Quantcast

Is Germany's ruling on circumcision a protection against abuse or an abuse against religious freedom?

kir 2012/06/27 12:53:15
You!
Add Photos & Videos
There are a lot of issues when it comes to whether we allow free practice of all religious policies or not; the biggest concern is whether or not it causes risk to the individual. In the case of modern circumcision, there is little to no risk and the gain is a lower incidence of varying diseases.
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • bob 2012/06/27 13:44:04 (edited)
    Protection against abuse
    bob
    +4
    ritual circumcision comes from a time when government and religion worked hand in hand. Male and Female circumcision is no longer needed since we have better hygene. The uncircumcised just need to wash it. My son's ritual Jewish circumcision made me cringe and If it needed to be done, i'd rather a doctor do it. Putting fairy tale religionous belief along with medical procedures in unsafe.

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

  • Constitution Believer 2012/07/04 01:30:22
  • kir Constit... 2012/07/04 01:31:25
    kir
    Actually I'll probably have a new post about that pretty soon.
  • Constit... kir 2012/07/04 02:59:38
  • Mark Twain 2012/06/29 04:02:43
    Undecided
    Mark Twain
    Cant Answer I havent got any skin in the game!
  • mind-pilot 2012/06/29 02:04:30
    Protection against abuse
    mind-pilot
    The whole practice is to prevent diseases that, an otherwise, uncircumcised person can catch, carry or transmit.
  • edward mooney 2012/06/28 22:46:05
    Undecided
    edward mooney
    ZIONISM WORSHIP OF STATE NOT GOD THIS CREATES OSAMAS BY MILLIONS


    The Jewish Sanhedrin nailed the Christ to a tree for the gold of the altar, God told the Jewish people no usury!!! Give back the land to the original families every 49 years and all will be well in Israel . Because the Sanhedrin liked the interest on Money and because God gave them no land but just a temple.

    Israel used Usury to control the entire earth after God destroyed Israel for their sins.

    NOW this same Sanhedrin controls Washington using the Federal Reserve System.

    I am telling everyone here that the Earth and its wealth belongs to God and the debt the governments of the earth, the whore of Rome, Israel, false Church, Scriptural Church which was deceived by Lucifier, is owed to the Rod of Iron.


    Israel took parts of scripture to justify causing world wars ignoring scripture God said would destroy ISRAEL.

    They did this because they replaced God being in the center of religion Zionist believing only in physical world as themselves center of worship themselves as the center of the universe.

    Demonic Levi wanting to kill Joseph. Levi waited to the third day after having circumcised he was going to kill knowing they was weak with fever. (sons of Jacob), Simeon and Levi, Dinah's brethren, took e...
























    ZIONISM WORSHIP OF STATE NOT GOD THIS CREATES OSAMAS BY MILLIONS


    The Jewish Sanhedrin nailed the Christ to a tree for the gold of the altar, God told the Jewish people no usury!!! Give back the land to the original families every 49 years and all will be well in Israel . Because the Sanhedrin liked the interest on Money and because God gave them no land but just a temple.

    Israel used Usury to control the entire earth after God destroyed Israel for their sins.

    NOW this same Sanhedrin controls Washington using the Federal Reserve System.

    I am telling everyone here that the Earth and its wealth belongs to God and the debt the governments of the earth, the whore of Rome, Israel, false Church, Scriptural Church which was deceived by Lucifier, is owed to the Rod of Iron.


    Israel took parts of scripture to justify causing world wars ignoring scripture God said would destroy ISRAEL.

    They did this because they replaced God being in the center of religion Zionist believing only in physical world as themselves center of worship themselves as the center of the universe.

    Demonic Levi wanting to kill Joseph. Levi waited to the third day after having circumcised he was going to kill knowing they was weak with fever. (sons of Jacob), Simeon and Levi, Dinah's brethren, took each man his sword, and came upon the city boldly, and slew all the males.

    And they slew Hamor and Shechem his son with the edge of the sword, and took Dinah out of Shechem's house, and went out. sons of Jacob came upon the slain, and spoiled the city, because they had defiled their sister.

