German court declares circumcisions a crime

[Space Cowboy]

This sounds a good bit more reasonable-

Protecting freedom of worship

Op-ed: German ambassador says court ruling on circumcision not legally binding

Andreas Michaelis
Published: 09.12.12, 00:13 / Israel Opinion


Four months ago a district court in Germany issued a ruling on the circumcision of male infants for religious purposes. The ruling stirred a heated public debate both in Germany and Israel. But this debate was riddled with confusion and mistaken interpretation regarding the legal status of circumcision in Germany. Has Germany "banned" circumcision, as some of the pundits claim? Is faith-based circumcision now considered a crime according to German law? The answer to both questions is no.


So what really happened? On May 7, 2012 a court in the western city of Cologne ruled that circumcision "for the purpose of religious upbringing constitutes a violation of physical integrity." The court added: "The child's body is permanently and irreparably changed by the circumcision. This change conflicts with the child's interest of later being able to make his own decision on his religious affiliation."

Contrary to what many analysts claimed in articles published after the court's decision, the ruling is not binding and has not gained the status of a precedent. Meaning, German courts will not necessarily rule in a similar manner in the future. Moreover, it must be stressed that this single ruling went against the current reality in Germany, whereby male circumcision as a religious ritual is accepted by the general public. So far no one in our country has ever challenged faith-based circumcision.

(more) http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...280229,00.html

[MLehman]

In a country that perpetrated the worst genocide of the modern era against the followers of the Jewish faith, it is inconceivable that they would revert to the tactic of legally or symbolically outlawing a 3000 year old, recognized, time-honored practice of circumcision.

The rite of circumcision is fundamental to the Jewish people. To in any way allow legal or other proceedings or debate on the right to circumcision is criminal.

Then again, the German Genocide Against the Jews was criminal. The Germans ought cease and desist from this course of conduct post haste.

It would be like outlawing and depriving Catholics from the rite of Communion because you thought it medically unsafe for hygienic reasons and so forth.

[Pleepleus]

In a country that perpetrated arguably the worst genocide of the modern era against the followers of the Jewish faith, it is inconceivable that they would revert to the tactic of legally or symbolically outlawing a 3000 year old, recognized, time-honored practice of circumcision.

The rite of circumcision is fundamental to the Jewish people. To in any way allow legal or other proceedings or debate on the right to circumcision is criminal.

Then again, the German Genocie Against the Jews was criminal. The Germans ought cease and desist from this course of conduct post haste.

It would be like outlawing and depriving Catholics from the rite of Communion because you thought it medically unsafe for hygienic reasons and so forth.

Don't judge the entire country of Germany because of the actions of one judge. The German government is going to pass a law protecting the rights of parents to circumcise their children when they get back from their summer break.

[MLehman]

Don't judge the entire country of Germany because of the actions of one judge. The German government is going to pass a law protecting the rights of parents to circumcise their children when they get back from their summer break.

I would anticipate that they would pass such a law as other democratic places around the world where this despicable debate is instigated often work out bypass legislation to circumvent such stuff. Nonetheless, there is no excuse for this debate to rear its ugly head, whether in the courts, or otherwise in the nation of Germany. None, whatsoever!!!

I reserve the right to pass judgement on Germany as they have on followers of the Jewish faith and other minorities. I know the Germans and while there are good and bad in all groups, and there are many good Germans, in this modern era, Germany simply has no business reverting to their medieval anti-semitic past. None whatsoever .... Given their history ... Despite the lure of Islamic oil wealth!

As to German Judges, the guy should be removed from the bench immediately by PM Angela Merkel. I am reminded of Ernst Hess, the German Judge of partial Jewish extraction somewhere along the line, that Hitler protected from the Holocaust at one point. It was because they served together in the trenches of WWI.

