German Court rules circumcision as assault

[Neutraligon]

It's called alcohol, and is normally used in Jewish circumcisions.

Right...getting babies drunk makes everything better.

If you get babies drunk so they avoid pain, we've got bigger problems to worry about. And do you use alcohol for several days after the operation like a normal adult would get painkillers for a while after the operation?

It ask to anesthetize, and has been done with no harm to the child. It is one of the affects of alcohol and is a safe way to do so. The amount we are talking about is small, and normally, at least with circumcisions I've dealt with, pain killers are given after, as with any surgery.

[The Godly Nations]

Congradulations, you have now officially banned an essential part of Judaism. I remember when the Germans tried to ban another part of Judaism some time in the 40's. How about this, let people practice their own religion and don't interfere with the beliefs of others.
Nazis

You do realize that Nazism is no longer the driving ideology of Germany, right? They're banning circumcision because it is unnecessary, irreversible and can cause health problems. Not to jab at the jews.

Nazism isn't, ingrain anti-semiticism and xenophobic hatred of Moslem may be.

[Kazomal]

It's called alcohol, and is normally used in Jewish circumcisions.

Right...getting babies drunk makes everything better.

If you get babies drunk so they avoid pain, we've got bigger problems to worry about. And do you use alcohol for several days after the operation like a normal adult would get painkillers for a while after the operation?

They are not an adult having an operation, to treat them as such would be irresponsible.

[Fischistan]

Right...getting babies drunk makes everything better.

If you get babies drunk so they avoid pain, we've got bigger problems to worry about. And do you use alcohol for several days after the operation like a normal adult would get painkillers for a while after the operation?

It ask to anesthetize, and has been done with no harm to the child. It is one of the affects of alcohol and is a safe way to do so.

I'm pretty sure getting a one-week old baby drunk is _not_ a safe thing to do.

[Crogach]

As far as I'm concerned circumcision is a cosmetic procedure with few if any benefits when performed consensually, and performing it on an infant is morally no different than tattooing a baby or piercing a baby's ears. Is it the end of the world? No. Is it something that we as a society ought to be encouraging? Absolutely not (at least not in its current form ) and as far as I'm concerned when it is performed without consent of the owner of the penis in question it is a form of genital mutilation.

As far as the religious aspect is concerned, I'd have no problem with the ritual drawing of a drop of blood from the penis on the eighth day, similar to the ceremony performed for prospective converts who were medically circumcised, but the whole anti-Semitism angle is a bit much. On the more general subject of bodily autonomy and welfare vs. religious freedom (or vs. basically anything) I come down firmly on the side of bodily autonomy and welfare; that includes repudiating female genital mutilation, involuntary gender reassignment, and tonsillectomy or appendectomy unless acutely necessary. Speaking as someone who was hospitalized and operated on as a baby (medically necessary in my case due to a nasty heart condition) the experience leaves lasting emotional scars; it's not something that should be done unless it is acutely medically necessary.

...How can it leave emotional scars when the baby doesn't remember it (8 days and all)? Also, the torah is pretty specific on circumcision. I understand your stance on the issue, but I do not see how you have any more right to tell people what they can and can't do than Christians do on whether gays should marry.

Hell, I don't remember my hospitalization either, but that doesn't mean that it didn't take well over a decade to put to rest a bevy of PTSD-esque phobias and neuroses as a result of the aforementioned hospitalization. While I will give you that the psychological aftereffects due to what happened to me are much more serious than those your average circumcised boy can expect to deal with there's still no reason to traumatize an infant unless medically speaking there's no other choice. I honestly don't care what consenting adults do to their penises, even to the degree of having it lopped off as part of a gender reassignment procedure, but this isn't about what people can and can't do to each other with consent, but rather what people can and can't do to people who are unable to give consent.

As a matter of practicality certain medical decisions will have to be made for those who can't make the call for themselves (young children, the severely mentally ill, coma patients, etc.), but as far as I'm concerned the line needs to be drawn at acute medical need. Circumcision (except in cases where intervention is physically necessary and all less invasive approaches have failed, such as severe phimosis) is no more medically necessary than preemptive tonsillectomy or preemptive appendectomy, and we don't routinely do those anymore either.

[The Godly Nations]

Doesn't matter, Jews will see it as an attack on their religion, and then look at the history. Germans still have to deal with the consequences of their actions.

Secular law > religious rules

and don't even bring Holocaust bullshit into this argument. That's a logical fallacy and you know it.

So, what if a secular law is particularly unjust, such as indirectly targeting certain ethnic groups?

[Neutraligon]

Doesn't matter, Jews will see it as an attack on their religion, and then look at the history. Germans still have to deal with the consequences of their actions.

Secular law > religious rules

and don't even bring Holocaust bullshit into this argument. That's a logical fallacy and you know it.

Actually it isn't since this is how Jews will see it. It does not matter the purpose behind it, this will be seen as an attack on Jewish culture, especially since a circumcised penis was one of the ways Nazis distinguished Jews from everyone else.

