Religious circumcision of kids a crime - German court

page: 2
24
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by dorkfish87
 


The penis and vagina should be equally protected. Period.




posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by dorkfish87
By this standard you can't pierce your kids ears because it hurts.

Invalid argument #1. Ear piercings aren't a permanent modification. Circumcision is. Ear piercings will heal over eventually if earrings are left out of the puncture, thus if the child grows up and does not want them, they will heal in time. A mutilated penis will not.

Don't raise them in the wrong religion, could cause them harm.

Invalid argument #2. Not a permanent physical modification. People can grow up and change their mind and get rid of and/or develop new spiritual beliefs, but something like a mutilated penis cannot be changed.

According to Judaic doctrine you can't go to heaven without this happening. So you explain to these little boys why they won't be in heaven when they die.

Invalid argument #3. That's not the governments problem. If people want to believe in an antiquated 2,000+ year old religion, then by all means they have the right to do so, but they still have to obey the law. That's like a Muslim saying "But if I want to go to heaven I must kill non-believers, so could you please bend the law for my religion? WHY NOT?!? NOW I'M NOT GOING TO GET INTO HEAVEN AND IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT!!!"
edit on 27-6-2012 by Xaphan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 11:58 AM
link   
GOOD. Go, Germany.


This is a good wake up-message for those trying to defend male circumcision by saying "It's not the same as female circumcision", or, "It's more hygienic that way", and are not only completely missing the whole point but are also hippocrites in that they are basically saying that boys, on the contrary to girls, are fully allowed to abuse.

Speaking of it, I remember an episode from, was it E.R. or Chicago Hope or the like, where a couple had opposite opinions on whether their newly born son would be circumcised or not; The mother did want him to be circumcised, while the Father was against it.
To make a long story short, the Mother went ahead and had it done anyways, while the nurse doing it, supported her saying "It looks better", with a smile.
The worst thing was, that the episode didn't even bring up the most important aspect of circumcision, as being an actual abuse of a child, regardless of gender, but seemed to have thought that it was rather just a matter of differring opinions between parents that has to be discussed before doing it, and nothing more.

I was so disgusted by the episode and the blunt double moral, that I just could not bring myself to ever watch the series again.
Which was really a shame as I was a fan of watching hospital series.



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nightchild
GOOD. Go, Germany.


This is a good wake up-message for those trying to defend male circumcision by saying "It's not the same as female circumcision", or, "It's more hygienic that way", and are not only completely missing the whole point but are also hippocrites in that they are basically saying that boys, on the contrary to girls, are fully allowed to abuse.

Speaking of it, I remember an episode from, was it E.R. or Chicago Hope or the like, where a couple had opposite opinions on whether their newly born son would be circumcised or not; The mother did want him to be circumcised, while the Father was against it.
To make a long story short, the Mother went ahead and had it done anyways, while the nurse doing it, supported her saying "It looks better", with a smile.
The worst thing was, that the episode didn't even bring up the most important aspect of circumcision, as being an actual abuse of a child, regardless of gender, but seemed to have thought that it was rather just a matter of differring opinions between parents that has to be discussed before doing it, and nothing more.

I was so disgusted by the episode and the blunt double moral, that I just could not bring myself to ever watch the series again.
Which was really a shame as I was a fan of watching hospital series.


Those kinda crap is what media put into people's head, sooner or later you will have people saying, that uncircumsized penis is nasty...

i prefer Nature over "just cause its nasty"
edit on 6/27/2012 by luciddream because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   
This reminds me something...

During my high school exchange year in the Upper Midwest, I was on the wrestling team at my high school. One day in the showers one guy looked very confused, and asked me what was up with my penis. Long story short: This circumcised fella thought that he was uncircumcised because he assumed that circumcision removed the skin from the entire penis (effectively flaying it). He thought everyone was born as circumcised as him.

What made me sad was not (solely) the fact that he happened to be circumcised, but instead I was appalled at the complete lack of education regarding this matter in the US. Even anatomical(!) text books show circumcised penises as the norm.



