The Jewish and Muslim communities have recently expressed international outrage and concern about a ruling emanating from a German court in Cologne that apparently limits the freedom of those wishing to practice a ritual circumcision, known in Hebrew as a brit milah.
For Jews, the brit milah represents our oldest ritual and any attack upon this ritual should be viewed -- and has historically been viewed -- as an existential attack upon the Jewish people.
However, before we condemn Germany for its association with this decision, more information is necessary. Since the decision of the court has not been fully published we are relying on limited information in assessing the full danger and concern represented by this decision.
The AP and other media outlets have reported that the court in Cologne ruled: "That the child's right to physical integrity trumps freedom of religion and parents' rights."
If this was indeed the substance of the ruling then we should all be very concerned as it is creating a precedent that a brit milah is a violation of a child's rights. The fact that a court would view circumcision in this context is extremely distressing. I strongly disagree with that concept as I view a brit milah as a ritual that protects the child spiritually and allows him to spiritually and physically join a community with a tradition dating back more than 3,000 years.
But it is not entirely clear that the Jewish community and the ritual of brit milah is under attack in Germany.
The AP also reported, "The case in Cologne involved a doctor accused of carrying out a circumcision on a 4-year-old, approved by his Muslim parents, that led to medical complications. The doctor was acquitted, however, and prosecutors said they wont appeal."
It is possible that the case in question refers to a doctor committing malpractice in his efforts to circumcise the child. We simply don't know all the facts at this point.
After hearing about this ruling, I was initially horrified and reached out to the German embassy for clarification and requested a meeting with the Ambassador. While I am still waiting for that meeting, I was able to have a lengthy conversation with Knut Abraham, Legal Adviser and Consul General to the German Embassy in the U.S. (It is an ironic name since Abraham was the first person in Jewish history to be circumcised.)
He wrote to me and shared the official statement of the German government about this matter, which is reassuring to some degree:
"The ruling by the Regional Court of Cologne represents a singular decision which deviates from the broad majority of legal opinions on circumcision. In the Federal Republic of Germany, circumcision is socially and legally accepted as a consensual medical intervention. The Federal Government will carefully assess all facets of the ruling and review the possible consequences of this individual decision. Germany´s Foreign Minister, Mr. Guido Westerwelle, has made the following statement: 'The Cologne judgements has triggered confusion internationally. It must be clear that Germany is a globally minded and tolerant country in which religious freedom is firmly embedded and in which religious traditions such as circumcision are protected as an expression of religious diversity.'"
But Abraham then added: "According to media reports the case has developed the following way. After the circumcision the Muslim boy was bleeding heavily. The mother decided to go to a hospital where the boy got treatment. After talking to the mother a doctor got the impression that the circumcision had not happened in her consent."
This is of course a very different situation and it may very well have called for prosecutorial intervention. It remains to be seen whether or not this report from the embassy is accurate. Let's all monitor the situation closely.
Rivka T. Cohen: I Was Raised Orthodox, Yet I Am Not Considered 'Jewish Enough' to Keep the Sabbath
"For Jews, the brit milah represents our oldest ritual and any attack upon this ritual should be viewed -- and has historically been viewed -- as an existential attack upon the Jewish people"
"... the desire of practitioners for standard procedures can lead to unpredictable outcomes because of both ... anatomical variation and the impossibility of predicting the functional results .... This is because the procedures are performed with an emphasis on achieving an acceptable cosmetic outcome on a very small organ which has the capacity for considerable growth and changes during puberty. Furthermore, no surgical procedure can have absolutely predictable outcomes because of the variations in healing and scar formation, the individual variations in technique, and the effects of infection. Regrettably, it seems that the majority of those performing surgical procedures on the penis of minors take no interest in following up the outcome after the organ has developed. ... there have been very few attempts at quality control and many boys are left with seriously damaged penises; the outcome is often a functional impairment and is seldom tidy,..."
- Pathologist Ken McGrath
Ninth International Symposium on
Circumcision, Genital Integrity and Human Rights
Seattle, August 25, 2006
No child should suffer parents' religious worldviews.
Advantages to the ban are freedom from physical trauma, escaping the idea of uncut as inferior, escaping indoctrination into a society based upon a mutilated phenotype, and maturing without religious challenges of inferiority.
Disadvantages to the ban are cleaning the uncircumcised penis takes effort, and uncut German messianic aspirants will never be messiah. THE MESSIAH MUST BE CIRCUMCISED; it is probably the ultimate test of messianic stature. Without the circumcision, any aspirant would be considered a FRAUD/Antichrist.
Conscience is not a Jewish invention. Scientists have proven our paleolithic ancestors were concientious.
Looking at the call of Judaism, the belief in God, in good, and in messiah are the ultimates of good living. However, when good living is superceded by superficial, challenging, and mutilatory acts of devotion, that is not devotion; that is emotionally unbalanced and totally habitually unmessianic behavior.
What would Cologne say about child ear, tongue, penis, vagina, and body piercings?
Jewish and Muslim faiths seem to be a challenge for God Himself. If the Jewish and Muslim faiths are about love, it is time to put up or shut up. Love. Stop the abusive circumcisions to reach an ideal superman status. We, like our paleolithic ancestors, are just human beings.
