German court outlaws circumcision for boys

[anitram]

Interesting finding. Full article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012...?newsfeed=true

Some details:

A judge at a Cologne court said that the circumcision of minors went against a child's interests because it led to a physical alteration of the body, and because people other than the child were determining its religious affiliation.

Religious leaders said the court had stepped into a minefield with its decision, which undermined their religious authority and contravened Germany's constitution.

Ali Demir, chairman of the Religious Community of Islam in Germany, said: "I find the ruling adversarial to the cause of integration and discriminatory against all the parties concerned."

Dieter Graumann, president of Germany's Central Council of Jews, called it "an egregious and insensitive measure" which amounted to "an unprecedented and dramatic intervention in religious communities' right of determination".

...

The court weighed up three articles from the basic law: the rights of parents, the freedom of religious practice and the right of the child to physical integrity, before coming to the conclusion that the procedure was not in the interests of the child.

It rejected the defence that circumcision is considered hygienic in many cultures, one of the main reasons it is carried out in the US, Britain and in Germany.

After much deliberation, it concluded that a circumcision, "even when done properly by a doctor with the permission of the parents, should be considered as bodily harm if it is carried out on a boy unable to give his own consent".

It ruled the child's body would be "permanently and irreparably changed", and that this alteration went "against the interests of a child to decide for himself later on to what religion he wishes to belong".

Any thoughts?

I seem to remember there may have been threads in the past about this as I specifically remember melon contributing his thoughts so if it's appropriate to merge, feel free.

[Salome]

since in Europe the tendency to outlaw anything related to Islam, when the law remotely gives reason to do so, seems to become more & more prevalent
it seems to make sense not just to restrict this to one religion and treat every other religion equally

will be interesting to see how this will pan out though
because usually this ends up in people (who wouldn't be able to tell where in their neighbourhood you'd be able to find a church) starting to yell that it'd be outrageous if they'd have to tolerate this

[Jive Turkey]

Tradition and religion are the laziest reasons for doing anything. If it's a violation of personal rights, it doesn't matter if it's a religious tradition. There are plenty of traditions around the world that wouldn't fly in western society

[PhilsFan]

If the Mormons had started circumcising people, they would have never legalized it to begin with. The only reason it's legal is because, like JT said, it's a tradition. Otherwise, the idea of chopping off body parts at birth is insane (and no one be silly enough to bring up the umbilical cord).

[Dfit00]

I support it, don't cut the damn little thing... it's more sexual pleasure for the guy in long run, parent involvement should be limited in this.

[Moonlit_Angel]

I've never understood the point to begin with. And I agree on the whole lack of consent thing. It's a weird practice.

[LemonMelon]

Originally Posted by Moonlit_Angel

I've never understood the point to begin with.

It's part of dedicating a child in Judaism. Kind of a big deal, actually.

I don't really care. This has no relevance to Christians whatsoever, honestly. Pretty sure Paul rails against it at one point.

[Moonlit_Angel]

Oh, yeah, I knew it had to do with the Jewish faith and such, I just don't get how that procedure is supposed to relate to that faith, exactly. But admittedly, I'm not well-versed in Jewish rituals .

[Liesje]

I'm torn on this issue but since I haven't had kids yet I haven't had to decide where I stand. In general, I do not see the point in this and I would not do it because I am trying to force religion or tradition on my child. The issue for me/us is that around here, all the guys are circumcised, so having an uncircumcised child would definitely make him "different" (even if it's more natural, or better, or giving him the freedom to chose). Even if in this case the difference is so insignificant and private, I'm sure we can all relate to being different in some way and feeling like we stand out, even if no one else knows. I asked a friend about this because she grew up in Europe and her first husband is European. She is a lot like me in that we don't really see the point of this, but she had her son circumcised because her first husband (his father) was despite being European. I don't remember the whole conversation but it was also something that she took into consideration and gave me some convincing arguments for doing it (for the son to be like his father) despite neither of us giving a shit about religion or tradition. Also I've never had a guy friend, boyfriend, partner say he wished he wasn't circumcised.

So I don't know....but if it got banned here I guess it wouldn't matter to me, then my mind would automatically be made up.

[ladyfreckles]

This is such a tricky topic. I've always viewed it as a human rights issue. Unless it's medically required, I don't think parents should be able to remove a part of their child's body. I get that it's religious and it's a tradition etc etc but a male should be able to decide for himself. I also understand that there is a longer recovery time when you're older, but that's not an excuse to remove a body part without the person's permission.