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 12:37 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by dorkfish87
 


No, this is the government telling you that mutilating your child is wrong. As they very well should.



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by luciddream
This is like the 3rd post i seen with same topic..

This was my reply..



Girls are influenced by peers and whatnot without knowing the reason. They just assume, "eww uncircumcised is nasty" just cause her friend told her that.



Because its utterly inconceivable that a girl/woman could form her own opinion on how she feels about uncircumcised penis's, Without any influence from the outside world

I can tell you that im personally not a fan of uncircumcised but i support this courts decision to stop them performing circumcision unless the male consents. I absolutely believe that men and women should have rights over their own bodies.



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by dorkfish87
 





Female circumcision causes a hell of a lot more permanent suffering tho the girl than male circumcision does.


That depends. Type Ia of female circumcision does not cause any more suffering than male circumcision does. This type should have the same legal standing as male circumcision.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by luciddream
This is like the 3rd post i seen with same topic..

This was my reply..



Girls are influenced by peers and whatnot without knowing the reason. They just assume, "eww uncircumcised is nasty" just cause her friend told her that.



Because its utterly inconceivable that a girl/woman could form her own opinion on how she feels about uncircumcised penis's, Without any influence from the outside world

I can tell you that im personally not a fan of uncircumcised but i support this courts decision to stop them performing circumcision unless the male consents. I absolutely believe that men and women should have rights over their own bodies.


So you're not a fan of your partner having 100% of the feeling in his penis? How considerate of you.
Again, "sanitary reasons" are just excuses used by certain people to push the practice. These days we have access to clean water and products if you have a serious problem lol.

Would you trim your clitoris/labia if your boyfriend says it looks good?



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by HamrHeed

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by luciddream
This is like the 3rd post i seen with same topic..

This was my reply..



Girls are influenced by peers and whatnot without knowing the reason. They just assume, "eww uncircumcised is nasty" just cause her friend told her that.



Because its utterly inconceivable that a girl/woman could form her own opinion on how she feels about uncircumcised penis's, Without any influence from the outside world

I can tell you that im personally not a fan of uncircumcised but i support this courts decision to stop them performing circumcision unless the male consents. I absolutely believe that men and women should have rights over their own bodies.


So you're not a fan of your partner having 100% of the feeling in his penis? How considerate of you.
Again, "sanitary reasons" are just excuses used by certain people to push the practice. These days we have access to clean water and products if you have a serious problem lol.

Would you trim your clitoris/labia if your boyfriend says it looks good?



Thats not what i said, please dont twist my words its trollish. I said, im not a fan of uncircumcised penis's (that is a personal opinion) however, I think both men and women should have full control over their own bodies so i support this courts decision. I would never ask someone to get circumcised just for me (why should they?)

No i wouldn't mutilate my own genitals for anyone. I wouldn't expect anyone to mutilate theirs for me. There is nothing wrong with me saying i have a personal dislike for foreskin. Would you support a return to the 70's when a woman's bush was all the rage? After all, it is natural is it not?



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 03:38 PM
link   
Now you're twisting my words and comparing mutilation to removing body hair. How trollish of you and hypocritical.
Goodbye



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by HamrHeed
Now you're twisting my words and comparing mutilation to removing body hair. How trollish of you and hypocritical.
Goodbye


Im not twisting your words, your supporting your argument with the idea that foreskin is natural - and your right. Now im asking you if you could deal with a woman keeping her bush and not being put off by it, after all, pubic hair is natural is it not?

But if your not mature enough to discuss idea's...



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc

Originally posted by HamrHeed
Now you're twisting my words and comparing mutilation to removing body hair. How trollish of you and hypocritical.
Goodbye


Im not twisting your words, your supporting your argument with the idea that foreskin is natural - and your right. Now im asking you if you could deal with a woman keeping her bush and not being put off by it, after all, pubic hair is natural is it not?

But if your not mature enough to discuss idea's...


I made a thread about it and it was closed. I can discuss it but theres a heavy bias so whats the point?
People have made up their minds and are sticking to what the mainstream told them.

