German court bans circumcision

[Skybird]

While I think that abortion in 12th week probbaly leads too far, I refuse to compare a fetus of 4 weeks with a born child of several years in age. The criterion to me is the excistence of a nervous system and sensory system whose signal inpout gets computed in an already existing brain that is sufficiently developed to form an indiviodual "print" of this input. Before this is the case, to me it is just a bunch of cells, no human being with any form of philosophical identity of its own. And for that, 12 weeks (the limit at which abortion in Germany under certain circumstances can remain free of penalties) is probably too much.

But anyhow, circumcision and abortion have nothing to do with each other. You could as well complain about attacking pedophile priests when not at the same time protesting against abotion, too.

Article 1, German Basic Law (=coinstituion of Germany) : "The dignity of man is untouchable.". Ther eis no exception mentioned for Islamic or Jewish people. There is no word on that the dignity of children may be violated in the name of religious ideology and branding to claim cultural possession of children. The dignity of children is untouchable. Parents and priests or whomever have no right to do physical damage to them. You are not allowed to beat them, to mistreat them, or to cut off their nosetips or earlobes.

In Judaism there is even an extremely orthodox sect that pushes the mutilation of genitals even further. There the hero carrying out the procedure has to nibble on the cutoff foreskin and on the bleeding gential of the kid. I beg you! How much more is needed toi illustrate how absurd and idiotic the whole thing of circumcision is?

Again, the Quran, to my knowledge, does not demand it, at least I cannot remember it.

The circumcision of females is even more inhumane and disastrous, and an extremely painful and dangerous procedure as well, traumatizing the victim in most cases for the rest of her life. Here again the underlaying motive is about patriarchalic claims of possessing and being in power over females. The same motivation it is with mutilating male children: to claim possession of them in the name of an ideology and its subordinate culture.

If we protest against female circumcision, and make it illegal, then there is no excuse to not do the same with the circumcision of boys.

Or we could also allow 5 year old girls which are physically absolutely normal brought by their parents to cosmetical surgery, becaue parents want a certain physicaol feature: a different nose, longer legs, a different skin colour...

Leave these things to free decision of the individual once it has grown up and is 18. I know I know - religions hate it to leave people in freedom, there is nothing they hate more than free people that think independently from them. That is one of the reasons why I am so bitterly hostile towards any religion.

[Rockstar]

OK, the issue at hand is circumcision. It is a medical procedure routinely done at birth and a procedure done on the 8th day according to the law of Moses. Whats the big deal?

I was circumcised at my parents request, Im perfectly fine. What the heck is your issue with it? Mind your own business, leave me and my parents out of your holier than thou hypocritical self righteousness rants.

If by chance a procedure has gone wrong whether it was performed by a doctor or rabbi then investigate that case and that case alone. Dont lump it and me with my parents decision in with your assinine arguements.

Jerks

[MH]

So who is complaining here?
The poor victims?

We all probably are so religiously brainwashed we don't know whats good for us.

It will truly solve your integration problems....outlawing branding.

[Herr-Berbunch]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

I was circumcised at my parents request, Im perfectly fine.

Jerks

As are most people, but at the age of 18, 21, 30, 40 would you choose to have it done if not for a purely medical reason?

Nice sign off, by the way.

[Skybird]

Herr Berbunch, that is exactly the point that I often have on my mind when being confronted with some religious claim or practice that is aimed at the young, weak, defenceless ones: children. Would people will to do when they are grown-up adults what they have been forced to do while they were little kids? And mind you, mutilation is a one-way street only, there is no reversing possible.

For relgious reasons, children are not left a later choice. rElious mitives denies them the right to make a free choice later, when theya are grown up and adult enough to actually form opinion by themselves and make decisions by their own. If people want to snibble thewir gentials when they are adults, I cannot care less. When people do that to helpless children that simply get forced, I have a problem with it. Like I have with raping children or beating up children or letting starve children as well.

Parents are responsible for their children. That does not mean they own them, or that they are their possessions. Parents are not owners, they are somebody with a duty to care for somebody else until that somebody can take care for himself by his own means.

[joegrundman]

this law is not going to stand. Seriously, anyone here thinks that Germany is going to let a law stand that outlaws jewish practice?

think again. No matter how silly the practice is on the face of it.

It will be dropped, and soon.

[MH]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Parents are responsible for their children. That does not mean they own them, or that they are their possessions. Parents are not owners, they are somebody with a duty to care for somebody else until that somebody can take care for himself by his own means.

here we go..so who's possession are they...yours....the state's...the politicians'?

[antikristuseke]

No-ones, they are the wards of their parents and in some bad cases wards of the state.

