To think that circumcism of under 18 year olds for non medical reason should be illegal

[Reallytired]

Cutting off a baby's boys foreskin is cruel and unless there are strong medical reasons it should be outlawed. Babies feel pain and sometimes circumcisms can go wrong.

There should be limits to what people do in the name of religion. Child abuse should not be allowed just becauase it is not PC to upset ethnic minorities. If an adult choses to be circumised for religious reasons with no pain relief then that is their decision.

The use of corporal punishment is heavily restricted in the UK. Infact there are many people think there should be a total ban on smacking. It is illogical not to campaign for a ban on the circumicising of little boys.

prism, did you miss the bit where I said historical context. Not particularly historical either -- my grandparents got out of Germany and Austria in 1938. So it's still in my mind, and it always will be.

Re picking and choosing -- I guess you're right. Very few Jews who consider themselves practising Jews would choose to skip circumcision.

Perhaps you're right that if the practice were invented today, it wouldn't be allowed. But you know what? I think there are plenty of bigger fish to fry if we want to protect children from harm.

it is not something my own religion/tradition demands so to me tbh it seems very strange and I don't like it being done to babies. I wonder tbh why it cannot be replaced with some kind of ceremony in rememberance of the original one, this happens with so many traditions over time that they are replaced with a kind of token act to which nevertheless a deep meaning is attached.

I might feel differently if it were my culture/tradition, don't really know. Just I cannot help thinking anyone taking a knife to a baby and drawing blood is doing wrong. Sorry if that causes anyone offence. I realise no one does this is taking pleasure in a baby being hurt.

difficutl, never thought about it before tbh

actually come to think of it my brother might have been circumcised. Have a feeling he was. Not because of any religious belief but it would have been done in the nursing home, due to where and when he was born.

There should be some way of protecting children against unnecessary and irreversible procedures they can't consent to - otherwise we're treating them as objects that belong to their parents rather than human beings.

just as an interesting aside..the Jewish community hundreds of years ago recognised haemophilia and also knew it was poentially passed on via the mother..they had a sad rule that if a couple had two babies die of bloodloss after circumcision then any future sons were 'spared' and were not given the operation - they also allowed furure children of the woman to be spared even if she remarried.

It took 2 deaths?? Before subsequent children were spared.

Just another reason to loathe religion and the people who carry out atrocities in it's name.

hundreds of years ago though, dc were dropping off like flies all over Europe though

reasonable medical care for all children and half way sanitary living conditions for the bulk ofthe population etc are really very modern developments

Actually...this was a VERY long time ago..like 12th century..so even recognising that haemophilia existed and was heriditary on the mother's side was amazingly clever...but yes, very sad about the two deaths before others spared...and did those others then not be classed as 'real jews' if they were spared the operation?

I don't know how they got around that but I would have thought they were Jews because clearly their mother was Jewish thus their descent from common stock was assured. The circumcision is a sign of the covenant between God and his chosen people, isn't it? So must be enormously significant to practising Jewish faithful. I don't know if not being circumcised limited how they were able to participate in Jewish spiritual life at all.
So I think you are a Jew if you belong to the Jewish extended family and being circumcised shows a man is part of the spiritual world of Judaism. Am noticing I really don't know. Should therefore probably not be gabbing on about it either.

I am an observant jew and of course I accept that this is bloody and barbaric. As I am observant this commandment is extremely fundamental to the faith, yet it never ceases to amaze me that jews who are totally non observant choose to circumcise. I guess as its a one off act, yet a constant reminder?

A few years back in it was reported in the JC that a teacher at jewish nursery was shocked that one of the boys wasn't circumcised. Although it was a jewish nursery very few of the families were observant at this nursery.

There are so many crimes against dc in our society. Just horrific things that you cannot even really bear to think about. A mother at dd's nursery years ago took in children whose parents were having huge problems coping and she said it broke her heart to look after these little kids and see what had been done to them and also to know that after a time, she would have to return the children to those parents.

One little girl (2) had been tied up to the radiator all day, weeks on end. Another boy was so enormously fat he could not move at all. The mother told her, feed him lots of chocolate, I want him very very fat. Then the people who take pleasure in inflicting cruelty on defencesless children - stubbing out cigarettes, child prostitution, rape, beating them up

I knew a woman in London who used to break down some nights. She was a wonderful mother to her own ds. Her father would make her perform at talent shows, then with the prize money he would go binge drinking, leaving her looked up in a cupboard overnight. When he got back he would beat her up till she fainted. Who knows when he stopped?

