Religious circumcision of kids a crime - German court

page: 3
24
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
The article says the circumcised child was 4-years old. That appears to be a few steps harder than circumcising a newborn child. Maybe there should be an age-limit. Just an observation.


I agree completely 4 years old is too old.

IMO children should be circumcised for cleanliness reasons. Recently, several large studies revealed a 60% decrease in HIV transmission in circumcised males compared to uncircumcised males. This may ultimately influence some changes in recommendations in the near future. www.medicinenet.com... .




posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 09:08 PM
link   
This is one of those subject matters that's just difficult to logically justify; but speaking from a personal standpoint circumcision really isn't as bad as it sounds. I'm actually very happy with the appearance and feeling of mine despite it being "mutilated", and I wouldn't take it back if I was given the choice. People say things like, 'an uncircumcised penis is 1000x more sensitive', and why would we want to throw that away?

Well for one I don't believe a minor loss in sensitivity of the foreskin affects the intensity of an orgasm, and if anything, it hastens the ejaculation; i.e even worse for premature ejaculators. If you want a super-sensitive member that blows after the first pump, alright then.

As for the fact that an infant is being mutilated, yes it sounds terrible & primitive in every sense. Which is why I'm not necessarily opposed to laws banning it either.

^^ Edit: If it's true that a circumcised penis has 60% decrease in HIV transmission, that does change things a bit.
edit on 27-6-2012 by Raelsatu because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 11:03 PM
link   
Out of those whom find circumcision wrong, inhumane, and abusive, I wonder how many of those same individuals are against abortion. Would be interesting to know.



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 11:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Xaphan
 


Mayo clinics view of benefits of circumcision...




Circumcision might have various health benefits, including: Easier hygiene. Circumcision makes it simpler to wash the penis. Washing beneath the foreskin of an uncircumcised penis is generally easy, however. Decreased risk of urinary tract infections. The overall risk of urinary tract infections in males is low, but these infections might be more common in uncircumcised males. Severe infections early in life can lead to kidney problems later on. Prevention of penile problems. Occasionally, the foreskin on an uncircumcised penis can be difficult or impossible to retract (phimosis). This can lead to inflammation of the foreskin or head of the penis. Decreased risk of penile cancer. Although cancer of the penis is rare, it's less common in circumcised men. In addition, cervical cancer is less common in the female sexual partners of circumcised men. Decreased risk of sexually transmitted infections. Circumcised men might have a lower risk of certain sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. Still, safe sexual practices remain essential.


Mayo Clinic



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 11:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by brukernavn
Out of those whom find circumcision wrong, inhumane, and abusive, I wonder how many of those same individuals are against abortion. Would be interesting to know.


What the ...... does that have to do with this? It's not even related!
Good job Germany, hopefully this spreads.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 01:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vardoger

Originally posted by brukernavn
Out of those whom find circumcision wrong, inhumane, and abusive, I wonder how many of those same individuals are against abortion. Would be interesting to know.


What the ...... does that have to do with this? It's not even related!
Good job Germany, hopefully this spreads.


How is another act which some find wrong, inhumane, and abusive NOT related to another act (circumcision), which some find wrong, inhumane, and abusive? Open your mind a bit. The world is not as cut and dry as you think. Try to deny ignorance. Ha det bra.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 01:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by brukernavn
Out of those whom find circumcision wrong, inhumane, and abusive, I wonder how many of those same individuals are against abortion. Would be interesting to know.


Can't see how the 2 have anything to do with each other but I have no issue with abortion and big problems with this if that helps.

I'll keep my skivvy thanks, Ban the archaic practice everywhere, performing cosmetic surgery on a baby for no good reason is barbaric and if it was not for religion "AGAIN" it would have been baned years ago.
If people are going to post about some supposed benefits many of which have alternatives like condoms and basic hygiene perhaps someone could post up stats on the Negatives like baby deaths or erectile problems for comparison.
If I got to puberty & found out Mr winkle didn't work dear lord I would show the snipers how a penis is removed.

As a non Muslim/Jew/? What is the exact purpose of this is it for ID purposes at the pearly gates or during the next war (like the Germans did). I thought all Abrahamic religions forbid mutilating marking the body in any way.
edit on 28-6-2012 by WorkingClassMan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 03:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by WorkingClassMan

Originally posted by brukernavn
Out of those whom find circumcision wrong, inhumane, and abusive, I wonder how many of those same individuals are against abortion. Would be interesting to know.


Can't see how the 2 have anything to do with each other but I have no issue with abortion and big problems with this if that helps.

