German court bans circumcision

[Skybird]

The sentence today gained the force of law and became legally valid, after the prosecutor saw no chance for success in an appeal and thus folded over that option. A revision now is no longer possible.

The church now has joined the chorus of Jewish-Muslim complaints.

Nice! By constitution, Germany should be a formally secular state where the state has no right to intervene and propagate on behalf of religious communities and their demands for priviliged treatement. While this is violated on many instances (mandatory church taxes enforced by the state, major public tax funding for church property, tax relief, diplomatic status of Vatican clerics, bypassing laws of the civil penalty code and replacing them with internal club rules designed to hide and prevent internal crime from the public), at least this time simple healthy reason has taken the second hurdle.

You do not cut off body parts of your wards without consensus over the medical necessity , religious claims for being given special status do not rule above the law of the penalty code and the constitution.

"The dignity of man is untouchable" (German constitution, article one). The right of wards for physical integrity supercedes the desire of parents to push them into their religion's schemes or to ill-treat them over religious motives.

Let them grow up, let them collect and compare infomation on philosophies and religions that they take interest in, let them weigh and assess and judge it, and then let them make a choice for or against one lineage, school, traditon, teaching, or against it, and let them make that choice in freedom. If then, as adults, they chose to snip or brand, to tic or to pierce, it is indeed their own business for which they are responsible themselves only and for which they have freely decided.

Of course, for the three desert dogmas that want a submissive, obedient, dependant, stupid crowd of sheep that is not educated enough and intellectually uncapable to question clerics' motives and powerpolitical interests , this is a nightmare scenario, and that is why they so bitterly agitate against it. They even killed, and still kill over it.

Where there are no sheep, there would be no need for a shepard.

[August]

Originally Posted by VipertheSniper

You conviniently leave out that those discussion weren't about all children, but those with disorders of sex differentiation.

Just like the opposite side here conveniently ignores the fact that most circumcisions are not done for religious purposes.

Personally I think this whole issue is just another instance of anti-religion and mixed in with a large dose of latent antisemitism.

[MH]

Originally Posted by joegrundman

well, the "wait until older" argument is not completely trivial, and fits better into modern standards of behaviour. It is not completely unimaginable that the norm changes at some point in the future so that circumcision occurs at an older age eg bar mitzvah age. .

Wait till older sounds cool in general still doing it at later age is not most optimal solution.

[antikristuseke]

Not doing it without a medical reason is the optimal solution, but if a person does it by choice it is their body and their call.

[Safe-Keeper]

Originally Posted by MH

Right... OK we are in the copy paste Internet bull stage....just look for something to paste that contradict your claims.

Oh, pardon us for backing up our claims rather than just sitting trading opinions and fallacies. Such as,

It's about fighting religion nothing more...as much heretic unbeliever as i am i can't agree with your vision of pluralism by wiping out traditions and cultural heritages in pursuit of some sort of tyrannic hegemony...

Poisoning the well, some rather offensive and faulty ad_hominem attacks and a full-blown conspiracy theory, all rolled into one. Could you please stop attacking your debate opponents and focus on actually arguing for your position?

Male circumcision does not affect your rights does not hurt anyone and the "victims" have no regrets so stop all this mantra about child abuse.

Stop lying. There's plenty of cicumcized people out there who wished the procedure had not been performed on them. They exist no matter how much people like you try to convince each others that they don't.

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Just want to put your mind at ease Skybird and let you and The First International Symposium on Circumcision know that my foreskinless penis works just fine and I am extremely pleased with its performance. Oh, and my wife who calls it 'Sparticus' can attest that it keeps her VERY happy too. If you dont believe me I can have pictures sent for you and your fellow professionals at the U.N. to ogle over.

You do know anecdotes are worthless as evidence, right?

The big picture, with apologies to those of you who prefer we don't post facts in here:


Source:http://www.davidwilton.com/files/mc-and-sexual-function---denmark-2011.pdf(Male circumcision and sexual function in men
and women: a survey-based, cross-sectional
study in Denmark. 2011).

I halfway expect you to pretend studies like this don't exist either, just like you pretend no one ever object to having their penises circumcized in infanthood.

Don't force a permanent change in your child's body to be in line with your ideology, when you know that he might wish that he had been able to choose for himself, rather than have it imposed upon him.

This is so blindingly obvious, but yet again religion keeps creating problems like this which otherwise would have been solved and forgotten ages ago.

A great summary of our side's view. Good job.

The sentence today gained the force of law and became legally valid, after the prosecutor saw no chance for success in an appeal and thus folded over that option. A revision now is no longer possible.

Yay!

