consent or medical neccesity.
If, when he is older, a man decides to have his foresking removed (for whatever reason) that is something entirely different.
The fact that you are “thrilled to bits” about your naked dong is awesome for you, but completely irrelevant to the discussion. Unless you have some sort of crystal ball that can be used to divine whether an infant boy will be just as “thrilled to bits” later in life?
ACS: “I really don’t get the amount of anti-circumcision anger on the web, it’s really something that doesn’t come up in real life, I find. Personally I’m thrilled to bits with my circumcised penis (for traditional, not religious reasons) and more sensation would be the last thing in the world I’d want. Most all circumcised fellas I know seem to feel the same way.”
Well, yeah, and you have every right to be. Except this is not what we’re talking about and I’ll address it in your next point further.
ACS: “There was that one bloke I’d met who’d had to have a circumcision in his 20s thanks to phimosis (apparently a painful and nasty business), and I think he wanted some reassurance. I was happy enough to give it.”
The difference is that your friend is an adult, capable of making decisions for himself and the ability to deal with whatever benefits and consequences may follow. Your friend also had a disease so that adds to it, yes.
Yet, we’re talking about infants here who are not even fully developed yet to have a say in the decision to be circumsized. Plus, it’s for “Religous Reasons” not for legitmate concerns like, in the case of your friend, phimosis.
Two entirely different situations here.
Israelite circumcision was originally only the cutting of the foreskin. However, after Hellenistic Jews tried to cover up their circumcision by various means of stretching the foreskin, the Rabis added in another step. This procedure is called priah (Hebrew: פריעה), which means: ‘uncovering’, and consists of peeling back the epithelium after the foreskin has been amputated.
The claim that circumcision is a continuous bond with the times of Abraham is false. It has changed before and can change again.