German court rules religious circumcision on boys an assault: is Yahweh upset?

holyheretic 2012/06/27 00:57:45
No, Yahweh is not upset
Yes, Yahweh must be upset
God does not require circumcision anymore
I have another idea
Add Photos & Videos

The verdict, which is valid only in the Cologne area, could "send a signal," he said, but it was not clear if other courts would follow this example. He did not know of any similar cases before other courts in Germany.



Watch video: http://tinyurl.com/744fmdt

Read More: http://holyheretics.blogspot.com/

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest

  • holyher... Billyk75 2012/06/30 03:10:07
  • owen holyher... 2012/06/30 06:13:55
    I agree,its barbaric
  • Billyk75 holyher... 2012/06/30 18:40:07
    I'm not complaining.
  • holyher... Billyk75 2012/06/30 22:06:20
  • holyher... holyher... 2012/06/30 22:33:40
  • JwonGalt 2012/06/29 17:38:46
    I have another idea
    That the being we call "God" is now to insignificant to even realize that his actions have been put on trial

    Next up on trial, will be Yahweh *cough* Satan himself
  • holyher... JwonGalt 2012/06/30 03:16:11
  • SilveryRow 2012/06/29 13:37:38
    I have another idea
    No good person wants to abuse babies.
  • holyher... SilveryRow 2012/06/29 15:28:04
  • Joe Six pack 2012/06/28 22:52:25
    I have another idea
    Joe Six pack
    In general can people stop messing with little boy's and girl's pee-pee's?
  • holyher... Joe Six... 2012/06/28 23:19:22
  • Heyow:) 2012/06/28 22:32:44
    I have another idea
    wrong one dont know
  • holyher... Heyow:) 2012/06/28 23:18:48
  • Griegg 2012/06/28 04:21:12
    I have another idea
    Circumcision is an assault. Yahweh is imaginary.
  • holyher... Griegg 2012/06/28 05:05:16
  • ☥☽✪☾DAW... holyher... 2012/06/28 21:20:53
    ☥☽✪☾DAW ☽✪☾
    Is the Bible a Threat to National Security?
    A military Bible paints war as religious devotion. What could go wrong?

    military bible paints war religious devotion wrong httpwww alternet orgbelie
  • ☥☽✪☾DAW... holyher... 2012/06/28 21:34:06
    ☥☽✪☾DAW ☽✪☾

    the sad thing that was an actual question

    honestly my mind is about to explode from the stupidity of these people
  • sam123 Griegg 2012/06/29 20:47:10
    circumcision is not an assault

    who says that circumsision is an assualt ?

    what is your definition of an assult ?

    the circumsicion praticed for more than 5 thousand years , why especially now in june 2012 this practice is considered an assult ? does it means all those generation before us were wrong and only you are right ?

    fourth ?
    what's wrong with circumsicion ? it has been proved to be healthy and powerful way of making ladies have maximun satisfaction in bed ? so what's wrong ?
  • Griegg sam123 2012/06/29 21:54:54
    First, I say circumcision is an assault. See above.

    Second, an assault is an act of force or threat of force to inflict harm on a person or to put the person in fear that such harm is imminent.

    Third, it doesn't matter how long it has been practiced, and it hasn't only now in June 2012 been considered an assault.

    Fourth, it is barbaric. It hurts and it mutilates. The foreskin is forever removed. If the baby had a say in the procedure it would be "Hell no!" or some equivalent.
    It giving ladies maximum satisfaction, which is debatable, is the prerogative of the penis owners, not the ladies or anyone else.
  • sam123 Griegg 2012/06/29 22:53:50
    why are you thinking on behalf of the babies to say it hurts ?
    have you heard about something called ''local anesthezy''?

    millions have been circumcised and they did that to their kids ..
    were those parents been forced too to be circumcised ?

    and who are you to decide for kids what is good for them and what is bad ?
    and who are you to stop parents to treat their kids the way they want as long as it 's for their own benefit ?

    and above all , do kids know what is good for them when they were babies ? who fed them? , who clean then ?? who take them to doctors? and dentists?

    and who is responsible for kids ?
    so small number of crazy atheists can't decide for the majority what decision should be taken , they can choose the school they want , dress them the way they want , feed them banana or baby food cut their hair or live it long ..

    the decision is wide open , if you believe it is barbaric and it hurts , then keep your baby to your self without circumstances and celebrate with him , but to force others to believe it is barbaric , this is against religious freedom and interfere into the heart of human right .

  • Griegg sam123 2012/06/29 23:47:48 (edited)
    Someone could anesthetize you before walloping you with a bat. On your rationale, because it didn't hurt you due to ansesthesia you haven't been harmed. If you are you would be fortunate if you weren't harmed permanently. Unless you were deformed in some way you would recover from getting whacked. Not so with circumcision. What is removed doesn't grow back.

    Nobody asked those millions of kids what they wanted. They didn't have a choice, hence they were forced. So were their parents when they were kids.

    I'm not deciding for anyone having a circumcision. I'm acknowledging that it is an assault. I agree with the claim that it is an assault. No baby chooses pain. No baby chooses to be anesthetized to dull the pain of mutilation.

    Parents are responsible for kids. Whether they mutilate them or not, they are responsible.