I'll keep my skivvy thanks, Ban the archaic practice everywhere, performing cosmetic surgery on a baby for no good reason is barbaric and if it was not for religion "AGAIN" it would have been baned years ago.
If people are going to post about some supposed benefits many of which have alternatives like condoms and basic hygiene perhaps someone could post up stats on the Negatives like baby deaths or erectile problems for comparison.
If I got to puberty & found out Mr winkle didn't work dear lord I would show the snipers how a penis is removed.

As a non Muslim/Jew/? What is the exact purpose of this is it for ID purposes at the pearly gates or during the next war (like the Germans did). I thought all Abrahamic religions forbid mutilating marking the body in any way.
edit on 28-6-2012 by WorkingClassMan because: (no reason given)


Again, how do two things that some say are wrong, inhumane, and abusive NOT related??? It does not take a genius to see that some people view BOTH of these things as abhorrent. I only said what I said, for I was interested in seeing whom was against circumcision, yet for the slaughter of innocent human infants. Anybody that cannot see the similarities between the two is obviously deluded.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 03:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by WorkingClassMan

Originally posted by brukernavn
Out of those whom find circumcision wrong, inhumane, and abusive, I wonder how many of those same individuals are against abortion. Would be interesting to know.


Can't see how the 2 have anything to do with each other but I have no issue with abortion and big problems with this if that helps.

I'll keep my skivvy thanks, Ban the archaic practice everywhere, performing cosmetic surgery on a baby for no good reason is barbaric and if it was not for religion "AGAIN" it would have been baned years ago.
If people are going to post about some supposed benefits many of which have alternatives like condoms and basic hygiene perhaps someone could post up stats on the Negatives like baby deaths or erectile problems for comparison.
If I got to puberty & found out Mr winkle didn't work dear lord I would show the snipers how a penis is removed.

As a non Muslim/Jew/? What is the exact purpose of this is it for ID purposes at the pearly gates or during the next war (like the Germans did). I thought all Abrahamic religions forbid mutilating marking the body in any way.
edit on 28-6-2012 by WorkingClassMan because: (no reason given)


Oh, so it is not ok to perform a minor surgical operation on an infants genitals, but it is entirely ok, ethical, and moral to shove a pair of scissors into its brain, suck out the brains with a vacuum and remove the living human being from the uterus before birth. Thanks for your clarification. You are correct. Circumcision is MUCH more barbaric than slaughtering an unborn human.
edit on 6/28/2012 by brukernavn because: Jævla quotes



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 03:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by WorkingClassMan

Originally posted by brukernavn
Out of those whom find circumcision wrong, inhumane, and abusive, I wonder how many of those same individuals are against abortion. Would be interesting to know.


Can't see how the 2 have anything to do with each other but I have no issue with abortion and big problems with this if that helps.

I'll keep my skivvy thanks, Ban the archaic practice everywhere, performing cosmetic surgery on a baby for no good reason is barbaric and if it was not for religion "AGAIN" it would have been baned years ago.
If people are going to post about some supposed benefits many of which have alternatives like condoms and basic hygiene perhaps someone could post up stats on the Negatives like baby deaths or erectile problems for comparison.
If I got to puberty & found out Mr winkle didn't work dear lord I would show the snipers how a penis is removed.

As a non Muslim/Jew/? What is the exact purpose of this is it for ID purposes at the pearly gates or during the next war (like the Germans did). I thought all Abrahamic religions forbid mutilating marking the body in any way.
edit on 28-6-2012 by WorkingClassMan because: (no reason given)


Aside from where it says to not mark the body in remembrance of the dead, can you back up what you have said? I would like to see where it says such. Truly. Ha det bra.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 03:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by brukernavn
Out of those whom find circumcision wrong, inhumane, and abusive, I wonder how many of those same individuals are against abortion. Would be interesting to know.


Abortion is accepted because of the right of the mother to decide what happens in her own body, or because early foetus has no working brain developed yet, so there is no victim anyway. None of these reasons apply to circumcision. So yes, it can be perfectly logical to be against circumcision and pro-abortion.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 07:06 PM
link   
What the heck? Someone deleted my post or something... But anyway, I would agree with this if the german government and people did not have history or persecuting jewish people in general. Come on. A little inappropriate? To outlaw a worldwide staple practice to jewish religion? Doesn't anyone see this as ironic? Jeez...



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by eriktheawful

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.



I agree with you 100% I was circumcised, every boy in my family was as well. We are Catholic, and there are many health benefits that come with being circumcised! I am very glad I am and I do not feel "mutilated".