[Wellfleet]

Or NOT AT ALL.
The infant cannot consent to it. The infant does not benefit from it. The infant cannot undo the damage later in life.

Are you against abortion? Because if not...

[The Godly Nations]

Why do people even care what about the state of other people's penises?

Exactly. Why should you circumcise your babies if you don't even care?

If I am the parent, I should think I have some bloody right as to what I think is best for my child.

[Kazomal]

...How can it leave emotional scars when the baby doesn't remember it (8 days and all)? Also, the torah is pretty specific on circumcision. I understand your stance on the issue, but I do not see how you have any more right to tell people what they can and can't do than Christians do on whether gays should marry.

Hell, I don't remember my hospitalization either, but that doesn't mean that it didn't take well over a decade to put to rest a bevy of PTSD-esque phobias and neuroses as a result of the aforementioned hospitalization. While I will give you that the psychological aftereffects due to what happened to me are much more serious than those your average circumcised boy can expect to deal with there's still no reason to traumatize an infant unless medically speaking there's no other choice. I honestly don't care what consenting adults do to their penises, even having it lopped off as part of a gender reassignment procedure, but this isn't about what people can and can't do to each other with consent, but rather what people can and can't do to people who are unable to give consent.

As a matter of practicality certain medical decisions will have to be made for those who can't make the call for themselves (young children, the severely mentally ill, coma patients, etc.), but as far as I'm concerned the rule needs to be about acute medical need. Circumcision is no more medically necessary than preemptive tonsillectomy or preemptive appendectomy, and we don't routinely do those anymore either.

Circumcision at birth presents a much better risk:benefit situation than those two procedures.

[Fischistan]

You do realize that Nazism is no longer the driving ideology of Germany, right? They're banning circumcision because it is unnecessary, irreversible and can cause health problems. Not to jab at the jews.

Nazism isn't, ingrain anti-semiticism and xenophobic hatred of Moslem may be.

You think anti semetism is the driving ideology behind Germany?

[The Godly Nations]

...How can it leave emotional scars when the baby doesn't remember it (8 days and all)? Also, the torah is pretty specific on circumcision. I understand your stance on the issue, but I do not see how you have any more right to tell people what they can and can't do than Christians do on whether gays should marry.

Hell, I don't remember my hospitalization either, but that doesn't mean that it didn't take well over a decade to put to rest a bevy of PTSD-esque phobias and neuroses as a result of the aforementioned hospitalization. While I will give you that the psychological aftereffects due to what happened to me are much more serious than those your average circumcised boy can expect to deal with there's still no reason to traumatize an infant unless medically speaking there's no other choice. I honestly don't care what consenting adults do to their penises, even to the degree of having it lopped off as part of a gender reassignment procedure, but this isn't about what people can and can't do to each other with consent, but rather what people can and can't do to people who are unable to give consent.

As a matter of practicality certain medical decisions will have to be made for those who can't make the call for themselves (young children, the severely mentally ill, coma patients, etc.), but as far as I'm concerned the line needs to be drawn at acute medical need. Circumcision (except in cases where intervention is physically necessary and all less invasive approaches have failed, such as severe phimosis) is no more medically necessary than preemptive tonsillectomy or preemptive appendectomy, and we don't routinely do those anymore either.

yay! hear that, all Jewish men are emotionally scarred for life. Show me a study to prove this claim, and I will start believing you.

[Artanili Datium]

Exactly. Why should you circumcise your babies if you don't even care?

If I am the parent, I should think I have some bloody right as to what I think is best for my child.

The operation is not in a dire request at the moment when the child is circumcised. You don't have a right to impeach the bodily rights of your child.

[Fischistan]

Secular law > religious rules

and don't even bring Holocaust bullshit into this argument. That's a logical fallacy and you know it.

So, what if a secular law is particularly unjust, such as indirectly targeting certain ethnic groups?

Then that would be horrible.

Except that this law is not unjust.

[Tahar Joblis]

Honestly, when we roll back all the cultural baggage - Jews and Muslims vs. certain parts of Africa - it's the same thing whether we're talking about boys or girls:

"Person X should have operation Y performed on them by their parents at a young age to fit in with culture Z!"
"Y is intrusive and unnecessary genital mutilation, and shouldn't be under parents' control!"

The only real non-cultural differences are in the larger variety of types of female genital mutilation [including some more substantial ones] as compared to the types of male genital mutilation [which honestly don't seem to be very broad]; it's really the same basic issue on the fundamentals of whose rights belong to whom (parents vs. infants).

[Neutraligon]

...How can it leave emotional scars when the baby doesn't remember it (8 days and all)? Also, the torah is pretty specific on circumcision. I understand your stance on the issue, but I do not see how you have any more right to tell people what they can and can't do than Christians do on whether gays should marry.