If we want to be like the God of Moses, who says, "I am Who am," how about we just be comfortable with who we are as well?
This is child abuse, plain and simple. It's comparable to Chinese footbinding, and the sexual mutilation of little girls. There is no justification for it. Religion is not a justification for child abuse.
Well, don't wait for the embassy. I'm sure you are aware that the executive power of a democratic country has no say in the judicial power. You will always get a diplomatic answer, but not facts.
If you speak German (or know someone who does), check out the website of Holm Putzke. He is professor of law at the University of Passau and has been working on the legal consequences of religious circumcisions for years together with Rolf Dietrich Herzberg, Hans-Georg Dietz and others.
There is a collection of jurisprudential works on his website illustrating how the legal evaluation of religious circumcision on children evolved on the ground of concrete law cases (and precedents) in the last years.
http://www.holmputzke.de/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=23&Itemid=29
That will help you to understand the background of the ruling. These law cases prompted grievous questions about the constitutional rights and freedoms of children in Germany, questions we can not ignore.
The question religious communities must ask themselves is: are we going to approve forced circumcision just to keep our tradition, ignoring the distress of children, or are we going to take our civic responsibility, engage the dialogue, looking for solutions and protect those children?
This is of course a very different situation and it may very well have called for prosecutorial intervention. It remains to be seen whether or not this report from the embassy is accurate. Let's all monitor the situation closely."
Are you suggesting that you care about the mother's consent, but not the child's?
If you want to get circumcised, I'm sure you can find someone to do it for you, when you're old enough to make that decision for yourself.
Well said.
This is a great illustration of how religion deludes and dilutes normally humane, good people toward wicked immoral acts, and make them feel righteous about it. Brilliant, really, not allowing people to hold down or strap a tiny infant to a board and mutilate it's penis with no anesthesia is "limiting peoples freedom", gotta love the logic of faith.
Lets re-write this, except this time with a proper sense of morality and human decency.
....that apparently **protects infants from being subject to medically unnecessary ritualistic genital modification or mutilation**., known in Hebrew as a brit milah."
Amazing how different it sounds when you put the helpless infant before the adults practicing cult rituals.
I know it's hard, but it's the 21st century, time to evolve, find a way to keep your heritage without the barbarism.
That the child's right to physical integrity trumps freedom of religion and parents' rights is the smartest, most sensible thing anyone could say about circumcision. I hope this sets a useful precedent, but doubt it.
Why don't boys get the same protection? Everyone should be able to decide for themselves whether or not they want parts of their genitals cut off. It's *their* body.
is if there is an urgent medical need which cannot be remedied through less invasive measures.
I upset some posters on another thread by describing the thought experiment of a 'clis' :
a big party where a 'clitoral hoodectomy' is religiously, ritually performed on eight-day-old girls.
(This is an analogous procedure to a circumcision, it removes the foreskin covering the clitoris).
The idea of having a big party and bringing out the baby girl on a pillow while an old woman
awaits her arrival with a razor knife was apparently rather disturbing. I agree. It IS disturbing.
And the consequences of holding the 'clis' would include the cutter being charged with a felony.
The argument of religious mandate would not be allowed to trump the girl's right to bodily integrity.
If any person over the age of consent wishes to enter into a covenant by cutting off pieces of
their living flesh, so be it. The German ruling correctly stated that position regarding circumcision.
the photo you see in 'related news' above of the baby boy all dressed in white
like a bride about to be deflowered (another interesting analogy).
Several posters here have bragged about the great parties they throw at a 'bris'.
Just doesn't seem like a reason to party, imho.
(Not that there was anything in it that should have triggered moderation).
Anyway, good luck with your thesis.
Recommended reading, in case you haven't come across this book yet :
"Marked in Your Flesh : Circumcision from Ancient Judea to Modern America"
by Leonard B. Glick. Available through Amazon.
(And those same people seem happy to compare MGC with almost anything else parents do to children, most recently spanking and making them eat spinach!)
(Thanks, once again, Hugh, for your work on this issue.)
I see no limit. Anyone that wants to cut off parts of their penis is free to do that. The ruling is about someone wishing to practice a ritual circumcision on another human being, that is cut off penis parts of someone else!
How does anyone disagree with the point that amputating nerves, blood vessels, protective covering and pleasure zones is bodily HARM? Do the harm to yourself, make the SEXUAL sacrifice. (that is the original basis of the ritual -- SEXUAL sacrifice, giving up pleasure of the flesh.) Do not sacrifice the sexual pleasure of someone else. No one has the right to do that anymore than they have the right to sacrifice a virgin.
Those saying that preventing the cutting off of penis parts of a baby boy violates the cutter's freedom of religion, are way out there in irrational land. One's religion ends where their knife touches another human's body. The idea that another human's ritual (rite) trumps ones right to body parts is insane and creepy. Baby boy penis parts removal cuts off thousands of fine touch and stretch nerves. This is like disconnecting the fingertips, nipples or lips from the brain. No human should be subjected to sensory system harm as well as a forced decrease of sexual function and PLEASURE for life!