To approve of a German courts decision re circumcision

[SlipperyNipple]

Apologies if this has already been covered.

I am Jewish by descent but an an agnostic. I think the time has come to say that being religious is not an excuse to carry out mutilation of small boys.

www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/27/circumcision-ruling-germany-muslim-jewish?newsfeed=true

Obviously Female circumcision is already illegal but the same protection should be given to boys.

Graham - the risk of cervical cancer is reduced in BFing women, but we don't force all women to have babies and BF them, do we?

To my mind, whether it is being done for religious, cultural or any other misguided reason, it is unacceptable to mutilate children, full stop.

I thought there might be more defenders....maybe they get up later. Still I am pleased that a lot of people agree with me. Maybe this means this is something that can be changed. Maybe we have reached a tipping point in opinion.

Ridiculous. Surely this will mean people taking their children abroad and getting the job done there. ThAt is more dangerous for the child IMO.

They can't ban something that has been done for centuries: no one will go against their religion. What they can do is make it safer by training doctors and making sure every circumsition is recorded.

I'm worried this will mean more casualties of circumsized boys abroad that will go unnoticed.

Or perhaps they'll move to adult circumcision instead? After all, Abraham circumcised himself as an adult ... !

What are the religious reasons? What God said you have to chop a bit off your willy?

rainydays has a good point.

Perhaps it should be made more like abortion i.e two doctors agree in best interest of child, and operation must be performed in a medical environment, by trained medical staff?

I am from the US and circumcision is very much the norm there, as others have said.

Does anyone know: are there are any real health benefits to it?

I'm just curious. You would think they would be quite robust given the level of conviction about it but it seems like they aren't.

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1921837.stm it's an ancient report - but they're suggesting that the reason is that circumcised men are less likely to have HPV.

The reasons for that could be many though - even down to things like circumcised men being more likely to be from cultures that marry young so aren't promiscuous and so don't catch HPV rather than that circumcision reduces HPV directly.

But I agree. YANBU, it is barbaric, and to help protect himself and his partner my son can learn to wash/wear a condom rather than lop bits off.

Good. Yanbu.

I come back to that you can't use religion as a shield from wrongdoing. There are loads of religious beliefs out there that are not compatible with a civilised society. We don't practice "an eye for an eye" here. It's mutilation plain and simple and should be stopped. I'm horrified that this still goes on.

YANBU. This is a fantastic decision. I hope we follow suit.

yanbu
really happy with that decision.
let the boys decide when they come to an age when they can make that decision sensibly themselves and when they can decide for themselves if they want to take this religion on themselves.

To say you can't stop something that has happened for hundreds of years is ridiculous, rainydaysarebad, not outlawing the systematic abuse of children in the name of religion.

What about the death penalty, stocks, women having no property rights, any number of things that society sees as no longer acceptable. And as for people just going abroad, well that may happen in a few cases, but I think it's important for our laws to reflect what our society feels is right. Surely chopping bits off kids should be illegal? I can't really understand why it isn't already!

rainyday, You could say that about every other practice that is illegal here, including female circumcision.
There are some reports by the World Health Organisation establishing the potential health benefits, none of them really applicable to small babies and children since they are linked to STIs (and only 'decreased' risk)
I am very happy about this decision.

But the issue is, where do you stop.

Lopping off bits not ok - fair enough

Making holes in (ear piercing) - ok?

Crosspost with nightowlmostly who says it much better

I don't think (ear) piercing for babies is ok, either.

I don't know. It's not something I would choose to do, because it's completely unnecessary. But it isn't the same as FGM - a circumcised man can still enjoy a full and prefectly normal sex life, it isn't done to control his sexuality, it isn't done in an abusive or controlling way at all. I think the vanity and hygeine 'reasons' have come about because of misinformation and rumours among parents. I'd say people who do it for those reasons are misguided, not abusive or mutilating their child.

I actually think this is the wrong decision, purely because religion seems like the only reason for circumcision that I can understand.

As I said, I think it's pointless, but calling mutilation is going a step too far for me.

A German court ruling on what Jewish people can and can't do really doesn't sit easy with me due to the historically connotations even if there aren't any

ItsAllGoingToBeFine, you are right. There are many many practices, some more invasive than others to be honest. Circumcision is not one of these things you can change later on in life. It is very very invasive in a very intimate part of your body. I would not try to use a legal/punitive system to combat ear piercing, although I would try to cultivate a culture where this was not seeing as a normal way of marking girls (who later on can decide whatever aboout this)

Easily I'm not sure what else you can call it

mu·ti·late (mytl-t)
tr.v. mu·ti·lat·ed, mu·ti·lat·ing, mu·ti·lates

1. To deprive of a limb or an essential part; cripple.
2. To disfigure by damaging irreparably: mutilate a statue. See Synonyms at batter1.
3. To make imperfect by excising or altering parts.

It's not hundreds of years though is it nightowl, it's thousands. If you tell someone they're banned from doing something they have belief in, they will no doubt find another way to do it. This is worrying. And I bet my teeth on the fact that if this happens in the uk, people will get the op done illegally by any old tom dick or harry like abortions in the olden days.

I don t agree with ear piercing in children either. They are born perfect and whole and should remain that way unless they themselves choose to alter their own body at an appropriate age.

Mutilation is to strong a word.

It cannot be classed as mutilation, because a body part is not permanately removed, only skin, which as others have said can be done for medical reasons and does not impare function.

The procedure, if done properly does not cause death, long term pain and problem, as FGM does, even if done by doctors. So that is why comparing them is not helpful.

If this law is implemented in the UK then it will drive circumcision under ground and may stop parents taking medical advice, if it looks like the child is developing problems.