For it's handed a victory to the secularists and medicos who, like these in Norway, class male circumcision as child abuse and want it outlawed.
Admittedly, it's not only brit milah that's targeted, but the fact that Muslim male circumcision seems to be driving this assault on ancient custom is hardly comforting. Nor is the fact that male circumcision is lumped together with a truly barbaric and reprehensible practice, female genital mutilation, which migrants from benighted countries have brought to Europe, and which does deserve a zero-tolerance policy.
As Rabbi Pinchas Goldschmidt, president of the European Conference of Rabbis, recently declared regarding Sweden's proposed ban:
"It betrays a dangerous ignorance of what is involved in the practice of milah as compared with the abhorrent practice of female genital mutilation."The Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) reports:
'A resolution that calls male ritual circumcision a “violation of the physical integrity of children” was passed overwhelmingly by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.
The council, a pan-European intergovernmental organization, debated and passed the resolution on Tuesday based on a report by the Committee on Social Affairs, Health and Sustainable Development led by German rapporteur Marlene Rupperecht. The resolution passed by a vote of 78 in favor and 13 against, with 15 abstentions.
The resolution calls on states to “clearly define the medical, sanitary and other conditions to be ensured for practices such as the non-medically justified circumcision of young boys.”
It also calls on member states to “initiate a public debate, including intercultural and interreligious dialogue, aimed at reaching a large consensus on the rights of children to protection against violations of their physical integrity according to human rights standards” and to “adopt specific legal provisions to ensure that certain operations and practices will not be carried out before a child is old enough to be consulted.”
Practices covered by the resolution include female genital mutilation, the circumcision of young boys for religious reasons, early childhood medical interventions in the case of intersexual children, corporal punishment, and the submission to or coercion of children into piercings, tattoos or plastic surgery.
Large majorities rejected five amendments that sought to remove or alter references to the circumcision of boys. An amendment that removed a reference to the “religious rights of parents and families” was supported by a large majority of members.
“Although the adoption of this report is non-binding and does not represent any direct threat to milah, we are troubled at the readiness of the Parliamentary Assembly to dismiss the points made during the debate about religious freedom,” the Milah UK organization told JTA. [Emphasis added here and above]
The ritual circumcision of boys younger than 18 has come under attack increasingly in Scandinavia and German-speaking European countries both by left-wing secularists and right-wingers who fear the influence of immigration from Muslim countries.'
The emotional response to being touched, let alone cut; the uninformed reaction to circumcision; the desire to protect the baby and then...
Add this to the mix and the groundwork is being laid for a blanket ban with the resultant persecution.
What a nasty case!Delete
I would not be surprised if muslims are exempted from such laws, having read in mosaic magazine a while back on kosher slaughter being banned (with plans in the works to also ban the importing of kosher meat) yet halal slaughter being permitted.ReplyDelete
Very little surprises me about Eurabia anymore.Delete
Of course if the same children were instead to be snuffed out whilst still in the womb that would be fine.ReplyDelete
Scientific research shows that circumcision removes over 20,000 highly erogenous nerve endings and, on average, over 15 square inches of skin from the adult penis. Obviously it doesn't prevent sexual pleasure, but it does reduce it. I was circumcised as a baby, and now that I know what I'm missing, I'm not happy at all. The rights of the baby to have his full sexual faculties are the key here.ReplyDelete
I forgot - just to add, I do not oppose circumcision, as long as it is with the full consent of the person who owns the penis. In the 21st century, with modern notions of human rights, I think this is how it has to be. If this means updating some religious rituals to bring them in line with the rights of the child, then it should be done; there's no anti-Semitism here so if this is done then the fuss will all go away.ReplyDelete
Here is what the latest peer reviewed medical literature has to say:ReplyDelete
Does Male Circumcision Affect Sexual Function, Sen... [J Sex Med. 2013]
Those studies reported a total of 40,473 men, including 19,542 uncircumcised and 20,931 circumcised.
Rated by the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network grading system, 2 were 1++ (high quality randomized controlled trials) and 34 were case-control or cohort studies (11 high quality: 2++; 10 well-conducted: 2+; 13 low quality: 2-).
The 1++, 2++, and 2+ studies uniformly found that circumcision had no overall adverse effect on penile sensitivity, sexual arousal, sexual sensation, erectile function, premature ejaculation, ejaculatory latency, orgasm difficulties, sexual satisfaction, pleasure, or pain during penetration.
Support for these conclusions was provided by a meta-analysis.
Impairment in one or more parameters was reported in 10 of the 13 studies rated as 2-. These lower-quality studies contained flaws in study design (11), selection of cases and/or controls (5), statistical analysis (4), and/or data interpretation (6); five had multiple problems.
Conclusion: The highest-quality studies suggest that medical male circumcision has no adverse effect on sexual function, sensitivity, sexual sensation, or satisfaction. Morris BJ and Krieger JN. Does male circumcision affect sexual function, sensitivity, or satisfaction?-A systematic review. J Sex Med