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Xaphan
 


What are the benefits of circumcision? There is some evidence that circumcision has health benefits, including: A decreased risk of urinary tract infections. A reduced risk of sexually transmitted diseases in men. Protection against penile cancer and a reduced risk of cervical cancer in female sex partners. Prevention of balanitis (inflammation of the glans) and balanoposthitis (inflammation of the glans and foreskin). Prevention of phimosis (the inability to retract the foreskin) and paraphimosis (the inability to return the foreskin to its original location). Circumcision also makes it easier to keep the end of the penis clean. Note: Some studies show that good hygiene can help prevent certain problems with the penis, including infections and swelling, even if the penis is not circumcised. In addition, using a condom during sex will help prevent STDs and other infections. What are the risks of circumcision? Like any surgical procedure, there are risks associated with circumcision. However, this risk is low. Problems associated with circumcision include: Pain Risk of bleeding and infection at the site of the circumcision Irritation of the glans Increased risk of meatitis (inflammation of the opening of the penis) Risk of injury to the penis

Web MD

I am sorry but in my opinion the health benefits out way the risks. I do not think this is mutilation and I do to think it should be done for religous reasons but for health. I grew up Catholic so not Jewish or anything and very happy that I was circumcised.

edit on 6/28/2012 by Djayed because: Edit
edit on 6/28/2012 by Djayed because: Added link
edit on 6/28/2012 by Djayed because: I am a math type of guy



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by brukernavn

Originally posted by WorkingClassMan

Originally posted by brukernavn
Out of those whom find circumcision wrong, inhumane, and abusive, I wonder how many of those same individuals are against abortion. Would be interesting to know.


Can't see how the 2 have anything to do with each other but I have no issue with abortion and big problems with this if that helps.

I'll keep my skivvy thanks, Ban the archaic practice everywhere, performing cosmetic surgery on a baby for no good reason is barbaric and if it was not for religion "AGAIN" it would have been baned years ago.
If people are going to post about some supposed benefits many of which have alternatives like condoms and basic hygiene perhaps someone could post up stats on the Negatives like baby deaths or erectile problems for comparison.
If I got to puberty & found out Mr winkle didn't work dear lord I would show the snipers how a penis is removed.

As a non Muslim/Jew/? What is the exact purpose of this is it for ID purposes at the pearly gates or during the next war (like the Germans did). I thought all Abrahamic religions forbid mutilating marking the body in any way.
edit on 28-6-2012 by WorkingClassMan because: (no reason given)


Oh, so it is not ok to perform a minor surgical operation on an infants genitals, but it is entirely ok, ethical, and moral to shove a pair of scissors into its brain, suck out the brains with a vacuum and remove the living human being from the uterus before birth. Thanks for your clarification. You are correct. Circumcision is MUCH more barbaric than slaughtering an unborn human.
edit on 6/28/2012 by brukernavn because: Jævla quotes


Is it possible to multi quote on this site?

You are correct it is not ok to perform any surgical operation on an unconsenting PERSON not just child without very good reason and I haven't heard of any good reason yet, and no not understanding what soap & water are for is not a good reason.
Why don't we cut out their tonsils while we are there to avoid future potential medical problems.
I know Chopper looked cool without ears how about we hack them off while we are at it for aesthetic purposes, thank god I'm not your child.
Once again you are correct it is much more barbaric to take kicking screaming pain feeling child who will have to live a life with the trauma, and mutilate his penis potentialy cause him life long problems.
Would you mind if my friends and I come round hold you down and mutilate your genitals and the only say you have in it is a scream as I cut.
Nice try with the shock & aw tactics but do you do understand that abortions happen at different stages and is a very technical debate which involves more than just a fetus there all kinds of things involved like I don't know the woman it's growing inside, does a mans penis effect anyone but the man.

So you think taking away a persons rights holding them down and brutally mutilating their genitals while they scream & you and your friends celebrate cheering on the torture is less barbaric than taking a pill a bleeding out some cells for a few days like a regular period.
Yeah gold star for you, see I can play the game to.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xaphan


I usually refrain from posting controversial articles such as this, but this one is an exception. I for one am glad to see this. Circumcising a child should be considered mutilation. A baby isn't old enough to make the decision as to whether he wants a piece of his penis clipped off or not.


Are you Insane?

I'm Not Jewish or Muslim but I was circumcised as a child for health reasons. Back in '68 doctors were doing this routinely for health and sanitary reasons. It was recommended to parents for these reasons. It is still being done today for these reasons.