[MH]

Originally Posted by antikristuseke

No-ones, they are the wards of their parents and in some bad cases wards of the state.

Fine with me....

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by Herr-Berbunch

As are most people, but at the age of 18, 21, 30, 40 would you choose to have it done if not for a purely medical reason?

Nice sign off, by the way.

Its something that doesnt concern me really as the procedure has been done already. I have no animosity towards my parents or for their descion concerning my well being when I was a child. They didnt take anything from me that I want back. But frankly knowing what I know and where my faith lay, yes my desire would be for circumcision if I wasnt already.

As I said I personally have no resentment for the decsion my parents made. What I find odd and irks me a bit is that there are some nosey busy bodies here that do.

[Skybird]

By that logic of yours - the deed is done, so get over it - you can screw all law enforcement. The crime is done, so why the noise?

It is not about you and your past. It is about those children today and the freedom to choose that now or in the future gets taken away from them - or is bein g left to them so that thy can choose by their own decision when they are grown up.

Why I care? For the same reason why i care when children in my neighbourhood would get beaten up by parents, or would get hurt by their parents, of would get abused.

If you do not understand that, you would just illustrate the kind of egoist desinterest that is so very much modern today and that time and again gets brought to new heights if this kind of coldhearted desinterest is founded on religious rules and thoughts. Nothing beats the the inhumanity and mercilessness that religion shows when it comes to enforcing its morals on people. "The maximum of possible cruelty is still not enoiugh for the enemies of my God". "Whatever hit you in suffering and pain, it serves oyu right for you do not follow the will of my God." "You do not believe in my God, so we pull you into the light of the purifying fire."

I do not care much for babies getting baptised, it is just water and a ritual that causes nothing, done in a round of adults who still got stuck in the superstitiuon of even pre-medieval eras. I got baptised, too, but who cares? There is no watermark on my forehead, nor is anyone in the family caring for such magical stauff anymore - I made them all turning their back on the church.

But circumcision is somethign else, here damage gets done, physcial injury that is irreversible. That is what separates a superstitious but harmless watershow that takes itself way too serious but beyond that does not cause effect, from a crime. And a crime is what it is when you physically or mentally abuse or violate children, pupills (=Schutzbefohlene).

IMO it just adds another argument against religions that there is no moral outcry amongst them over this kind of abuse. If the same thing would be done to children without referring the deed to a religious cult, law enforcement immediately would get engaged and prosecute the parents and the person carrying out the deed.

[Sailor Steve]

I always thought the reason for hospitals doing it was medical, not religious, and I'm not sure how much damage is really done. It looks to me like a bit of overreaction, I don't have a real opinion one way or another on this yet, so that's all I'm going to say.

[MH]

By that logic of yours - the deed is done, so get over it - you can screw all law enforcement. The crime is done, so why the noise?

It is not about you and your past. It is about those children today and the freedom to choose that now or in the future gets taken away from them - or is bein g left to them so that thy can choose by their own decision when they are grown up.

Why I care? For the same reason why i care when children in my neighbourhood would get beaten up by parents, or would get hurt by their parents, of would get abused.

Now that is so dramatic and graphic another foreskin man comes to our rescue....

[joegrundman]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I always thought the reason for hospitals doing it was medical, not religious, and I'm not sure how much damage is really done. It looks to me like a bit of overreaction, I don't have a real opinion one way or another on this yet, so that's all I'm going to say.

it is done in hospitals because it is more hygienic and safer than people doing it in less regulated conditions (ie in ceremonies done at home).

only very rarely is circumcision done for direct medical reasons, although people do say all sorts of nonsense about "better hygiene" etc. to justify circumcision.

It is done for religious/cultural/traditional reasons in almost all cases

as for how much damage is done - i'd say it's less than losing your little toe, but more than having your fingernails cut.


In any case most of Skybird's argumentation is missing his primary problem.

Germany is going to drop this law. The question is, how much of a fuss do you wish to make before this happens?

It does not look good for Germany to be making this sort of law, and you can either drop this law pronto while making it clear that this was some sort of weird judicial aberration .. or you can wait until the maelstrom kicks up with Jewish groups in Israel and the USA joining in and start saying unpleasant things.

I recommend you take the first option and drop it quickly and be glad for the triumph of common sense.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by joegrundman

it is done in hospitals because it is more hygienic and safer than people doing it in less regulated conditions (ie in ceremonies done at home).

only very rarely is circumcision done for direct medical reasons, although people do say all sorts of nonsense about "better hygiene" etc. to justify circumcision.

Okay. I'm not sure I understand, but that may be because it was done to me despite the fact that neither of my parents were believers. I just thought it was considered routine.