Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2nd Level German Court: Circumcision illegal

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 2nd Level German Court: Circumcision illegal

    German court rules circumcision is 'bodily harm'



    A court in Germany has ruled that circumcising young boys for religious reasons amounts to bodily harm.

    In a decision that has caused outrage among Jewish and Muslim groups, the court said that a child's right to physical integrity trumps religious and parental rights.

    The case involved a doctor who carried out a circumcision on a four year-old that led to medical complications.

    Thousands of Muslim and Jewish boys are circumcised in Germany every year.

    Although male circumcision - unlike female circumcision - is not illegal in Germany, the court's judgement said the "fundamental right of the child to bodily integrity outweighed the fundamental rights of the parents".

    Circumcision, it decided, contravenes "interests of the child to decide later in life on his religious beliefs".

    'Protect religious freedom'

    The doctor involved in the case was acquitted and the ruling is not binding, but correspondents say it sets a precedent that would be taken into account by other German courts.

    The president of Germany's Central Council of Jews, Dieter Graumann, called it "an unprecedented and dramatic intervention in the right of religious communities to self-determination".

    He urged the country's parliament to clarify the legal situation "to protect religious freedom against attacks".

    Male circumcision is part of the ancient religious rituals of both the Jewish and Muslim faiths, as well as the traditions of some tribal groups.

    In some countries, such as the United States, it is also not uncommon for parents to request that young boys are circumcised for health reasons.

    The BBC's Stephen Evans in Germany says it is unclear what the next legal step will be, but this issue is a moral and political minefield.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18604664

    The ruling followed a lengthy legal battle, sparked when a Muslim couple decided to have their son circumcised, specifically for religious reasons, by a Muslim doctor in Cologne. The doctor, identified only as Dr K, carried out the circumcision on the four-year old boy in November 2010, before giving the wound four stitches. The same evening, he visited the family at home to check up on the boy. When the boy began bleeding again two days later, his parents took him to the casualty department of Cologne's University hospital. The hospital contacted the police, who then launched an investigation. The doctor was charged with bodily harm, and the case was taken to court.

    While the court acquitted Dr. K on the grounds that he had not broken any law, it concluded that circumcision of minors for religious reasons should be outlawed, and that neither parental consent nor religious freedom justified the procedure. It ruled that in future doctors who carried out circumcisions should be punished.

    The court weighed up three articles from the basic law: the rights of parents, the freedom of religious practice and the right of the child to physical integrity, before coming to the conclusion that the procedure was not in the interests of the child.

    It rejected the defence that circumcision is considered hygienic in many cultures, one of the main reasons it is carried out in the US, Britain and in Germany.

    After much deliberation, it concluded that a circumcision, "even when done properly by a doctor with the permission of the parents, should be considered as bodily harm if it is carried out on a boy unable to give his own consent".

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012...-muslim-jewish


    Some Clarifications & Additions: The Doctor made no medical mistake and was not hold liable in this Case / at 14 every Child is allowed to officially change its Religion which the court views as the Time where it is able to make a Decision regarding cutting off a part of his Junk / Before this Decision the Medical Society could claim there is no legal decision against it (Ex Culpa ~Verbotsirrtum) which it now can't / The Court Decision claims the Hygienic Value of the Procedure is marginal in Northwest Europe

    Due to the legal Dispute the '─rzte Zeitung' is advising against circumsisions which are not medically needed as Doctors may be liable to civil and criminal charges.
    http://www.aerztezeitung.de/news/art...neidungen.html (german)
    They also published an Article regarding the grey Area of Circumsisions a few months ago which caught some Heat from a Muslim Society. http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleto...-11801160.html (german)

    There are two more Instances of Courts above this (Bundesgerichtshof and Bundesverfassungsgericht) which likely wont be called.


    TLDR: (Irreversible) Bodily Harm versus Religious Freedom Which is the better Argument?
    Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal!

  • #2
    You Germans just can't help hating Jews, can you?
    Click here if you're having trouble sleeping.
    "We confess our little faults to persuade people that we have no large ones." - Franšois de La Rochefoucauld

    Comment


    • #3
      Letting the child pick its religion . Parents should be made to rear their children as agnostics and provide them access to different religious views.
      Graffiti in a public toilet
      Do not require skill or wit
      Among the **** we all are poets
      Among the poets we are ****.

      Comment


      • #4
        Circumcision, it decided, contravenes "interests of the child to decide later in life on his religious beliefs".
        Are they retarded? Having a cut penis doesn't force someone to believe in anything.
        "South Africa is a shithole. It used to be a decent place." -Ben Kenobi, sharing his wisdom on world history
        "The electoral college is a disaster for democracy." - Donald J. Trump
        100% WOLF

        Comment


        • #5
          Several Religions forbid/ dont condone Circumcision I recall the Amish forbid it, while Hinduism and Buddhism don't do it.

          Also: The Navajo Nation believes that they are put on the earth the way that they are intended to be. No man would disrupt the spiritual harmony of the family by having circumcision performed on his child.(wiki)
          Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal!

          Comment


          • #6
            "Don't condone" isn't really relevant. It's not like someone is going to be prevented from becoming a Buddhist because they were circumcised. Are the children of German Jews really going to join the Navajo nation? REally?
            "South Africa is a shithole. It used to be a decent place." -Ben Kenobi, sharing his wisdom on world history
            "The electoral college is a disaster for democracy." - Donald J. Trump
            100% WOLF

            Comment


            • #7
              Excellent. ****ing savages.
              The genesis of the "evil Finn" concept- Evil, evil Finland

              Comment


              • #8
                Point is, even if the Child leaves the Religious Group, the Part of his D*** wont grow back.

                http://www.amazon.com/Looking-Lost-B...ion/0380795531
                Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Lorizael View Post
                  You Germans just can't help hating Jews, can you?
                  QFT. Nazis
                  If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
                  :(){ :|:& };:

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    This is awful. Don't they know that circumcision reduces your risk of contracting HIV by 0.5%???
                    <p style="font-size:1024px">HTML is disabled in signatures :( :( :(</p>

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      For something this trivial, they really ought to err on the side of religious liberty. Not that I'd ever do it to my kid--ouch! But it doesn't much matter. Lower AIDS risk vs. ostensibly higher sexual pleasure (which could conceivably make you climax sooner, which isn't exactly desirable) vs. it's part of his body vs. so's his appendix...
                      1011 1100
                      The Cynical Christian

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I read somewhere that the Prime Minister of South Africa just underwent a circumcison in order to encourage other South African men to get circumcisions. Circumcision seems to cut the rate of HIV transmission by 50%.
                        "I say shoot'em all and let God sort it out in the end!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by loinburger View Post
                          This is awful. Don't they know that circumcision reduces your risk of contracting HIV by 0.5%???

                          Studies done in Africa show that the risk reduction is more like 50%.
                          "I say shoot'em all and let God sort it out in the end!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            No tonsillectomies before 14 either... if necessary we can create a religion which excommunicates and forever damns those without tonsils :nazi:
                            "tout comprendre, c'est tout pardonner"

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Dr Strangelove View Post
                              Studies done in Africa show that the risk reduction is more like 50%.

                              If circumcised men start thinking they don't have to worry about HIV, watch that figure fall fast.
                              The genesis of the "evil Finn" concept- Evil, evil Finland

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X