    They took their sheep, and their oxen, and their asses, and that which was in the city, and that which was in the field, And all their wealth, and all their little ones, and their wives took they captive, and spoiled even all that was in the house.

    And Jacob said to Simeon and Levi, Ye have troubled me to make me to stink among the inhabitants of the land, among the Canaanites and the Perizzites: and I being few in number, they shall gather themselves together against me, and slay me; and I shall be destroyed, I and my house.

    Idolatry was done first by the House of Levi in charge historically of rituals of the one God of Abraham. Aaron as all paid religionists was a coward without Moses; difference between a real prophet and a wanna be.

    Aaron said unto them, Break off the golden earrings, which are in the ears of your wives, of your sons, and of your daughters, and bring them and all the people brake off the golden earrings which were in their ears, and brought them unto Aaron.

    Aaron received them at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool, after he had made it a molten calf: and they said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.


    TRIBE of Levi gets no land at all in Israel they are in charge of the temple. Sanhedrin loved money so much they worshiped Gold rather than God.

    God told them all debts are canceled every 49 years if the obeyed they could dwell safely in the Land.

    Sanhedrin never obeyed concerning money they was too greedy.

    And ye shall perish among the heathen, and the land of your enemies shall eat you up.

    And they that are left of you shall pine away in their iniquity in your enemies' lands; and also in the iniquities of their fathers shall they pine away with them. If they shall confess their iniquity, and the iniquity of their fathers, with their trespass which they trespassed against me, and that also they have walked contrary unto me;

    And that I also have walked contrary unto them, and have brought them into the land of their enemies; if then their uncircumcised hearts be humbled, and they then accept of the punishment of their iniquity:
    (more)
  • Nadrasta 2012/06/28 19:36:52
    Protection against abuse
    Nadrasta
    How is performing a circumcision on a baby religious freedom anyway? Does the baby choose to be circumcised? What if the baby grows up and decides to have a set of religious beliefs that differ from it's parents?
  • Karl 2012/06/28 06:44:33
    Protection against abuse
    Karl
    There's really no need for it anymore besides the want of the parent. I would also like to point out that this story was sparked by a circumcision that went wrong on a 4-year-old, not a baby.
  • RS 2012/06/28 04:36:55
    Abuse against religious freedom
    RS
    If I understand the ruling...then it is stupid and should not have been passed.
  • ajracestables1 2012/06/28 04:36:19
    Undecided
    ajracestables1
    I am glad I live in the USA where we still have the freedom of choice.
  • stevmackey 2012/06/28 00:34:29
    Undecided
    stevmackey
    There is lot to be said for circumcision. Easier to urinate is one.
  • unrelig... stevmackey 2012/06/28 03:13:49
    unreligious
    How do you come up with that? Seems to me uncut guys piss just as well as cut guys.
  • ehrhornp 2012/06/27 23:38:06
    Protection against abuse
    ehrhornp
    Circumcision is an unneeded operation that just fattens the wallets of doctors. Wow I didn't expect to be on the winning side on this.
  • kir ehrhornp 2012/06/27 23:39:20
    kir
    Fattens the wallets of doctors? This is generally performed by a specific type of Rabbi; not sure if they charge or not--I know they don't become rich off of it.
  • ehrhornp kir 2012/06/28 00:02:03
    ehrhornp
    Circumcision is generally done in the United states in a hospital shortly after birth. Generally is not done by a Rabbi. The practice originated as an attempt to keep little boys from masturbating and doctors got a few bucks off of it.
  • kir ehrhornp 2012/06/28 00:26:44
    kir
    You know how the practice originated; you were around thousands of years ago?
  • ehrhornp kir 2012/06/28 00:42:04
    ehrhornp
    I remember when this was an issue during the nineties or late eighties. The practice in the United States became common in the early 1900s.
  • kir ehrhornp 2012/06/28 00:45:02
    kir
    I'm not asking when it became common practice in the United States; you're saying that you know when and how the practice originated, not originated in the United States. On top of that, did you ever think that maybe the reason the practice was increasing in the United States because of a rise in Jewish immigrants?
  • ehrhornp kir 2012/06/28 00:52:11
    ehrhornp
    Where did I say that? (you're saying that you know when and how the practice originated, not originated in the United States.) I am just relaying what I remembered. As for Jews they have different types of circumcision. The mildest one is basically a nick on the head of the penis.
  • JDLogan 2012/06/27 22:59:52
    Protection against abuse
    JDLogan
    +1
    There is no medically sound reason to remove any part of any normally formed baby's genitals. Letting superstition guide you into child mutilation proves the need for IQ testing before parenthood.
  • Jaroslav Dantes 2012/06/27 22:01:01
    Undecided
    Jaroslav Dantes
    no. if the parents refuse to perform circumcision for your child, then clearly in good hands.
  • nightcrawler2005 2012/06/27 21:37:01
    Undecided
    nightcrawler2005
    Personally I don't care one way or the other. I was circumcised when I was born but I haven't been to a church in decades. Not being circumcised does not cause any increase in any diseases that's an old wives tale. The reason why I was circumcised was it was the 1950's in North America and that was standard practice.

