Circumcision Ruled Assault in German Court

---

"Non-medical circumcision is a "serious and irreversible interference in the integrity of the human body,” the Cologne district court ruled.

This criminalises religious circumcisions performed by Jews and Muslims, the Financial Times Deutschland newspaper said on Tuesday. It says circumcision should be considered a crime of bodily harm.

Thousands of very young boys are circumcised in Germany each year, mainly for religious reasons.

In the United States most boys are circumcised shortly after birth - regardless of their religion, though the practice has declined in recent years and anti-circumcision protest groups have sprung up.

---

---

From the press release of the cologne court:

Dieser Eingriff sei insbesondere nicht durch die Einwilligung der Eltern gerechtfertigt, weil sie nicht dem Wohl des Kindes entspreche. Denn im Rahmen einer vorzunehmenden Abwägung überwiege das Grundrecht des Kindes auf körperliche Unversehrtheit vorliegend die Grundrechte der Eltern. Ihre Religionsfreiheit und ihr Erziehungsrecht würden nicht unzumutbar beeinträchtigt, wenn sie gehalten seien abzuwarten, ob sich das Kind später selbst für eine Beschneidung entscheidet.

http://www.lg-koeln.nrw.de/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/26_06_2012_-_Beschneidung.pdf

Translated (mistakes may happen):

This intervention is in particular not justified by the consent of the parents because they did not correspond to the welfare of a child. Because in the context of a coming assessment the fundamental right of children of physical integrity in this case outweigh the fundamental rights of parents. Their religion and their right to educate would not unreasonably be affected thereby if they were held to wait whether the child later decides for himself for a circumcision.

---

---

PARIS, June 29 (Reuters) - A widely criticised German court verdict on religious circumcision this week aims only to delay the act, not ban it, and is not directed against any faith, a jurist with a leading role in the legal debate said on Friday.

---

---

On June 28 2012 03:48 zeru wrote:
It shouldnt be done on kids unless actually medically needed. Simple as that imo. They can choose on their own if they want it later (however i dont see an adult actually choosing it later on in life). Go germany. \o/

---

---

On June 28 2012 03:53 HellRoxYa wrote:
"Trashing on religion"? I'm going to take on Dawkin's stance here and say that there are no muslim, christian, buddhist or any other kind of religious children. They're just children. So I don't think a religious reason stands up against genital mutilation either. I'm fine with people who make this decision themselves after they've turned either 16 or 18, just like I'm fine with other body modifications and things like tattoos and piercings. Doing it to children however? Yeah, good work Germany.

---

---

On June 28 2012 03:54 sekritzzz wrote:
Maybe they should ask the kids of Jews or Muslims if they want to be circumsized? So much for freedom of rights..........

---

---

On June 28 2012 03:57 danl9rm wrote:
To me, there are many things that just don't make sense to believe is ok if you're "not religious." I actually don't believe anyone is "not religious," but a that is a whole 'nother discussion, and I think my comment will still be understood. If not, I'll certainly clarify.

As I was saying, it just doesn't make sense to think certain things (i.e. circumcision) is ok if your beliefs don't include such things. How is chopping off a part of baby males a good thing?

Anyway, I happen to believe it's ok. I won't be circumcising my boys when they're born, but that's because I'm not Jewish. But, because I am a Christian, I do believe it's your right to do so. Judaism precedes Christianity, therefore, before Christ came physically, I would have been, in a sense, a Jew - not nationally, of course. That was supposed to help, but now it just sounds confusing.

What I don't always understand is when atheists think it's ok just because their culture says it is.

What I also don't understand, is why they (German gov't) care so much about a piece of male foreskin at birth, but don't mind (right before birth, or even during birth) killing the child entirely.

Quite perplexing.

---

---

On June 28 2012 03:50 CaptainCrush wrote:
I have it done and dont remember it. Plus my dick doesnt look like its in a sleeping bag all the time.... If I have a son, you can bet he will hae it done too. Pretty stupid ruling IMO

---

---

On June 28 2012 03:47 Dagobert wrote:
Well if this is definite now... then all I can say is "Finally!". The "medical" justifications are shaky at best, the damage irreversible. I've always been opposed to this, just as I'm opposed to female genital mutilation.

---