    I don't force anyone to believe anything, and I'm not crazy.
  • holyher... Griegg 2012/06/30 05:49:14
  • holyher... Griegg 2012/06/30 06:07:17
  • sam123 Griegg 2012/06/30 13:25:27
    i disagree with you that circumcision is an assult

    an assult is when you hit someone hard causing bodly harm or injury .

    circumcision is performed by doctors who studied fro 7 to 10 years and they carry complicated operation like heart and organ transplant .

    now if a parent decide to have tatto for his /her kid / is this an assualt ?
    if the parent decide to pierce the ear of a baby , is this an assault ?
    if you decide to take your kids to the pub and he started inhalling smke from cigarette, is that an assualt ?
    if you live your baby in his house alone for hours , is this an assult?
    so we need a definition of what is an assult before you clasify circumcision if it is an assult or not ?
    and if it is an assult , it is not for the others , because they have done it and nothing happen
  • holyher... sam123 2012/06/30 22:00:19
  • holyher... holyher... 2012/06/30 22:02:22
  • Griegg sam123 2012/07/03 15:21:21 (edited)
    I provided a definition. It is a legal one, and all one needs for classification.

    Your definition is inadequate. Striking someone is an assault if the strike wasn't consented to and wasn't accidental. An assault need not involve physical contact, however. Your definition doesn't allow for that.

    Whether or not circumcision is an assault depends on whether circumcision is an act of force or threat of force to inflict harm on the baby or to put the baby in fear that such harm is imminent. Until babies consent to be without foreskins they are being assaulted when circumcised.
  • sam123 Griegg 2012/07/03 19:06:21
    ok then big boss,

    ask the baby if circumcising him is an assault ?
    ask 7 day baby and 1 year baby if they felt pain when they grow up ?

    pathetic really.

    parents knows what is better for their kids .. if parents love their kids spent million of dollars, protect them from harm , and they do not let anyone touch them , how can they harm them ?
  • Griegg sam123 2012/07/03 19:18:03
    No need to ask the baby anything. What is needed is to stop the mutilation. Harm is done, no matter how well-intentioned parents are.
  • sam123 Griegg 2012/07/03 20:01:45
    1 billion 800 million and more people including some jews and others are circumcised and now you ask for this practice to stop ?
    you must be dreaming
  • Griegg sam123 2012/07/03 20:12:25
    No, I'm acknowledging that the practice is an assault. It doesn't matter how many people have had it done to them.
  • sam123 Griegg 2012/07/03 20:39:50 (edited)
    for you is an assault , but for others is a honor , is a good custom and practice and healthy
    therefore keep belieivng that is an assault , this view is only in your mind nothing else
  • Griegg sam123 2012/07/03 20:45:31
    By definition it is an assault. For you it is a good custom and practice, and healthy.
  • sam123 Griegg 2012/07/03 21:15:25
    who devise your definition ?
    the time that you set rules for definition is gone
    do you know that terrorism for example has more than 1200 definition ? every country define terrorism .

    denefinitions are not sacred unless they are obvious

    so the definition of the muslims to certain concept is tottaly different from western ones.
    and you can't force your definition on others

    take for example the definition of marriage

    marriage is defined in islam man marrying a woman by legal binding agreement and conscent of the parents and no force or bribery used and with intention to live together forever unless something beyond control happen .

    marriag definition in the west is loose , man get married with woman, woman get married with woman , a person can live with partner without marriage and have babies and after 10 years they go to church to get married !
  • Griegg sam123 2012/07/03 21:29:38
    It came from a law dictionary. It isn't a "sacred" definition. It is a legal one.
  • sam123 Griegg 2012/07/03 22:28:28
    this is arabic dictionary , muslims know how to read and write you know
    arabic dictionary
    definition of assault in this dictionary is different from your interpretation in yours
    this is their definition of an assault
    but circumcision , the definition is when boy get circumcised , he goes to play football in just three day and nothing happen
  • Griegg sam123 2012/07/03 23:08:39
    Is it a "sacred" dictionary? What does it say in the dictionary that an assault is? Translate what it says. Being able to play football in three days is beside the point.
  • sam123 Griegg 2012/07/04 20:35:19
    bsically , in arabic the denition of it is as follow

    it comes from the word '''khitan '' : remove excess forsking that is not necessary from the head of the penis .

    in the dictionary it says , it is a religious obligation that muslim can be distinguished from non muslims. the abrahamic faith people do it and they are the one who are concerned but others if they do not accept this practice or do not believe in it they are not obliged to accept it .

    so you do not need to force your chovaunistic view and denying the right of religious people to practice their religion as they wish
  • Griegg sam123 2012/07/04 22:45:31
    Khitan means circumcision, not assault.

    It being a religious obligation doesn't prevent it from being mutilating.

    I have been circumcised. My view isn't chauvinistic. My view is compassionate.
  • sam123 Griegg 2012/07/04 23:20:13 (edited)
    be compassionate for those who are not circumcised
    as regard to babies , they do not remember anything .. and we do things which is right for their own benefit ..

    like you , now you thanking your parents for doing the right thing ..

    and this is correct khitan is not an assault and khitan is the correct terminology ... and has no other explanation and can't be explained by assualt because assault need using force ...like sexual assault ...
    if you take khitan , the father take his son to aclinic , pay qualified doctor , the doctor has a certificate on the wall , he put the kids to sleep and within 5 minutes the forskin removed , and small operation done , the baby wakes up get some sweets , family celebrate and done ... no harm .. no assault , no big deal ..
    the coinsequenses
    healthy sex
    clean pant from urine dripping
    clean private part and accumulating filth
    fulfilling abraham custom
    pleasing God and being distinguished among others
    and above all pleasing allah not human being , doing it for allah sake not for government or for any other purposes .

    in the past , Paul used to strip the chritians and if he found anyone circumcised he killed him .. so they stop circumcising themselves for fear percecusion ...
    are we going to return back to this dark ages agqain ?
    or are we going to see another Paul resurected . but an atheist Paul ?

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2016/02/13 08:58:30

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals