Should circumcision be banned?

Please treat other members in a friendly and respectful manner: Our Community Guidelines.

  • Religious groups have condemned a bill in Iceland's parliament that would ban circumcision for non-medical reasons.

    The draft law would impose a six-year prison term on anyone guilty of "removing part or all of the [child's] sexual organs", arguing the practice violates the child's rights.

    The country is thought to have roughly 250 Jewish citizens and around 1,500 Muslim citizens.

    I partially heard a heated debate on LBC this evening on this subject as I was coming home in the car and this subject was also discussed on Newsnight tonight. Two commentators were brought on, both Jews, one of them a GP and a representative of a secularist society and the other the president of the British Board of Jews.


    It goes without saying that the representative from the Jewish board was supportive of circumcision. He said it was a fundamental part of his Jewish identity and he believed that if his son was not snipped, he would've felt left out amongst other Jewish children and would've looked different to them. Note: both of these people are from 21st century Britain...


    The Jewish GP had a totally different view though, he believed that parents should not introduction their children with religoius identity and especially should not mutilate them. He specifically called it a "branding" exercise, is he right? He said that if Jewish boys wanted to be circumcised, then they should be given that as an option from aged 16 onwards, not get snipped within eight days of being born, as laid out by Jewish law.


    Should we follow Finland and ban this legal mutilation and assault of children? You can tell the way I phrased that what my opinion is on this!

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • I agree. It would also be good if we could ban 'entry' into any religion until the age of 18, and let individuals make their own decisions after having the most common religions explained to them, if they are interested.


    Once you are 'given' a religion by your parents it's with you for life, with very few exceptions. Leaving certain 'religions' can be very dangerous for the individual. However, we don't know if 'refusing' those same religions would be as dangerous, or less so.

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • Of all the crap that people have to address in this increasingly weird, stupid or manic world, this one is surely bottom of society's to-do list.


    The health argument is trivial, divided and inconsequential.


    http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/circumcision-in-boys/


    As for the rights of the child, gimme a break. The kid is not even 5!


    How about the rights of a religion/race that just wanted to mind their own business, pay their own way, not lean on a government handout, not seek to change the values and beliefs of their host country , not multiply like rabbits, and yet had 8 million of their members exterminated by the (future) ruling body of the EU?


    Circumcision is a mainstream Jewish practice, not just for ultra-Orthodox Jews. Gentiles should have better things than this to worry about and should mind their own business. Circumcision is symbolic of a Jewish identity that reflects a close-knit Jewish family life, with a low-to-zero incidence of mental ill-health and acts of terrorism. The goys should be so lucky!


    That all said, the ultra-orthodox Jews, who parade around Stamford Hill, Golders Green and such places, do look weird (like black-clad bearded Morris dancers) and their preoccupation with the finer or nuttier points of Jewish religious traditions and customs strike me as freakishly oppressive. But I don't need to look at them or have them over for a lemon tea and strictly-kosher cheesecake. I would be happy to use them as my accountant or financial adviser.


    I know that some young people in these ultra-orthodox Jewish families are almost prisoners (or brainwashed) to adhere to such "family values" and it can end up being a life sentence of non-assimilation for a naive or easily-intimidated young man. I think mainstream society could at least help here by legally banning faith schools. Now that's a topic worth debating!

  • "I think mainstream society could at least help here by legally banning faith schools. Now that's a topic worth debating!"


    I agree. Faith schools encourage a 'them and us' attitude. All schools in the UK should be secular, and there should be no exemptions to the law, for any religion. The law should treat all equally.

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • Another ridiculous, ancient practice that will be allowed to continue as the snowflake generation must not upset minorities, majorities however ...........

    What has the continuation of a ridiculous ancient practice got to do with the snowflake generation upsetting minorities? And what does the caveat "majorities however ....." actually mean?


    I'm all for Smartphone brevity if ........

  • I agree. It would also be good if we could ban 'entry' into any religion until the age of 18, and let individuals make their own decisions after having the most common religions explained to them, if they are interested.


    Once you are 'given' a religion by your parents it's with you for life, with very few exceptions. Leaving certain 'religions' can be very dangerous for the individual. However, we don't know if 'refusing' those same religions would be as dangerous, or less so.

    The religions would fight that tooth and nail, but I fully agree. Once the introduction is done from a early age, its very difficult for a individual to break out of that mould.


    When you say we don't the effect of refusing religions, what do you mean? Do you mean that the individual might wander into something more extreme, or perhaps there would be such a backlash from the billions of people who are religious that this would make the world unstable and dangerous for everyone?


    "I think mainstream society could at least help here by legally banning faith schools. Now that's a topic worth debating!"


    I agree. Faith schools encourage a 'them and us' attitude. All schools in the UK should be secular, and there should be no exemptions to the law, for any religion. The law should treat all equally.

    I agree, but can you imagine any faith school including the CoE and Catholic ones agreeing to this?

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • As for the rights of the child, gimme a break. The kid is not even 5!

    Why you pour cold water on the rights of a small child? Why does being a small child deny them the right not be mutilated, in your opinion?


    How about the rights of a religion/race that just wanted to mind their own business, pay their own way, not lean on a government handout, not seek to change the values and beliefs of their host country , not multiply like rabbits, and yet had 8 million of their members exterminated by the (future) ruling body of the EU?


    Circumcision is a mainstream Jewish practice, not just for ultra-Orthodox Jews. Gentiles should have better things than this to worry about and should mind their own business. Circumcision is symbolic of a Jewish identity that reflects a close-knit Jewish family life, with a low-to-zero incidence of mental ill-health and acts of terrorism. The goys should be so lucky!

    This is the problem. To give everone the same rights, means taking away the rights of family members to choose a religion for their children. Millions would disagree with this in the UK and billions worldwide. Does the State have the right to order, by law, that a parent cannot bring up their kids as they wish?


    That all said, the ultra-orthodox Jews, who parade around Stamford Hill, Golders Green and such places, do look weird (like black-clad bearded Morris dancers) and their preoccupation with the finer or nuttier points of Jewish religious traditions and customs strike me as freakishly oppressive. But I don't need to look at them or have them over for a lemon tea and strictly-kosher cheesecake. I would be happy to use them as my accountant or financial adviser.

    They look like an alien race, the same as the Muslims and the fully veiled women and it gets worse.


    Many people are not aware, although it has been mentioned in the nationwide media, they not only does this community have its own police force, but ambulance service too, based on Jewish doctrine.


    I know that some young people in these ultra-orthodox Jewish families are almost prisoners (or brainwashed) to adhere to such "family values" and it can end up being a life sentence of non-assimilation for a naive or easily-intimidated young man. I think mainstream society could at least help here by legally banning faith schools. Now that's a topic worth debating!

    I agree and we are, here.


    I'll probably move this thread into the central thread covering religion and race soon.


    As for the brainwashing, Fidget's idea seems sensible to mean. Anyone can choose a religion at 18, but no indoctrination by families until then.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • As for the brainwashing, Fidget's idea seems sensible to mean. Anyone can choose a religion at 18, but no indoctrination by families until then.

    This is my take on it as well. The religions should change circumcision to be as a passage to adulthood made at that time when the "recipient" can make that decision for themselves. Mutilating a newborn is just barbaric. Glad to say nobody mutilated me.

    History is much like an Endless Waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever.

    4312-gwban-gif

    If my post is in this colour  it is moderation. Take note.

  • Can you think of any other situation where a baby boy would be allowed to be touched in this way?


    At the very least, the offender would be treated as a peado and as someone who carried out a serious assault, yet somehow this behaviour is acceptable because God says it is.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • Can you think of any other situation where a baby boy would be allowed to be touched in this way?


    At the very least, the offender would be treated as a peado and as someone who carried out a serious assault, yet somehow this behaviour is acceptable because God says it is.