Maybe circumcision is not as huge a problem as some of these things

I think cutting bits off babies for non-medical reasons is just plain wrong. Whilst complications might be rare and depend on the type of procedure used I will always remember this example. Though it probably isn't the best example to use against non-medical circumcision as it was for medical reasons, it is a reminder that circumcision is not without risks.

"being circumcised shows a man is part of the spiritual world of Judaism"

Thing that gets me is that this "imperfection" is hardly a "visible" sign of one being religious - only in very special circumstances is one aware of someone being circumcised.

I read an earlier link with interest, but don't quite understand why this particular organ was chosen - an exclusively male organ - rather than, say, ear lobes, where the presence or absence is visible from 20 feet, without any need to undress, and applicable to both men and women! (OK, not ideal as ear-rings are popular today as they have been through history, but you get the gist.)

If it was something to do with us being imperfect, how were women in the Jewish faith considered ? Perfect, or something else ?

I just get this (perhaps silly) impression that women were not considered significant enough, but have other things to do so not going to go back to further reading on this subject today.

Once again, thanks Tee2072 for the link. The fact there were significant voices against circumcision (citing old problems such as desert sand making more sense, and how the AIDS case is a non-argument) was good to see.

Mutilating children for non medical reason should be illegal.

It does need repeating regularly as new people join so they get a chance to comment too.

Religion is not an excuse. Don't the same religions that practice this also preach that you must obey the law of the country you are in? In which case if it were banned then religious people should not have a problem with their church about it.

show it to him maybe? Reminds him every day of that

why that part of the body? It will be to do with reproduction, God gives life to man and man passes it on (not without the woman obviously).. something like that I'd imagine.

i dont think forcing your child to follow your religious beliefs is right at all.
every child should be allowed to find their own spiritual meaning in life, not forced to follow their parents rituals.
but then i have a feeling that if religious parents did not include their child in their religion at a young age and left them to make their own choices, there would be a lot less young people of restrictive faith out there!

I personally think circumcision for religious reasons is a hell of a lot better reason than having a unsightly mole removed for cosmetic reasons but most people find having a mole removed that the mother feels is unsightly but the child likes perfectly acceptable.

I personally would do neither but find it hypocritical that many argue against circumcision when many argue for mole removal.

"My sincerest hope for my son is that it is the most bloody act of barbarism he ever has to endure",

So, YOU, his mother, caused him to endure a barbaric act when 8 days old, in the name of history and religion??

As a mother, your maternal instinct should make it so you would do anything to ensure you protect him against any kind of pain!!

This topic often came up on a birth group I am in on a US fertility site. Interestingly, the overwhelming reason for people getting it done there didn't seem to be for religious reasons but 'so he could look like his dad'. Often, the dad had insisted upon it, just so they could be the same. That's what I find most bizarre.

I'm not religious at all but can see why someone who is (and their religion calls for it) might do it - but to circumcise a child just for appearance? That I can't comprehend. Some people would then try to back it up with 'hygiene reasons', but plenty of men survive perfectly well with uncircumcised penises.

My DH was circumcised as a child for medical reasons - and we won't do it to our son unless there are medical reasons either.

YANBU

I believe it is still available in some areas on the nhs, but i must admit that i havent done any research since 2008 (was in the news then) as its not in my area and we went to a private clinic

I dont have much time to google atm but:

leaflet about religious circumcision in scotland

scroll down to point 5 for lists of trusts offering circumcision

Just because there are worst forms of child cruelty does not mean that circumcision is OK. The mother of the two year old who was tied to the radiator might say what she is doing is OK, because baby P suffered a worst fate. As a nation we should seek to eliminate ALL child abuse.

Most religions evolve with time. What was acceptable two thousand years ago in many parts of the world is not acceptable now.

The baby doesn't get a choice about whether he wants to be an observant Jew or not though, does he? Maybe actually he's not very religiously inclined, maybe he quite likes his body the way it is.

My all means people can choose to be as religiously observant as they want - an 8 day old baby doesn't get a choice.

"Just because there are worst forms of child cruelty does not mean that circumcision is OK. "

wher did I say it was?

"Just another reason to loathe religion and the people who carry out atrocities in it's name. "

There has been no comment in this gem. What a disgusting thing to say.