Hell, I don't remember my hospitalization either, but that doesn't mean that it didn't take well over a decade to put to rest a bevy of PTSD-esque phobias and neuroses as a result of the aforementioned hospitalization. While I will give you that the psychological aftereffects due to what happened to me are much more serious than those your average circumcised boy can expect to deal with there's still no reason to traumatize an infant unless medically speaking there's no other choice. I honestly don't care what consenting adults do to their penises, even having it lopped off as part of a gender reassignment procedure, but this isn't about what people can and can't do to each other with consent, but rather what people can and can't do to people who are unable to give consent.

As a matter of practicality certain medical decisions will have to be made for those who can't make the call for themselves (young children, the severely mentally ill, coma patients, etc.), but as far as I'm concerned the line needs to be drawn at acute medical need. Circumcision (except in cases where intervention is physically necessary and all less invasive approaches have failed, such as severe phimosis) is no more medically necessary than preemptive tonsillectomy or preemptive appendectomy, and we don't routinely do those anymore either.

Again how can it cause a phobia if there is no way a child would remember it, in any way shape or form. Parents do have the right to make decisions for their children. Circumcision is neither medically necessary, but it is also not something that would harm the child if done correctly. As such it is something that can and should be left up to the parent. You have no right to prevent something that causes no harm due to your morals.

[The Godly Nations]

Nazism isn't, ingrain anti-semiticism and xenophobic hatred of Moslem may be.

You think anti semetism is the driving ideology behind Germany?

No, I think they are fucking busy bodies who should let parents raise their own child as they see fit.

身體髮膚，受之父母

[Fischistan]

Hell, I don't remember my hospitalization either, but that doesn't mean that it didn't take well over a decade to put to rest a bevy of PTSD-esque phobias and neuroses as a result of the aforementioned hospitalization. While I will give you that the psychological aftereffects due to what happened to me are much more serious than those your average circumcised boy can expect to deal with there's still no reason to traumatize an infant unless medically speaking there's no other choice. I honestly don't care what consenting adults do to their penises, even having it lopped off as part of a gender reassignment procedure, but this isn't about what people can and can't do to each other with consent, but rather what people can and can't do to people who are unable to give consent.

As a matter of practicality certain medical decisions will have to be made for those who can't make the call for themselves (young children, the severely mentally ill, coma patients, etc.), but as far as I'm concerned the rule needs to be about acute medical need. Circumcision is no more medically necessary than preemptive tonsillectomy or preemptive appendectomy, and we don't routinely do those anymore either.

Circumcision at birth presents a much better risk:benefit situation than those two procedures.

Circumcision at birth provides almost no benefits at all.

[Neutraligon]

Nazism isn't, ingrain anti-semiticism and xenophobic hatred of Moslem may be.

You think anti semetism is the driving ideology behind Germany?

We can't know, and that is how it will be seen by people who have dealt with antisemitism from Germany.

[Fischistan]

You think anti semetism is the driving ideology behind Germany?

No, I think they are fucking busy bodies who should let parents raise their own child as they see fit.

身體髮膚，受之父母

If I think that routinely, savagely beating my child for stepping out of line is how I want to raise my kid, should the gov't let me do that?

[Tahar Joblis]

Circumcision at birth presents a much better risk:benefit situation than those two procedures.

Circumcision at birth provides almost no benefits at all.

It's not clear whether there really are any medical [as opposed to cultural] benefits from circumcision at birth; and with any procedure like that, there's a clear risk of medical complications arising immediately out of that.

[The Godly Nations]

So, what if a secular law is particularly unjust, such as indirectly targeting certain ethnic groups?

Then that would be horrible.

Except that this law is not unjust.

It is, it targets, indirectly, Jews and Moslems.

[Neutraligon]

If I am the parent, I should think I have some bloody right as to what I think is best for my child.

The operation is not in a dire request at the moment when the child is circumcised. You don't have a right to impeach the bodily rights of your child.

Actually, if it causes no harm the parents do have the right to decide on medical procedures for their children. For that matter they have the right to deny medical procedures for their children.

[Neutraligon]

So, what if a secular law is particularly unjust, such as indirectly targeting certain ethnic groups?

Then that would be horrible.

Except that this law is not unjust.

It is to those who find circumcision a vital part of their religion.

[Shofercia]

Honestly, when we roll back all the cultural baggage - Jews and Muslims vs. certain parts of Africa - it's the same thing whether we're talking about boys or girls:

"Person X should have operation Y performed on them by their parents at a young age to fit in with culture Z!"
"Y is intrusive and unnecessary genital mutilation, and shouldn't be under parents' control!"

The only real non-cultural differences are in the larger variety of types of female genital mutilation [including some more substantial ones] as compared to the types of male genital mutilation [which honestly don't seem to be very broad]; it's really the same basic issue on the fundamentals of whose rights belong to whom (parents vs. infants).

As I said earlier, the problem with circumcision, is that by the time you wait until the age of consent - it's too late, and the operation's more complicated. Most of the people that were circumcised, that I know IRL, liked it and were thankful for it, even the ones that were no longer Jewish. Also, Y isn't genital mutilation - you're lopping off skin, not a vital body part.