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!