court rules circumcision is an assault.

[geronimotwo]

 http://news.yahoo.com/german-court-outlaws-religious-circumcision-172728400.html

a german court has ruled that the religous rights of the parents do not outwiegh the individual rights of the child.  the jewish and muslim communities are outraged.  the child does have the right to have the procedure once they come of age.

"fundamental right of the child to bodily integrity outweighed the fundamental rights of the parents"

[Perd Hapley]

What is a "religious right"?

[MechAg94]

Why do I get the feeling the judge(s) is an atheist? 

[geronimotwo]

What is a "religious right"?

not to be confused with "a religious rite", or "the religious right", although the author did find its meaning interchangable.

Why do I get the feeling the judge(s) is an atheist? 

what makes you think that?

[MechAg94]

Oh, when I see someone really dumping on Christians or Christian practices, it is normally either another denomination or a radical Atheist.  I have found Atheists are often not just atheits, but very anti-religion.  They don't believe in Live and Let Live (of course that is likely the more outspoken ones I see).

[Strings]

It is the more outspoken one, Mech. The ones that just don't believe for themselves, tend to not care about what others believe in

[MicroBalrog]

Circumcision is a Christian practice? I thought the Christians, by and large, gave up on circumcision after Paul?

[Balog]

Yeah, while many Christians do it as a cultural thing no denomination I am aware of requires it as a religious practice. This really seems to be more of an anti-Jew/Muslim act. And given the location it's especially odd.

[lee n. field]

Circumcision is a Christian practice? I thought the Christians, by and large, gave up on circumcision after Paul?

Paul was OK with circumcision, as long as it wasn't required for Gentiles converting.  That got his strongest condemnation. 

[Jamie B]

Seems that the issue is more one of malpractice than assault.

[zahc]

Leaving religion completely out of it, it seems fairly reasonable to me. Religious freedom is great, but some practices (human sacrifices, genital mutilation) objectively harm other people, and that's a reasonable place to draw the line.

[Perd Hapley]

Not this stuff again.

[drewtam]

Maybe the German court should punish those Jews who break the law by making them wear a yellow star on their sleeve? 

[dogmush]

Maybe the German court should punish those Jews who break the law by making them wear a yellow star on their sleeve? 

Godwined in 12 posts. Not bad because you know (right or wrong) saying a child has to be old enough to consent to a permanent body modification is exactly like a concentration camp. Same thing really.

[RevDisk]

Godwined in 12 posts. Not bad because you know (right or wrong) saying a child has to be old enough to consent to a permanent body modification is exactly like a concentration camp. Same thing really.

Dude, dogmush. This is now at least two logical, sane and reasonable posts I've seen. I suspect the Internet Gestapo will be along shortly for violating the Law of the Internet. All discussion must be unreasonable.

[Sergeant Bob]

If circumcision were forced on an adult, it would certainly be considered an assault.

[Balog]

If circumcision were forced on an adult, it would certainly be considered an assault.

If I made an adult go to their room and spanked them for lying it'd be considered an assault too. Did you have a point?

Godwined in 12 posts. Not bad because you know (right or wrong) saying a child has to be old enough to consent to a permanent body modification is exactly like a concentration camp. Same thing really.

What other medical decisions are you ok with the government dictating that parents can or can't make for their kids? What harmless religious practices are you ok with the .gov banning? And really, German .gov telling Jews they cannot practice a central tenant of their religion kinda begs for the comparison.

[zahc]

What other medical decisions are you ok with the government dictating that parents can or can't make for their kids?

This isn't a medical decision. I don't think anyone, including the German court, would propose banning any therapeutic operation, including circumcision done for therapeutic reasons.

What's being discussed here is neonatal circumcision done for non-therapeutic, cultural reasons. It was a good strawman attempt, though.

What harmless religious practices are you ok with the .gov banning?

Strawman (refuting a different argument),  loaded question (did you stop beating your wife?) and begging the question (circumcision is harmless because it's a harmless religious practice) all in one short sentence. Bravo!

[longeyes]

If circumcision is an assault, what is abortion?

[Balog]

This isn't a medical decision. I don't think anyone, including the German court, would propose banning any therapeutic operation, including circumcision done for therapeutic reasons.

What's being discussed here is neonatal circumcision done for non-therapeutic, cultural reasons. It was a good strawman attempt, though.
Strawman (refuting a different argument),  loaded question (did you stop beating your wife?) and begging the question (circumcision is harmless because it's a harmless religious practice) all in one short sentence. Bravo!

There is clear if limited medical value to the procedure. There is no medical evidence of harm, assuming the procedure is not botched.

It is an integral part of the Jewish religion. Banning it is a ban on the practice of that religion. Reciting the names of logical fallacies doesn't demonstrate that they in any way apply.

[zahc]

If circumcision is an assault, what is abortion?

Murder?

[geronimotwo]

There is clear if limited medical value to the procedure. There is no medical evidence of harm, assuming the procedure is not botched.

It is an integral part of the Jewish religion. Banning it is a ban on the practice of that religion. Reciting the names of logical fallacies doesn't demonstrate that they in any way apply.

the court has not banned circumcision, only postponed it until the child is able to make the decision for himself. 

why is this procedure so important to some cultures?  when was it first started, and was there a logical reason for it?

[KD5NRH]

the court has not banned circumcision, only postponed it until the child is able to make the decision for himself.

Genesis 17:12 specifically calls for it to be done at the age of eight days.

why is this procedure so important to some cultures?

Divine command.

when was it first started,

Genesis 17

and was there a logical reason for it?

"Do it or I'll condemn you to eternal suffering" is a pretty logical reason when it comes from a guy who can do just that.

[drewtam]

Godwined in 12 posts. Not bad because you know (right or wrong) saying a child has to be old enough to consent to a permanent body modification is exactly like a concentration camp. Same thing really.

Because you know, a German court outlawing a basic tenet of Jewish law is nothing like Nazi persecution of Judiasm.  

the court has not banned circumcision, only postponed it until the child is able to make the decision for himself. 

why is this procedure so important to some cultures?  when was it first started, and was there a logical reason for it?

Leviticus 12:3
3 On the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.

It is a direct command to the Jewish people to circumcise the newborn. Its not just tradition of men, for Jewish belief, it is a basic law of Moses.
If one attempted to faithfully follow the laws of Moses, this is not an option regardless of what a judge or human law says.

[MicroBalrog]

There's a difference between believing circumcision should be legal, and believing circumcision is a form of basic religious freedom.

Supposing I belong to a faith that believes in in tattooing the young at age 5, is that a religious freedom? Assume, for instance, that we believe in tattooing the genital area of the young at age 5.  This is an area that will not be observed by strangers. Should it be legal, then, to tattoo a swastika symbol on the pubic area of your offspring at a young age (after all, it's somewhat unlikely this will hurt your offspring's future employment  prospects)? If not, why?