[MH]

Of course, for the three desert dogmas that want a submissive, obedient, dependant, stupid crowd of sheep that is not educated enough and intellectually uncapable to question clerics' motives and powerpolitical interests , this is a nightmare scenario, and that is why they so bitterly agitate against it. They even killed, and still kill over it.

Where there are no sheep, there would be no need for a shepard

I'm not quite sure who is who.... but congratulations.

I think what you are seeing there MH is the angle of the people who just hate and are using the other arguements as an avenue to drive their hate along.
You can see the pile of falsehoods he writes there are more illustrative of his real views than any real concern on the issue of circumcision.

[Penguin]

A little to the ruling, to make it a little more clear to the international community:
It is a ruling of a local court. The ruling is legal and valid, but has no legal binding - except in this particular case. Of course it can be used as a precedent, but it is no law or edict. Other courts may rule different. In fact there are still 2 higher courts than a Landesgericht, the last being the Supreme Court. While in this case, no more revision is possible, it is certain that the people who disagree with this particular decision will try to fight it. So I estimate in the next 1,2 years we can expect a decision by the Supreme Court regarding circumcision.

Originally Posted by joegrundman

There are multiple factors here. This is one of them, but this belongs in the realm of debate. If you think that circumcision of infant males is ill fitting for today's world, then say so and explain why. You may even, given time, win the debate. Religious norms do change over time, even Jewish ones.

But I think there is a serious problem when Germany bypasses the debate process and just moves to make it illegal. What happens then if it turns out you have not won the debate? At present circumcision of infant males is central to the issue of Jewish identity (i can't really speak about its significance in Islam, and so I will not mention how things may appear to Muslims), and Germany, of all places, is to say that this has to change.

That in short Germans consider Judaism as it is practiced to be incompatible with German society. Excuse me, but what a message.

So what if, since there has been no major debate on the issue, Jews don't think this is a tolerable decision, and that there is no room for compromise to accommodate this law? Is that it then? Jews are again not welcome in Germany?

This is a serious matter, and Germany is at risk of making a big mistake.

I think if such a thing as this is to change it should follow the following order:

1. widespread debate producing a sea change in attitudes
2. jews (and muslims) begin in increasing numbers to delay circumcision until old enough to take responsibility for own decision
3. some countries begin legislating to enforce what is now only a minor practice
4. germany legislates the same.

Ok, I made my point clear about the age of consent in my previous posts. The more important question is: How many special rights should religion get: my answer is clear: none, nix, nada I can't see any logical reason why other believes should be more (or less) protected than my own. I can't see why Freedom of Religion should be an extra freedom, as all those issues are covered by other laws like freedom of thought or expression

The point about a debate is a very good one, that's why I try to focus on it.
To say that circumcision was a hot topic of debate here would be a gross overstatement. Regarding religion vs. human rights, the debates focused on heavy and serious offenses like forced marriages, dishonor killings or child abuse.

However even though there was not much of a debate here, this ruling certainly fuels, if not even starts, the debate. I hope this will be an honest debate.

Let me give you an example of an dishonest debate, regarding a similar topic.
Some years ago, in 2006, ritual slaughter was legalized in Germany. There was much debate about it, in this case Freedom of Religion vs animal rights.
But the animal rights arguments often looked pretextual, just because of the fact that you can't call one thing cruel when not pointing out how cruel to the animals the "humane" killings in slaughterhouses are in the very same debate. So it indeed often looked like some people used animal rights to cover their agenda.

So an honest debate about children's rights must also cover the point how in Germany authorities de facto tolerate abuse - with or without religious background - by doing nothing even when alarmed.

An honest debate about revoking special rights for religion also must include the call to abolish idiotic stuff like blasphemy laws or the prohibition to dance on certain Christian holidays - the Tanzverbot

And it must also include the question how much a religious identity is dependent on a piece of foreskin. To me no more or less than a Metalhead's identity depends on long hair - you can believe in Slayer with or without

[MH]

Originally Posted by Penguin

And it must also include the question how much a religious identity is dependent on a piece of foreskin. To me no more or less than a Metalhead's identity depends on long hair - you can believe in Slayer with or without

In orthodox communities you would have to do it till 13 anyway or faced with theological problem i think.
I can hardly see any benefit in delaying it till then.
Other than that this vary on weather its orthodox or reformist or conservative sect and how flexible they could be since the inheritance is based on mothers religion and not necessarily on the act of circumcision by it self.
Also personal views come into play here some may feel about it stronger than others.
Some not really religious people may follow the orthodox tradition when it comes to religious ceremonies(?)some may be less strict.