    You have got to be kidding! You'll be telling me next that water baptism will be misconstrued by the child as an attempted drowning and that, in any case, the child has rights.


    The rights of the infant? For goodness sake, the infant has a vocabulary of about 3 words. Unless those 3 words happen to be along the lines of "leave it alone", and the kid actually knows what he has just said, the notion that the kid has rights is meaningless pretentious tosh. You may as well suggest that the kid has the right to vote. (A considerably under-developed brain would not be a handicap to exercising voting rights ........as the current adult electorate have proved in recent years).


    Of course, if one is pro-life and believes that the fetus has rights, then ignore the above as being beyond discussion or disputation.


    Returning to the circumcision, which you have so delicately put as "being touched in this way", do you think the infant has the foggiest instinct of being intimately touched or violated compared with being given a vaccination or having a potential ingrowing toenail clipped or being bathed? Granted, an adult or even a young boy would probably squirm at the idea of a circumcision. But an infant a few months old?


    Dare I suggest that you are confusing a child's rights with a grown-up's obligations?


    BTW: are you just playing Devil's Advocate to stimulate the thread?

  • The rights of the infant? For goodness sake, the infant has a vocabulary of about 3 words.

    What does vocabulary have to do with taking a knife to the most sensitive part of a baby boy's body?

    do you think the infant has the foggiest instinct of being intimately violated compared with being given a vaccination or having a potential ingrowing toenail clipped?

    Are you seriously suggesting that taking a knife and cutting the foreskin on the penis is not painful? If you are, then I wholly disagree.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • What does vocabulary have to do with taking a knife to the most sensitive part of a baby boy's body?

    Are you seriously suggesting that taking a knife and cutting the foreskin on the penis is not painful? If you are, then I wholly disagree.

    Actually I'm not suggesting it, I'm actually stating it. The medical profession maintains that an infant would feel little or no pain from a circumcision compared with an older child or boy.


    The rest of your earlier comments are just 1 or 2 sentences that don't have substance although might pass muster on Facebook!!


    Or maybe you are deliberately missing the point (my Devil's Advocate accusation)


    Either way I think I'll pass!

    Edited once, last by casablanca ().

  • FGM is very a very serious assault on a child and I'm surprised it's taken this long to get punished. The case sends a clear message that the law of this land is supreme to anyone's particular culture.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • It's about time. This is horrendous mutilation of the female. Bad enough that males are mutilated for religious reasons but the consequences are much less serious.

    History is much like an Endless Waltz. The three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever.

    4312-gwban-gif

    If my post is in this colour  it is moderation. Take note.

  • Female circumcision has been unlawful here for about 5 years, but to the best of my knowledge there's only been one prosecution, and I don't know if that ended in conviction or (more likely in the interests of cultural stability? :rolleyes: ) acquittal. It's the ultimate crime against the person; that overwhelming strength (adults) is unnecessarily perpetrated to mutilate, without anaesthetizing, the private parts of the weakest (babies) in our society. And for what? Mindless religious ritual. that's what. How on earth can any salient, not to mention compassionate adult, especially the child's parents, simply sit back and watch it going on?

    There are none who do so much harm as those obsessed with doing good.


    People are far more more likely to believe a lie if they want it to be the truth.


  • How can she be sentenced, long or short? Who will look after the child or children (whichever the case may be - probably the latter :rolleyes: ) while she's doing her stretch?

    There are none who do so much harm as those obsessed with doing good.


    People are far more more likely to believe a lie if they want it to be the truth.

  • How can she be sentenced, long or short? Who will look after the child or children (whichever the case may be - probably the latter :rolleyes: ) while she's doing her stretch?

    A child usually has two parents!

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • A child usually has two parents!

    Yes I know - but if the father is working? Or incapacitated, or inept?


    Next?

    There are none who do so much harm as those obsessed with doing good.


    People are far more more likely to believe a lie if they want it to be the truth.

  • Yes I know - but if the father is working? Or incapacitated, or inept?


    Next?

    What happens if the father is jailed and the mother is working, incapacitated, or inept?

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • It must be remembered that this is a cultural procedure which is very significant to certain faiths, abhorrent as it is to Western eyes

    If the people concerned come to live in the West then the question is should they adhere to our ways or stick to their own traditions

    A similar question could be asked about male circumcision, and the wearing of clothes to hide either all the body or parts of the same

    A Hand Up Not A Hand Out

  • If it is part of a religious observance (eg young male Jewish children) I think it should be banned if conducted in the back of a car with poor suspension and a road with lots of potholes


    Other than that, I think we should all mind our goddamn business and concentrate on issues that really matter

  • No. Because it is these "little" issues that matter.

    It must be remembered that this is a cultural procedure which is very significant to certain faiths, abhorrent as it is to Western eyes

    If the people concerned come to live in the West then the question is should they adhere to our ways or stick to their own traditions

    A similar question could be asked about male circumcision, and the wearing of clothes to hide either all the body or parts of the same

    I'm clear cut on this. No foreign ways in our country. Period.

    If my post is in this colour, it is a moderator decision. Please abide by it.

  • 1 No. Because it is these "little" issues that matter.

    2 I'm clear cut on this. No foreign ways in our country. Period.

    1 Big issues matter more


    2 Hitler, Eichman, Mengele, Mosley and the Labour Party would be proud of you. Jewish British citizens born in this country less so and, with more like you, may decide to emigrate to Israel. (My view is is that some "foreign ways" are weirder, more disconcerting or offending than others, eg killing a goat on in the middle of a busy shopping high street, as traditional way of Muslims breaking a fast. Do you feel we need a hard Brexit from this whole planet?

  • No. Because it is these "little" issues that matter.

    I'm clear cut on this. No foreign ways in our country. Period.

    Would that include "foreign" food or cooking, clothing, TV programmes and so on?

    A Hand Up Not A Hand Out

  • Male circumcision is not the same as female genital mutilation. The latter is a barbaric and terrible crime against girls. Male circumcision is done on Protestant western males mostly for health reasons of greater hygiene. It is falling away by choice. If Jews want to do it, then that is their affair. It is similar to the tail and ear docking that was done on some breeds of dog when the dog was a very young pup.


    Female circumcision is a crime against women, is misogynistic and oppressive. It has no place in a civilized country.


    I'd like to know, though, how certain doyens of social engineering and public suppression like Tony Blair, for example, could say that "immigrants have immeasurably enriched us" when some of them cut the throats of British soldiers in their own streets, blow people up as a matter of religious obligation and state publicly that they want to see you dead or converted to their belief system. I have to presume Blair wasn't thinking of Celts, Romans, Saxons or Scandinavians when he made his famously fatuous declaration.


    This sort of statement is either the result of devious psychological manipulation, or mental illness. Or both, the one being basically responsible for the other.

    The vagabond who's rapping at your door

    Is standing in the clothes that you once wore

  • What happens if the father is jailed and the mother is working, incapacitated, or inept?

    :rolleyes: WTF!

    There are none who do so much harm as those obsessed with doing good.


    People are far more more likely to believe a lie if they want it to be the truth.

  • Well said, LW. Male circumcision and female genital mutilation are not comparable, other than they involve the genitals.


    There are NO health reasons for female genital mutilation. It is done purely for misogynistic reasons and has ZERO benefits for the female. It has one great disadvantage, and can actually be the sole cause of serious health problems.

    Mark Twain — 'Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.'

  • I've no idea why you try and defend male circumcision, but you obviously have some kind of agenda. For one thing, it's nothing whatever to do with 'hygiene'; and for another, it involves taking a razor-sharp instrument to a baby and cutting away part of his anatomy, precisely the same as FGM does.


    'It is similar to the tail and ear docking that was done on some breeds of dog when the dog was a very young pup.'


    WTF does that have to do with anything fcs? Are you equating animals with humans?

    There are none who do so much harm as those obsessed with doing good.


    People are far more more likely to believe a lie if they want it to be the truth.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member to leave a comment.