Hitler not only actually issued a protective order for a while that Himmler respected, but he obviously had some sympathy for this German of Jewish race. If he can do this, then Merkel can remove the anti-circumcision judge. Any ruling issued was politically motivated and clearly biased. The ruling is to appease anti-Jewish interests and left on the books to be revived at some time in the future should political winds change.

I can still see the tatoos on relatives that suffered in Auschwitz. I still remember the disappearance of entire communities one cold day in 1941.

Recommended Reading: Hitler's Willing Executioners by Jonah Goldhagen

[Pleepleus]

...Hitler not only actually issued a protective order for a while that Himmler respected, but he obviously had some sympathy for this German of Jewish race. If he can do this, then Merkel can remove the anti-circumcision judge. Any ruling issued was politically motivated and clearly biased. The ruling is to appease anti-Jewish interests and left on the books to be revived at some time in the future should political winds change...

Hitler was a dictator with with the 1933 Enabling Act behind him. Merkel's powers as Chancellor are limited by the German Constitution. I seriously doubt Merkel has the power under German law to remove judges she doesn't like.

One judge's bad decision is not Germany reverting to its "medieval anti-semitic past".

[MLehman]

One judge's bad decision is not Germany reverting to its "medieval anti-semitic past".

All it takes is one person to do something unspeakably evil. Setting a bad precedent is one such thing.

It doesn't take much for a trend to be set in motion whatever probability that nothing is likely to come of it for the time being. You don't put such a law on the books.

It is a shame for Germany. Like doing nothing to prevent the Munich Massacre.

Nothing like this should have ever come up in Germany. It is a reversion to the past.

Merkel should sponsor legislation to repudiate and render null and void the ruling and bury it from sight and prevent further rulings from ever surfacing again on this issue.

It's one thing for this to surface in anti-Semitic jurisdictions in other less civilized countries, which shouldn't be tolerated either, but in Germany, it is an outrage. The Nuremberg laws were borne out of such precedents!

The state could have intervened to short circuit such a proceeding and didn't. As to her powers to remove him, I'm not sure about current German law, but he could be pressured to resign from the bench because of his insensitive, unwise and utterly biased ruling.

[Pleepleus]

All it takes is one person to do something unspeakably evil. Setting a bad precedent is one such thing.

It doesn't take much for a trend to be set in motion whatever probability that nothing is likely to come of it for the time being. You don't put such a law on the books.

It is a shame for Germany. Like doing nothing to prevent the Munich Massacre.

Nothing like this should have ever come up in Germany. It is a reversion to the past.

Merkel should sponsor legislation to repudiate and render null and void the ruling and bury it from sight and prevent further rulings from ever surfacing again on this issue.

It's one thing for this to surface in anti-Semitic jurisdictions in other less civilized countries, which shouldn't be tolerated either, but in Germany, it is an outrage. The Nuremberg laws were borne out of such precedents!

The state could have intervened to short circuit such a proceeding and didn't. As to her powers to remove him, I'm not sure about current German law, but he could be pressured to resign from the bench because of his insensitive, unwise and utterly biased ruling.

The German government has already said that it is going to make a law protecting circumcision rights in Germany.

[dayag]

update from Germany:

Germany's cabinet approved a draft law on Wednesday protecting the right to circumcise infant boys, which it says will end months of legal uncertainty after a local court banned the practice, causing outrage among Muslims and Jews...

An embarrassed German government pledged to bring in new legislation by the autumn to safeguard the right of parents to have their sons circumcised.

"It was always our intention to lift this ruling," German government spokesman Steffen Seibert told a news conference.

Parliament must still approve the bill for it to become law.

The speed with which national lawmakers agreed to draw up a new law underscored sensitivity to charges of intolerance in a country haunted by its Nazi past.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said the country risked becoming a laughing stock if Jews were not allowed to practice their rituals.

The bill states that the operation should take place with the most effective pain relief possible and only if parents have been fully informed about the nature of the procedure. It makes no mention of religious motivations for circumcision...

source: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...290606,00.html