[Skybird]

German article focussing on Jewish circumcision.

http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleto...-11802683.html

They reveal that there is a growing trend in Israeli population to reject circumcision, in 2006 one third were found to undergo the procedure only and exclusively due to social pressure and fears of social discrimination.

They also quote Jewish Rabbis from Israel saying that although the Brith is mandatory for converts, despite opppsoite cliams in the Thora Jewish men by birth still can enter paradise even when not getting circumcised.

The opposition to circumcision in Israel is constantly growing. There are groups and activists in Israel that openly welcome the German court's decision. I assume that their profiles will sharpen and they will win support the tougher the inner-Israeli confrontation with the Jewish ultra-orthodox and rightwingers becomes: "Druck erzeugt Gegendruck."

Another nice detail: the way circumcision in Judaism is carried out, is not original and authentic anyway. Abraham, they say, just cut off a very tiny piece of the skin, and around the time of the second temple, they further say, it had become common habit to artifically prolongue the foreskin again. This led the Rabbis to demanding that from now on all and everything shut be cut off. But that is not the original procedure of Brith at all. The Jewish author explaining it calls it barbaric and sadistic. He reminds of Judaism having chnaged its habits repeatedly in history, and adapted to new standards: the rite of offerings has been abandoned two thousand years ago, polygamy was banned in the medieval. He proposes to turn the - already unauthentic - Brith into a purely symbolical rite.

I earlier read that 55% of American males are circumcised, which surprises me, in Germany it is only 10-15%. But not 55% of the Americna male population is Mulsim or Jewish. Obviously many males thus do it not for relgious Jewish ands Musklim motivces, but due to fashion - and a fashion it saw indeed in the 60s, encoruaged by questionable medical claims that since then for the most has been proven wrong and also often founding on anylsis of faulty methodlogical standards. This means that such American males most likely had it down under local anesthesia, which maybe leads some peop,e here wondeirng wht the big deal is. But I mind you that for the religious purpose in Judaism and Islam, the demand is that it is carried out without an injection, and it is by far not just a small fast snip.

You can go to youtube and search for videos. I found some of circumcions of boys that receive the procedure in the religious correct manner. The pain must be immense, the three films I have on mind are revealing a nightmare. I do not link them directly, the mods maybe would have a problem with that.

I do not know to what degree families allow compromise and injections being used.

Anyway, the procedure is originally extrenely painful, and traumatising for sure. And even if it were not, or an injection gets used, this still would not excuse to commit an act of physical injury to a ward that cannot choose, assess, and decide by itself, but is subjugated to the procedure, no matter what. What I wanted to illustrate is that originally it is not a painless, but an extremely painful procedure.

NO ONE SHALL BE SUBJECTED TO TORTURE OR TO CRUEL, INHUMAN OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT.

[MH]

I think it is over drama by skybird...as usual.

Even in Israel they are against it....wow
Some small group of activist may be against it and be vocal about.
Other than that it is all about showing finger to orthodox establishment more than anything else through stupid claim of child abuse....due to some other religion/state issues which i support.
The reformist are gaining strength here because most Israelis think that the orthodox had been pain in the back for too long.

I'm against outlawing circumcision or making it mandatory while i certainly don't support orthodox.
How Abraham really did this is difficult to say there are many currents and rabbis in Judaism arguing about things as usual..which is good thing.
Some of those guys can be really fascinating and bring new fresh breath to Judaism.

[joegrundman]

and it is also beside the point. If jews in israel start questioning the importance of circumcision it is one thing. If Germany decides to make illegal standard jewish practice, that is another thing altogether.

Skybird should become aware of this difference.

[Diopos]

It is a german thingy! They hate deficits and adore surpluses!!!



.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Originally Posted by joegrundman

It's not about playing cards and temper tantrums, and Germany most certainly can choose whether to have this battle.

The battle has come to them. They can choose not to fight it, but that is called a retreat versus evil.

Yes, evil. Some evils are subjective but the unnecessary amputation of mass and nerves is an objective evil.

Sure, it is not as bad as Female Genital Mutilation, which is why FGM got banned first. Ultimately, it is the same thing, only a matter of degree.

A good analogy is to foot binding. Objectively, it is harmful and it is also started early. Still if you revert to the era and regions where it was popular, you will find the victims supportive of the practice, arguing that their feet work adequately, and that men like small feet! Does not make it right.

[joegrundman]

Originally Posted by Kazuaki Shimazaki II

The battle has come to them. They can choose not to fight it, but that is called a retreat versus evil.

this is not true. the battle is entirely a german driven thing. it's not like the euro crisis. They totally have the ability to say "this is not our fight", and at that point the problem will disappear. This is the difference between picking a fight and have one come to you.