    I looked up the ruling and the only thing that really scared me was that the Jews and Muslims were both on the same side on this one.
  • Hopscotch 2012/06/27 21:13:11
    Undecided
    Hopscotch
    It's but a small price to pay. price pay
  • johnnyg 2012/06/27 20:50:12
    Abuse against religious freedom
    johnnyg
    +2
    It is not up to the state on how you raise your child.
  • KaTy BeAr 2012/06/27 20:10:48
    Protection against abuse
    KaTy BeAr
    Its an unnecessary procedure and a child cannot decide for himself as an infant.

    If they want to get circumcised, then wait for adulthood to decide.
  • cynsity KaTy BeAr 2012/06/28 00:40:03
    cynsity
    babies can not decide to be baptised either should the state take away that religious practice as well. Small children have no choice but to attend church if tehir family does should the state be able to ban that activity?
  • Donald Eric Kesler 2012/06/27 19:41:53
    Protection against abuse
    Donald Eric Kesler
    +1
    Circumcision is not medically justifiable.
  • kir Donald ... 2012/06/27 19:45:06
    kir
    It reduces the risk of sexually transmitted diseases as well as other diseases as well as removes the risk of phimosis.
  • Donald ... kir 2012/06/27 19:53:32
    Donald Eric Kesler
    +1
    I did not realize infants were exposed to so many sexually transmitted diseases. How about we let the young person decide for himself if he wishes to be circumcised when he decides to become sexually active?

    Phimosis is rare and can often be treated with a steroid creme. Again, it is not something that really warrants such drastic preventative measures. If we follow your logic, one should go ahead and remove the tonsils and the appendix to prevent possible infections later.
  • ehrhornp Donald ... 2012/06/27 23:44:10
    ehrhornp
    +1
    circumcision makes as much sense as cutting all the breasts off women to prevent breast cancer.
  • kir ehrhornp 2012/06/27 23:45:28
    kir
    Cutting off breasts would prevent women from being able to produce milk for their children; cutting off the foreskin might and I repeat might reduce sexual pleasure; supposedly it reduces sexual drive too--can't much vouch for that one.
  • Donald ... kir 2012/06/28 14:16:25
    Donald Eric Kesler
    Think of it like this. Imagine we were installing solar panels. The more surface area we have, the more sun light we can capture and utilize.

    Likewise, the more fine touch receptors and other highly erogenous nerve endings we possess in our genitals, the more we will enjoy sex.

    The penis is covered with sensitive skin. This is one of the things that makes sex pleasurable. If you needlessly remove some of that skin, then you are going to reduce some of that pleasure.
  • Marie-Jacqueline 2012/06/27 19:14:19 (edited)
    Protection against abuse
    Marie-Jacqueline
    I never understood that practice of circumcision of a baby in the U.S.

    A newborn baby boy, recovering from the stress of being born, all the new impressions, smells, the comforting touch of his mother.
    Than suddenly taken away from his mother, into a room full of light, people are hurting him badly.
    If he is lucky enough they will sedate the area.
    At least at that moment there is no pain, but during the healingproces, there will be pain and discomfort.
    What will this very negative experience do with a baby boy

    For what should he suffer this treatment?
    Hygiene !
    A boy can be thought to learn the proper way to clean.
    It it would prevent more of the "varying diseases" as you call them, why aren't those diseases on a all time high in Europe.
    Having safe sex would be a rather less drastic option.