Lessons
1) males are dirty and can't wash
2) babies don't feel it
3) people love to stare at cocks
4) if it doesn't look pretty, cut it up



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by HamrHeed

Lessons
1) males are dirty and can't wash
2) babies don't feel it
3) people love to stare at cocks
4) if it doesn't look pretty, cut it up



I don't think the majority of people in this thread have implied such things, quite the opposite actually. In my experience on these boards ATS members seem to be well against circumcision for both men and women.



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 04:08 PM
link   
I tend to wonder about a religion that demands you mutilate your infant or yourself to be worthy of heaven. Weird.

On a non religious note.. there is NO reason to snip. Circumcision does NOT have this freakish health benefit that the medical community in the US claims. If a mother washes her infant male child as she should.. there isnt a problem with an uncircumcised penis. IMO its mutilation of a child and Drs KNOW this. They KNOW there is no benefit other than religious reasons or social conformity. Parents are at fault for not informing themselves of this heinous practice and demanding it not be done. We wont even get into the jewish sucking the blood of an infants penis after the circumcision.... sickening practices. Dont tell me there isnt trauma to the infant. Also, that skin t hey remove has millions of nerve endings that are pleasurable if intact. Why remove it?? Give that a thought.



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 05:20 PM
link   
Wow, very interesting thread. The amount of hostility about circumcision is very overwhelming.

My first exposure to someone being hostile (and by hostile I mean acting almost violently about it) was my son-in-law posting on facebook.

He was very upset because my oldest daughter (his sister-in-law) had decided to have her newborn son circumcised .

I had never known that there was such a large amount of people that felt this way. I was circumcised when I was a baby. My first wife and I had my oldest son circumcised. My 2nd wife and I had our son circumcised. All as newborns.

My late father was circumcised. His brother was circumcised. Both my grandfathers were circumcised.

All my male cousins were circumcised.

None of us are Jewish, and none of us had it done due to religious beliefs.

Back when I was born in the early 60's, it was a common belief that boys should be circumcised, and even promoted by the child care doctors back then.
It was still that way when I had my kids.

I understand that now it's not felt that way or even promoted by doctors anymore.

I don't feel mutilated. I just asked one of my sons if he felt mutilated and he looked at me like I had 2 heads.

It has never once interfered with my sex life (good lord no, hehehehe).

So while I understand many of you feel very deeply about this, please do not think of me as having been "mutilated". I don't feel that way.

As a mater of fact, I'm glad I don't have this extra piece of flabby skin in the way when I go to take a wiz or when I shower.

But that's just how I feel. I would never force anyone to have their child circumcised.

So for thousands of years, people have been having their sons circumcised. And for those thousands of years it was okay.
But now, anyone who was circumcised has been "mutilated", their parents are now "child abusers" (even though for how long doctors promoted this regardless of you religious preference or beliefs? Source), and now it's "Go Nanny State Government!" suddenly?

I would think you all would be a bit more concerned about things like:

10 year old girls who are only 32 pounds, that are locked in closets.
Children who are beaten to death, drowned, burned, etc.



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


This is one of my favourite Htichens (god rest his soul) moments and I am of the opinion that this video and the debate should be discussed in the classrooms.




posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 06:20 PM
link   
go germany. at LAST!! a justice system that works in favour of the defenceless child. i wish all countries would do it. let the males keep their foreskins and when they're old enough they can decide for themselves.

personally i prefer circumcised as well. from a female standpoint (sorry lads it just happens to be true), they taste and smell nicer. and lets face it, as adults i'm sure a few of you would volunteer for circumcision if you thought it would get your more oral action!



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Advantage
Also, that skin t hey remove has millions of nerve endings that are pleasurable if intact. Why remove it?? Give that a thought.

I came up with my own theory for this once: They probably do it because wanking is less pleasurable for circumcised people. We all know how the Abrahamic religions abhor wanking, so it only makes sense that they would use this as a deterrent.





new topics
top topics
 
24
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join