I honestly don't get how this is a violation of religious freedom. What does religious freedom have to do with removal of a body part without permission? I would never feel comfortable doing that to my own son since it should be his decision and not my own.

[INDY500]

San Francisco: Circumcision Ban and Religious Freedom - TIME

San Francisco tried to ban it last summer.

The anticircumcision debate began in April when a group of self-proclaimed "intactivists" — people who believe strongly that infant boys have a right to keep their foreskins intact — submitted enough signatures to put a circumcision ban on the ballot. The intactivists have taken up the language of international human rights: they are fighting, they say, for "genital autonomy" and "male-genital-integrity rights."

"Male-genital-integrity rights"... ya gotta love hippies.

One of the referendum's key supporters has written a comic book, Foreskin Man, that portrays a blond, Aryan-looking superhero doing battle with "Monster Mohel." (Mohels are people trained to perform ritual Jewish circumcisions.)

And who doesn't love anti-Semitism?

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by Liesje

I don't remember the whole conversation but it was also something that she took into consideration and gave me some convincing arguments for doing it (for the son to be like his father) despite neither of us giving a shit about religion or tradition. Also I've never had a guy friend, boyfriend, partner say he wished he wasn't circumcised.

i think this is much more for the father, though. i don't think boys (at least in the West) spend much time (if ever) thinking about whether or not their father is circumcised, and i don't think they'd want to either. and if it did come up, i'm sure it could be easily explained.

it's simply unnecessary. and i believe about half of American boys born today aren't circumcised, so whatever mild social stigma is probably gone.

and those boys with foreskins are likely going to be thankful in the long run.

[Liesje]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

and i believe about half of American boys born today aren't circumcised, so whatever mild social stigma is probably gone.

I don't doubt it but that is half of American boys as a whole. If you look at the smaller context of the community in which I was raised, live, and work I'd honestly be impressed if you found one, so it's not just the father but the peers as well.

Something I won't do is not do it just because everyone else is. I don't like to make reactive decisions like that. I personally do not see the point, all of the religious, tradition, and cultural context aside so I'm inclined not to do it but it's not up to just me and so far it seems like the men/fathers are still all for it.

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by INDY500

"Male-genital-integrity rights"... ya gotta love hippies.



And who doesn't love anti-Semitism?

What does this have to do with anything? Not that I'm surprised you'd support a tradition because "hey, it's what we do". What were you saying in the other thread about exercising your brain?

And it's amazing that you'd find rights to "Male Genital Integrity" to be so outside your worldview

[BVS]

Originally Posted by INDY500

San Francisco tried to ban it last summer.

No, SAN FRANCISCO didn't try and ban it, a small group did. The vote didn't even make it to the ballot.

Maybe Beck didn't tell you that part

[ladyfreckles]

I've heard really sad stories from certain rural midwest towns where boys who were in tact were made fun of for being "freaks" when showering for gym.

[anitram]

I have had this discussion with my partner because I strongly feel that it's an antiquated, barbaric, and unnecessary practice and I am very much against inflicting it on any sons we may have. Mercifully he agrees so there is really no conflict there.

[AchtungBono]

Originally Posted by Moonlit_Angel

Oh, yeah, I knew it had to do with the Jewish faith and such, I just don't get how that procedure is supposed to relate to that faith, exactly. But admittedly, I'm not well-versed in Jewish rituals .

There are many important stages in the life of a Jew, beginning with the "Brit Mila" which has its origin in biiblical times and in Hebrew it is called a "Brit Milla" (hence the word "Bris" in Yiddish). It symbolizes the "Brit" (covenant) between a Jew and G-d. Here is some more information:

Brit Milah - The Covenant of Circumcision (Bris)

[Jive Turkey]

Originally Posted by AchtungBono

There are many important stages in the life of a Jew, beginning with the "Brit Mila" which has its origin in biiblical times and in Hebrew it is called a "Brit Milla" (hence the word "Bris" in Yiddish). It symbolizes the "Brit" (covenant) between a Jew and G-d. Here is some more information:

Brit Milah - The Covenant of Circumcision (Bris)

There are tribes in Africa that also have important stages in the life of their females

[ladyfreckles]

I always found it odd that the western world is so against female circumcision but so for male circumcision. I don't see a difference.