    It is different ofcourse in African countries where HIV is very widespread, and condom use very low.
    Than it will happen, with consent, to a man, out of medical reasons

    In The Netherlands, the Royal Dutch Medical Association (KNMG) stated in 2010 that non-therapeutic male circumcision "conflicts with the child's right to autonomy and physical integrity."
    They called on doctors to inform caregivers seeking the intervention of the (in their assessment) medical and psychologica...




    I never understood that practice of circumcision of a baby in the U.S.

    A newborn baby boy, recovering from the stress of being born, all the new impressions, smells, the comforting touch of his mother.
    Than suddenly taken away from his mother, into a room full of light, people are hurting him badly.
    If he is lucky enough they will sedate the area.
    At least at that moment there is no pain, but during the healingproces, there will be pain and discomfort.
    What will this very negative experience do with a baby boy

    For what should he suffer this treatment?
    Hygiene !
    A boy can be thought to learn the proper way to clean.
    It it would prevent more of the "varying diseases" as you call them, why aren't those diseases on a all time high in Europe.
    Having safe sex would be a rather less drastic option.

    It is different ofcourse in African countries where HIV is very widespread, and condom use very low.
    Than it will happen, with consent, to a man, out of medical reasons

    In The Netherlands, the Royal Dutch Medical Association (KNMG) stated in 2010 that non-therapeutic male circumcision "conflicts with the child's right to autonomy and physical integrity."
    They called on doctors to inform caregivers seeking the intervention of the (in their assessment) medical and psychological risks and lack of convincing medical benefits. They stated that there are as good reasons for legal prohibition of male circumcision as exist for female genital mutilation.

    If it happens, it is out of religious reasons done for example by Jews ( as a baby) and Muslims ( when a boy is about 10, I don't know the exact age).

    Yes, I consider it abusive toward that baby boy, it is in the same category as female genital mutilation.
    "It conflicts with the child's right to autonomy and physical integrity."
    (more)
  • aibohphobia 2012/06/27 19:06:12
    Protection against abuse
    aibohphobia
    Religious freedom doesn't matter if you injure another person. If it was a religious ceremony to kill the third born child of a family no one would allow that, but because a bit of skin is cut from a little boy's penis people think it's okay, even though it's wrong.
  • kir aibohph... 2012/06/27 19:42:39
    kir
    Many people doing consider it injuring a person but performing a surgical procedure for religious and health purposes.

    Please vote on http://www.sodahead.com/livin... too.
  • joan.sloane 2012/06/27 18:17:25
    Undecided
    joan.sloane
    +1
    I never thought of circumcision as mutilating the genitals of boys. It was so common in the US that people never gave it a second thought. We had our son circumcised when he was born. Now I am not so sure I would do it again. It should really be a decision each male makes for himself. I'm tending toward support of the German law.
  • JoLost 2012/06/27 18:13:46
    Protection against abuse
    JoLost
    +1
    Body mutilations for religious reasons should be a individuals personal choice. When age of consent is reached and the child can willingly make an informed decision, then and only then should the laws permit such an extreme religious practice to occur.
  • saturdayschild 2012/06/27 17:15:34
    Protection against abuse
    saturdayschild
    It's time we wake up to the myths about circumcision. It's totally unnecessary despite others who make valiant efforts to prove otherwise. To circumcise a penis to keep it cleaner is like pulling out all your teeth for better hygiene.

    Among other things, circumcision causes nerve damage, and for the guys who have had it done as infants, they will never experience the sensation and exhilaration of sex that an intact penis can bring.
  • Tony 2012/06/27 17:04:00
    Abuse against religious freedom
    Tony
    I don;t understand how anyone thinks this is abuse. I went to a Bris once. The baby didn't know what was happening and didn't seem to care. Hell, he yawned during the ceremony.
  • aibohph... Tony 2012/06/27 19:05:45
    aibohphobia
    +1
    So, if it was a religious thing to cut off his leg would you think that that banning it would be abuse against religious freedom?

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/10/23 05:59:44

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals