• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Israel attacks Council of Europe move to restrict male circumcision

Status
Not open for further replies.
The rulers in the Euro collective are dictating what they deem appropriate...?

Tomorrow is Tuesday.

this is my surprised face :neutral:

They'll all be wearing khaki pants and listening to low frequency music in 100 years. Europe is lost to mediocrity and the ruling class, accept it.
 
shanners said:
It's not just extra skin. The foreskin is comprised of many sensitive nerve endings:
Click to expand...
It is extra skin.


shanners said:
An intact, un-mutilated body is a basic human right.

But not the right to mutilate their children.
Click to expand...
It is not mutilation or a basic human right.


shanners said:
Too late then.
Click to expand...
:doh
That statement was about choosing your own religion.
It is not too late to choose your own religion.



shanners said:
It's everybody's business.
Click to expand...
:naughty
No it is not.
It is none of your business. That isn't going to change.
 
Excon said:
It is extra skin.
Click to expand...

No, it has a specific purpose - to protect the glans, as well as:

"This study shows that the foreskin is the most touch-sensitive part of the penis:

... Morris L. Sorrells, James L. Snyder, Mark D. Reiss, Christopher Eden, Marilyn F. Milos, Norma Wilcox, Robert S. Van Howe

BJU International 99 (4), 864-869 (British Journal of Urology International,
Volume 99 Issue 4 Page 864 - April 2007)"

The Foreskin, Circumcision and Sexuality

"The foreskin itself gives pleasure."

Pleasures of the Foreskin

It is not mutilation or a basic human right.
Click to expand...

It is:

' "The Assault We Ignore", London Queen's Counsel James Chegwidden's speech at the 2013 Genital Autonomy Symposium in Keele, Staffs, UK, about how non-therapeutic infant circumcision is in breach of national and international law.'

The Assault We Ignore on Vimeo

It is not too late to choose your own religion.
Click to expand...

It's too late to restore the foreskin, I was referring to.

It is none of your business.
Click to expand...

Cruelty to children is every concerned citizen's business.
 
shanners said:
No, it has a specific purpose - to protect the glans, as well as:

"This study shows that the foreskin is the most touch-sensitive part of the penis:

...

"The foreskin itself gives pleasure."
Click to expand...

As I said. Extra skin.
It is not needed, and it is none of your business.



shanners said:
It is:
Click to expand...
:doh
It is not mutilation or a basic human right.



shanners said:
Cruelty to children is every concerned citizen's business.
Click to expand...
It is not cruelty or your business.
 
MadLib said:
Sorry, but nobody has the right to force religious beliefs down my throat, especially through genital mutilation. Determining what parts of my body stay on me are my business alone, no one else' :2wave:
Click to expand...

How can you not force religion. Children are eventually gaining their culture and beliefs from their family. Should families avoid practicing religion around their children and at the age of 18 give them a few leaflets explaining about each religion and let them choose? Its not working this way. If you were born Catholic, Jewish, Muslim or Hindu you will most probably be one, same goes for your culture, if you are raised in a liberal environment you will become one, if you were raised in an environment that believes men are superior to women, you will believe so too.

Circumcision is a major part of the Jewish culture and forbidding it equals forbidding Jews from raising their children as such. Calling the act barbaric is a bit extreme in my opinion, today you don't see many Jews do the Brith by a Mohel in a party with all of the family dancing around the infant's bleeding penis, it is done in a hospital by doctors. Why is it ok in a European eyes to make holes in your child's earlobe but not ok to do circumcision in a hospital?
 
ido_ said:
How can you not force religion. Children are eventually gaining their culture and beliefs from their family. Should families avoid practicing religion around their children and at the age of 18 give them a few leaflets explaining about each religion and let them choose? Its not working this way. If you were born Catholic, Jewish, Muslim or Hindu you will most probably be one, same goes for your culture, if you are raised in a liberal environment you will become one, if you were raised in an environment that believes men are superior to women, you will believe so too.
Click to expand...
It's one thing to practice your own beliefs in front of a child and to take him/her with you, it's another thing entirely to remove a part of their genitals without their consent. Would you say that female circumcision is merely an expression of religion that should be enabled by law?
Circumcision is a major part of the Jewish culture and forbidding it equals forbidding Jews from raising their children as such. Calling the act barbaric is a bit extreme in my opinion, today you don't see many Jews do the Brith by a Mohel in a party with all of the family dancing around the infant's bleeding penis, it is done in a hospital by doctors.
Click to expand...
Something being a major part of culture doesn't mean it should be legally sanctioned. Governments should try to their utmost to let children choose their own culture, and shouldn't have it forced upon them because of "parental rights."
Why is it ok in a European eyes to make holes in your child's earlobe but not ok to do circumcision in a hospital?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't mind making earrings for babies illegal as well. From what I've heard it's actually more dangerous to pierce an infant's ear than male circumcision is.
 
MadLib said:
It's one thing to practice your own beliefs in front of a child and to take him/her with you, it's another thing entirely to remove a part of their genitals without their consent. Would you say that female circumcision is merely an expression of religion that should be enabled by law?
Click to expand...
So at what age does this child who were taught up to be a Haredi Jew for example (And we all know what will become of such a child) is allowed to be circumcised ? Is he legally old enough to decide according to his culture at the age of 13? Or is it again what his government dictates to him?

Something being a major part of culture doesn't mean it should be legally sanctioned. Governments should try to their utmost to let children choose their own culture, and shouldn't have it forced upon them because of "parental rights."
Click to expand...
As I see it this by these law Governments force European culture upon the child


I wouldn't mind making earrings for babies illegal as well. From what I've heard it's actually more dangerous to pierce an infant's ear than male circumcision is.[/QUOTE]
 
X Factor said:
I had braces when I was a kid and they hurt a hell of a lot more than something I don't remember as a baby. Guess that barbaric practice out to be outlawed as well.
Click to expand...

having braces has a medical/dental reason, circumcision does not have that reason.
 
davidtaylorjr said:
Circumcision is also a health plus though if I'm not mistaken. Nobody remembers being circumcised as a baby so what is the problem?
Click to expand...

the problem is that it is a religious based interference on an infants body.
 
Excon said:
As I said. Extra skin.
It is not needed
Click to expand...

You're certainly entitled to your opinion but that's all it is, an opinion which has no basis in medical science.

It is not mutilation or a basic human right
Click to expand...

Your opinion again.

It is not cruelty or your business.
Click to expand...

I could've worded it better and said cruelty to infants.

Guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Have a nice day.
 
Last edited:
ido_ said:
How can you not force religion. Children are eventually gaining their culture and beliefs from their family. Should families avoid practicing religion around their children and at the age of 18 give them a few leaflets explaining about each religion and let them choose? Its not working this way. If you were born Catholic, Jewish, Muslim or Hindu you will most probably be one, same goes for your culture, if you are raised in a liberal environment you will become one, if you were raised in an environment that believes men are superior to women, you will believe so too.

Circumcision is a major part of the Jewish culture and forbidding it equals forbidding Jews from raising their children as such. Calling the act barbaric is a bit extreme in my opinion, today you don't see many Jews do the Brith by a Mohel in a party with all of the family dancing around the infant's bleeding penis, it is done in a hospital by doctors. Why is it ok in a European eyes to make holes in your child's earlobe but not ok to do circumcision in a hospital?
Click to expand...

Yet this Orthodox Jew argues from Torah that it's a human rights violation:

"There can be no doubt that bris milah is an important mitzvah. While the Torah does call for circumcision at eight days, there are indeed prominent Jews in the Tanakh who were circumcised later in life. Avraham Avinu was circumcised at 99; tradition holds that he kept the entirety of the written and oral Torah well before matan Torah, meaning he performed the majority of mitzvahs in his life while in an uncircumcised state.

"While it may potentially be halakhically serious if neglected, circumcision is not a requirement to be considered a Jew, if one is born of a Jewish mother. If someone uncircumcised happens to be a Kohen, he may even bless other Jewish people ...

"Circumcision of an infant is increasingly being viewed a human rights violation, and must certainly be viewed as such as stated in the key sentence. This being said, an adult Jewish male is free to choose the procedure for himself and should be encouraged to do so if he so desires. He will certainly be rewarded for his mitzvah (especially if done without anesthetic, though that is optional and not mandatory). However, no one in the modern world has the right to do this to another human without his permission. Circumcision of a baby is a serious malpractice and human rights violation, and must accordingly be viewed the same way all human rights violations are viewed within the Jewish faith."


Beyond the Bris: News and Views on Jewish Circumcision: Judaism, Bris Milah, and Human Rights: A Torah Perspective
 
shanners said:
Yet this Orthodox Jew argues from Torah that it's a human rights violation:

"There can be no doubt that bris milah is an important mitzvah. While the Torah does call for circumcision at eight days, there are indeed prominent Jews in the Tanakh who were circumcised later in life. Avraham Avinu was circumcised at 99; tradition holds that he kept the entirety of the written and oral Torah well before matan Torah, meaning he performed the majority of mitzvahs in his life while in an uncircumcised state.

"While it may potentially be halakhically serious if neglected, circumcision is not a requirement to be considered a Jew, if one is born of a Jewish mother. If someone uncircumcised happens to be a Kohen, he may even bless other Jewish people ...

"Circumcision of an infant is increasingly being viewed a human rights violation, and must certainly be viewed as such as stated in the key sentence. This being said, an adult Jewish male is free to choose the procedure for himself and should be encouraged to do so if he so desires. He will certainly be rewarded for his mitzvah (especially if done without anesthetic, though that is optional and not mandatory). However, no one in the modern world has the right to do this to another human without his permission. Circumcision of a baby is a serious malpractice and human rights violation, and must accordingly be viewed the same way all human rights violations are viewed within the Jewish faith."


Beyond the Bris: News and Views on Jewish Circumcision: Judaism, Bris Milah, and Human Rights: A Torah Perspective
Click to expand...

Where exactly do he argues that from the Torah?
 
ido_ said:
So at what age does this child who were taught up to be a Haredi Jew for example (And we all know what will become of such a child) is allowed to be circumcised ? Is he legally old enough to decide according to his culture at the age of 13? Or is it again what his government dictates to him?
Click to expand...
I try not to be a fundamentalist about these things - I'd prefer making 18 the age of consent for circumcision, but it could be combined with the bar mitzvah in the boy's early teen years. All I'm certain of is that an infant cannot possibly consent to the procedure.

As I see it this by these law Governments force European culture upon the child
Click to expand...

But in fact it does not do any such thing. Once the child is old enough to decide for himself whether or not he wants to be a part of his parents culture, then he may be circumcised.
 
MadLib said:
I l
But in fact it does not do any such thing. Once the child is old enough to decide for himself whether or not he wants to be a part of his parents culture, then he may be circumcised.
Click to expand...

But that wont help a Haredi Jew who you've now ruined his party with the Messiah because he is Karet

Moreover, when the law distincts between piercing an ear and circumsizion it shows its not about human rights of infants but forcing the majority's culture on the minority
 
Last edited:
shanners said:
Perhaps I misunderstood it when I saw "A Torah Perspective" in the title?
Click to expand...

I dont see any reference to that being deducted from the Torah. Moreover, not being circumsized is according to the talmud just as bad as breaking one of the ten comandments
 
Last edited:
ido_ said:
I dont see any reference to that being deducted from the Torah. Moreover, not being circumsized is according to the talmud just as bad as breaking one of the ten comandments
Click to expand...

At any rate, this practice should stop:

"…In January 2014, the New York City (NYC) Department of Health and Mental Hygiene received a report of a new case of HSV-1 infection in a newborn male infant following direct orogenital suction. To date, a total of 14 laboratory-confirmed cases of HSV-infection attributable to direct orogenital suction have been reported to the Health Department since 2000. Two of these infants died, and at least two others suffered brain damage.…"


New Case Of Infant Herpes Transmitted By Metzitzah B'Peh - FailedMessiah.com
 
better to do it when they are a baby who wont remember the procedure as a preventative measure then them being an adult and not really having a choice to go through it because of medical complications with the foreskin imho and to illustrate this point i shall share with you my experience of having it done as an adult

I had a problem through my teen years in which sex was physically painful because of a complication with the piece of skin being discussed in this thread until i got circumcised funnily enough after the procedure i found out that percocete and vicodin don't work on me and it wasn't the best time to find out i think you agree lol it was probably one the the most painful experiences in my life and it wasn't the daily life for the month it took to heal i mean i went back on duty four days after the procedure it was the nocturnal emissions that would cripple me in pain, not allowing me to sleep, having no way to stop the process and at one point tearing a quarter of the stitches out(damn near passed out from that one) and that is why if i have male children I'm going to have them circumcised as a preventative measure for not having to go through what i went through
 
Rainman05 said:
Israel attacks Council of Europe move to restrict male circumcision | Reuters





Well first off, the council of Europe doesn't make laws. this is just a resolution. It's a recommendation basically.
I personally agree, I think the whole male circumcision thing is barbaric at best. A savage practice that we can dispense from now, in this day and age.

I'm not against having men circumcised if they want to when they're past 18 years old and legally adults but not before they can speak and understand what is happening to them.

The funny thing is israels' reaction the suggestion. I mean talk about overreaction. This law won't affect israel. And I know what you're thinking, it will affect jews in Europe. But jews in europe that are not israelis are not Israels' duty to represent. They have their own representatives.
And the religious argument doesn't matter here. It doesn't matter if your religion says this is important or not, religion does not play a hand in matters of governance. You obey the laws of the land first and you observe your religious practices in religious locations.
If you make a religion that demands that you kill someone every solstice, you will go to prison for murder. Now I'm not comparing circumcision with murder, I'm just pointing out that the law of the land is what counts and religious rituals that are against the law are religious rituals that must be abandoned. But this isn't the case yet with circumcision, as I said, this is just a resolution, not a law. The council can't make laws.
Click to expand...

How is it 'racist?'

Being Jewish is a religion. It's not a race.
 
BlackAsCoal said:
How is it 'racist?'

Being Jewish is a religion. It's not a race.
Click to expand...

You can be a jew without being religiously jewish, hence, it's not just a religion. It's why you have all those rules in judaism like that in order to be a jew, your mom has to be jewish and that's not a religious thing, it's an ethnic thing.

So say, if you are a polish catholic, if you stop being catholic, you're still polish. If you're a jew, even if you stop practicing judaism, by jewish standards, you're still jewish.
 
ido_ said:
But that wont help a Haredi Jew who you've now ruined his party with the Messiah because he is Karet

Moreover, when the law distincts between piercing an ear and circumsizion it shows its not about human rights of infants but forcing the majority's culture on the minority
Click to expand...

1. The messiah already came and went. Get over it.

2. They banned circumcission that is not medically required. Which is most circumcision. What circumcision is, is in fact, forcing uneccesary and useless surgery on a child to satisfy some tribal ritual from a long gone era. It's primitive and stupid.

It's the same thing as not allowing tattoos on infants. You don't permit infants to be tattooed, why permit them to suffer through circumcision. It's protecting children's rights. If you hate children, you hate this law. If you want what is best for children, you start by not mutilating them.

You don't get to mutilate a child for the purpose of religious doctrine. We live by mans' laws not gods' law. Saying "god told me to do it" won't save you from prison if you do a crime, and saying that won't give you permission to circumcise an infant.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom