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.

nickel and mousy - good posts - completely agree

MousyMouse: "germany is just another european country, just like the uk."

Well, only if you completely ignore the history of the 20th century.

YANBU.

I agree that it's a shame it was a German court. This ruling from another European court would hold more weight as there would be less reason to accuse it being made on anti semetic grounds rather than looking after the rights of the child.

I think it's a bit ignorant to dismiss peoples discomfort that it was a German court

hackmum I know about the history. it was in the past. past as in it's over
I'm not going to deny things that happend in the third reich but I fail to see why it matters now, in a country with a good legal system.

The fact that it was a German court didn't escape me either, but that period of history is well past, we have moved on in Europe. Are you saying that German courts must pussyfoot around issues such as this for fear of offence?

I get why it may seem a bit sensitive if you put it in that context, but Germany is a fully involved member of the EU, we are close allies now, and bringing historical prejudices into this debate is inappropriate IMO.

And for those saying that making this practice illegal will simply drive it underground, why not make all things legal, such as FGM, as it will then be done safely? What rot.

"What do you mean about this being a 'national strategy' across Africa?"

There is a large advertising/pro active campaign for males to be circumcised, as a health issue and this is being funded by various means.

A third of the male population around the world is circumcised, but that will now increase as the aim is to get 100% across HIV affected regions in Africa.

Whilst courts can decide on individual cases, i don't think that it should decide across the population,unless there is a pledge to fund this in adulthood and make sure that time off work is guaranteed.

Fiofio, you can also see it as a manipulation of the idea of antisemitism when the issue is about child abuse and their capacity to consent. And it impacts other communities, not only Jews.
Antisemitism is a real issue that should not be manipulated.

Birdsgottafly, please give me the link to some data. And please tell me why children should be subjected to this (many times days after they are born, when risk of death for infection is much higher) because of HIV!
Where have you seen that the aim is to get 100% male population circumcised? And is this kind of campaing aimed at babies?
There is quite a contradiction when you say that this should not be decide for the full ppopulation and advocating for 100% circumcision. I would still want to see one of these campaings though and how they are meant to get babies invovled.

Birdsgottafly I don't see your logic (re your post on page 3). Why would this prevent circumscision for medical reasons? I don't think anyone disagrees with that.

Ok, I got back to the WHO reports on this issue and all campaigns are aimed at boys over 15. So nothing to do with the topic we are discussing here.

MousyMouse: " it was in the past. past as in it's over
I'm not going to deny things that happend in the third reich but I fail to see why it matters now, in a country with a good legal system."

But for lots of people it isn't over. If your relatives were murdered in the death camps, a philosophical shrug of "It's over" just won't cut it. Anti-semitism is still rife in many European countries, as is anti-Muslim feeling. This ruling is going to reignite feelings amongst both Jews and Muslims that they are being singled out for persecution.

Many families take their children abroad already. I don't see that as a good reason not to ban this unnecessary assault on our children's bodies . I have four boys and could not. Conceive of putting them through an a painful procedure with risk of infection for no good reason.
The don't believe for a second that reduction of HPV has anything to do with it.
If that were the case all boys would be. Vaccinated

I agree with the ruling. Just because something is tradition, doesn't mean it's right.

I disagree with that ohdoadmitmrsdevere. I have never known of any Muslim friends take their child abroad to have a circumsition done, and I have muslim friends and family from all cultures as north as Scotland and south as Brighton. The reason? Why Would they take a child abroad to an unknown place where levels of aftercare and hygiene are not as good as here? There are trusted clinics all around the uk that carry the op out in clean aurroundings. If it were made illegal it WOULD mean people going abroad to get it done.

That people might still find ways to do it is no excuse. there are still people who go abroad to get their daughters circumcised or to force marry them to cousins when they are 12 - does not mean it should be allowed here.

Exactly, HazleNutt.

"hackmum I know about the history. it was in the past. past as in it's over
I'm not going to deny things that happend in the third reich but I fail to see why it matters now, in a country with a good legal system."

Agreed. To discount the validity of something happening now based entirely on past events seems rather sensationalist.

the reason poeple lump male and female circumcision together is because in places where it's the cultural norm the people there talk in those terms. boys are circumcised and girls are circumcised. the most minor form of FGM is comparable to male circumcision.

muslims dont have to be circumcised (allthough most are) it's a cultural practise that pre-dates islam, chineese muslims are not circumcised.

i agree it should be made illegal in western countries, even in the states the practise is becoming less popular.

Cheyenne: "Agreed. To discount the validity of something happening now based entirely on past events seems rather sensationalist."

Sigh. I wasn't discounting the validity of something. I was pointing out that the practical consequences of a ruling like this in a society that already has a history of genocide against the particular group of people the ruling is aimed at is almost certainly going to have adverse consequences. Is it really that hard to understand?

The other problem with this ruling is that it was made by a court rather than by a democratically elected government. It rests on a particular interpretation of existing law by a judge or judges rather than a decision by elected representatives.

YANBU I completely agree! There is absolutely no medical need for it, hygienic my arse! There are millions of men the world over who haven't been circumcised and they have no problems with hygiene!

crescentmoon: you seem to be missing a vital point. You say "Compared to male circumcision during adulthood or adolescence..." and then provide a list of benefits of infant circumcision. But the true comparison is surely between infant circumcision and no circumcision at all.