I guess German doctors just aren't too good with health issues. By German doctors not being able to perform this for health reasons they endanger the child's life. The risk may be small but has great potential to grow into a huge problem.
edit on 28-6-2012 by JohnPhoenix because: sp



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by brukernavn

Originally posted by WorkingClassMan

Originally posted by brukernavn
Out of those whom find circumcision wrong, inhumane, and abusive, I wonder how many of those same individuals are against abortion. Would be interesting to know.


Can't see how the 2 have anything to do with each other but I have no issue with abortion and big problems with this if that helps.

I'll keep my skivvy thanks, Ban the archaic practice everywhere, performing cosmetic surgery on a baby for no good reason is barbaric and if it was not for religion "AGAIN" it would have been baned years ago.
If people are going to post about some supposed benefits many of which have alternatives like condoms and basic hygiene perhaps someone could post up stats on the Negatives like baby deaths or erectile problems for comparison.
If I got to puberty & found out Mr winkle didn't work dear lord I would show the snipers how a penis is removed.

As a non Muslim/Jew/? What is the exact purpose of this is it for ID purposes at the pearly gates or during the next war (like the Germans did). I thought all Abrahamic religions forbid mutilating marking the body in any way.
edit on 28-6-2012 by WorkingClassMan because: (no reason given)


Aside from where it says to not mark the body in remembrance of the dead, can you back up what you have said? I would like to see where it says such. Truly. Ha det bra.


I'm going to need the Australian translation for that one.
Are you saying that the Koran & Torah only state that one should not mark the body in remembrance of the dead but tattoos and whatever else is ok?
This is Internet so I will give you the benefit of the doubt but your post looks very antagonistic for some reason so some clarification of your attitude is in order.
I know I speak Ozzy & it can be difficult to interpret at times but let me try and break it down as best I can.
I started with this "As a non Muslim/Jew/?" indicating I'm not one so probably don't fully understand the internal workings of the religions.
Then I asked a question "What is the exact purpose of this" people ask questions when they don't have the answer and are seeking understanding & info so to make informed decisions.
What exactly do you want me to back up I pointed out the question and used the term "I thought" which here does not indicate stating facts that one wants to back up, it indicates in conjunction with the question asked someone seeking info from those who may have the answers. If you want to know where the assumption came from, it was from my Muslim friends who told me they don't get tats cause it was against Islam to mark the body god gave them.
Unless you want want me to back up that Germans used checking guys penis to identify Jews in which case I have no links but I can assure you 100% it happened, if you are referring to comment about ID at heavens gate well that was just a joke of a guess as to why god would require part of his creation be hacked off in order to gain entry on conclusion I could draw was for ID.
This "Ha det bra" might as well be written in Hebrew or Arabic cause I have no bloody idea what you are on about, please explain.

Like I said this is Internet so I'm giving your attitude the benefit of doubt but you started making statements like you knew what you were talking about yet failed to answer a genuine question even on the most basic level which leads me to doubt my benefit of the doubt. nom sayen



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix

Originally posted by Xaphan


I usually refrain from posting controversial articles such as this, but this one is an exception. I for one am glad to see this. Circumcising a child should be considered mutilation. A baby isn't old enough to make the decision as to whether he wants a piece of his penis clipped off or not.


Are you Insane?

I'm Not Jewish or Muslim but I was circumcised as a child for health reasons. Back in '68 doctors were doing this routinely for health and sanitary reasons. It was recommended to parents for these reasons. It is still being done today for these reasons.

I guess German doctors just aren't too good with health issues. By German doctors not being able to perform this for health reasons they endanger the child's life. The risk may be small but has great potential to grow into a huge problem.
edit on 28-6-2012 by JohnPhoenix because: sp


A risk to reduce another risk is a risky game they are playing, I don't have all the stats or pretend to know the answer but that would be a numbers game and if the deck isn't heavily stacked in favour of 1 risk out weighing the other risk then there is no point taking the risk with your child's penis/future/life IMO.



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 05:14 AM
link   
About time someone took the reigns on this blatant child abuse done in the name of some invisible man in the sky. Once again the Germans show the way to the rest of the world.

Further edification



'Religion is like your gentiles: it should be kept in your pants and not forced down your child's throat.'



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 06:01 AM
link   
reply to post by JohnPhoenix
 


Then why is it that these health issues are not an issue in places where they dont mutilate their children? Like Finland for example. This health argument is nothing but pure bs. and the only valid reason to cut a child is if there is a medical situation that requires it.





new topics
top topics
 
24
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join