[Keckers]

There is a ridiculous amount of hyperbole and in this thread. You'd all make excellent politicians or news anchors. Congrats.

[Bardem]

(Original post by Dirac Delta Function)
ok, then what about ear piercing?

What about it? It's hardly equivalent. We're talking religious based circumcision here, as per the court ruling, which however you justify it through 'custom', 'tradition' or even doctrine, is not an explicit mandate of either religion (that being Islam/Judaism). Circumcision can be seen in the same light as arranged marriage, yet another custodian impressed practice that eradicates freedom of will.

[. . .]

(Original post by Steevee)
Study/source please?

Every known 'benefit' of circumcision can equally be achieved by good hygeine.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123802256715541879.html

[. . .]

I always thought Germany guaranteed the freedom of faith and religion but apparently not.

[Bardem]

(Original post by . . .)
I always thought Germany guaranteed the freedom of faith and religion but apparently not.

It's not a mandate of Islam and navigable in Judaism. How ironic, freedom through faith to in turn remove freedom.

[Steevee]

(Original post by . . .)
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123802256715541879.html

I'd like a reliable study done in a controlled environment, something not yet conducted. Where it can be shown that both male and female parties are properly hygenic.

Add to that of course, that by practicing safe sex you would negate the need for circumcision, and the fact that circumcision does not prevent disease means you will have to practice safe sex anyway....I'm struggling to see any benefit.

[Bardem]

(Original post by Steevee)
I'd like a reliable study done in a controlled environment, something not yet conducted. Where it can be shown that both male and female parties are properly hygenic.

Add to that of course, that by practicing safe sex you would negate the need for circumcision, and the fact that circumcision does not prevent disease means you will have to practice safe sex anyway....I'm struggling to see any benefit.

The 'positives' shouldn't even register. I haven't seen a reputable argument so far in favour of circumcision apart from 'it did me no harm'. An argument that strengthens the opponents view that its a customary practice than something that can be truly ratified. 'Custom' is the worst defense of an action I can think of.

[Snagprophet]

(Original post by . . .)
I always thought Germany guaranteed the freedom of faith and religion but apparently not.

It's better than people's freedom to make permanent changes to a baby against it's will and allow it to be indoctrinated by some voodoo nonsense.

[Steevee]

(Original post by Bardem)
The 'positives' shouldn't even register. I haven't seen a reputable argument so far in favour of circumcision apart from 'it did me no harm'. An argument that strengthens the opponents view that its a customary practice than something that can be truly ratified. 'Custom' is the worst defense of an action I can think of.

This is my point.

Any benefit touted can equally be achieved without mutilation. Therefor the only argument that remains is the cultural one, which is no argument at all really.

[Bardem]

(Original post by Steevee)
This is my point.

Any benefit touted can equally be achieved without mutilation. Therefor the only argument that remains is the cultural one, which is no argument at all really.

Quite, it's a grisly ornament of 'faiths' that simultaneously embody divinity and unimpeachable holiness and the allowance to shift your moral parameters to carry out practices like circumcision. If religion is so highly esteemed there must be leeway to rid of customs that hark back to provincial cultures rather than the divine. (And if they can be attributed to both, then the whole religion should be equally disputed)

[vandub]

(Original post by . . .)
I always thought Germany guaranteed the freedom of faith and religion but apparently not.

Well, no, this ruling protects freedom, surely you can see that? The freedom for an individual to have autonomy over his body and to make an informed decision when he's old enough to understand it - children are not the property of their parents. Religious freedom would be the freedom to get yourself circumcised if you wanted, not to force that decision onto someone else.

[f1mad]

(Original post by . . .)
I always thought Germany guaranteed the freedom of faith and religion but apparently not.

Is that the best you could come up with? Still completely wrong .

[Arbolus]

(Original post by . . .)
I always thought Germany guaranteed the freedom of faith and religion but apparently not.

It's not affecting the parent's freedom of religion because they're not the ones being circumcised. It's not affecting the child's freedom of religion because they're not yet old enough to know what they want.

[Chindits]

In which case, Germany should also bring in legislation to stop parents feeding their kids junk food - as this is more detrimental to their mental and physical health than circumcision could ever be.

Germans curtailing the religious freedom of Jews? hmmm, think it's happened before....

[. . .]

(Original post by Steevee)
I'd like a reliable study done in a controlled environment, something not yet conducted. Where it can be shown that both male and female parties are properly hygenic.

Add to that of course, that by practicing safe sex you would negate the need for circumcision, and the fact that circumcision does not prevent disease means you will have to practice safe sex anyway....I'm struggling to see any benefit.

Why don't you carry one out then.

[robin22391]

(Original post by Dirac Delta Function)
how greatly?

it is designed to repress sexual pleasure and the boys opportunity for that...further thousands have died from this operation or have been severely mutilated by accidents of surgery.

[tehFrance]

(Original post by Einheri)
Non-medical, religious circumcision on children is bodily harm and thus a crime, a German court ruled this week.

I am surprised that a German court gave this ruling, especially as the Germans normally go out of their way to accommodate Jews... could this be the beginning of the end of a Germany that is carrying more guilt that it should?

[f1mad]

(Original post by tehFrance)
I am surprised that a German court gave this ruling, especially as the Germans normally go out of their way to accommodate Jews... could this be the beginning of the end of a Germany that is carrying more guilt that it should?

I don't see what religion has to do with it tbh.

It comes more in line with morality. Should for example, a child be circumcised without its own consent?

[tehFrance]

(Original post by f1mad)
I don't see what religion has to do with it tbh.

It comes more in line with morality. Should for example, a child be circumcised without its own consent?

Quite a lot imo.

I was and I am fine, lots of other men are also fine. I will never see what the big deal with it is but the non-Circumcised males will as but I guess it is one of those things that if you haven't had either you can't really say much on the subject.

[Dirac Delta Function]

(Original post by robin22391)
it is designed to repress sexual pleasure and the boys opportunity for that...further thousands have died from this operation or have been severely mutilated by accidents of surgery.

no it's not, and neither does it.