INFORMATION

This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used. For further information, see our Privacy Policy. Continuing to use this website is acceptance of these cookies.

Should religious circumcision be banned?

For topics that are more about faith, religion and religious organisations than anything else.
Message
Author
User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Should religious circumcision be banned?

#1 Post by Alan H » April 20th, 2016, 10:44 am

Should religious circumcision be banned?
Earlier this week, a top Family Division judge suggested that young children should not be circumcised until they are old enough to make the decision for themselves.

The Hon. Mrs Justice Roberts made the assertion during a landmark case in which a Muslim father and non-Muslim mother disagreed over whether or not their sons, aged four and six, should be circumcised in accordance with the Islamic faith.

The father, a 36-year old Algerian man, told both his ex-partner and the court that circumcision went to the very core of his identity as a Muslim. He said that "circumcision has both a religious and a social importance which overrides any slight risk which the procedure carries."

Justice Roberts, who refused to make a circumcision order after analysing both arguments, said: "First and foremost, this is a once and for all, irreversible procedure. There is no guarantee that these boys will wish to continue to observe the Muslim faith with the devotion demonstrated by their father although that may very well be their choice.

"They are still very young and there is no way of anticipating at this stage how the different influences in their respective parental homes will shape and guide their development over the coming years," she continued, "and there are risks, albeit small, associated with the surgery regardless of the expertise with which the operation is performed."
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
jaywhat
Posts: 15807
Joined: July 5th, 2007, 5:53 pm

Re: Should religious circumcision be banned?

#2 Post by jaywhat » April 20th, 2016, 11:37 am

what about girls ?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Should religious circumcision be banned?

#3 Post by Alan H » April 20th, 2016, 12:41 pm

jaywhat wrote:what about girls ?
The issues are slightly different but FGM is already illegal in the UK.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Tetenterre
Posts: 3244
Joined: March 13th, 2011, 11:36 am

Re: Should religious circumcision be banned?

#4 Post by Tetenterre » April 20th, 2016, 3:13 pm

Yes.

next, please...
Steve

Quantum Theory: The branch of science with which people who know absolutely sod all about quantum theory can explain anything.

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Should religious circumcision be banned?

#5 Post by Dave B » April 20th, 2016, 4:02 pm

^ +1
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

Fia
Posts: 5480
Joined: July 6th, 2007, 8:29 pm

Re: Should religious circumcision be banned?

#6 Post by Fia » April 21st, 2016, 5:08 pm

Good on The Hon. Mrs Justice Roberts :clap:
If an adult wants to chop the end off his todger for any reason, that's fine by me.

To my mind circumcising children is abuse.

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Should religious circumcision be banned?

#7 Post by Alan H » April 21st, 2016, 5:55 pm

Fia wrote:Good on The Hon. Mrs Justice Roberts :clap:
If an adult wants to chop the end off his todger for any reason, that's fine by me.

To my mind circumcising children is abuse.
Yup. (if not done for medical reasons.)
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
jaywhat
Posts: 15807
Joined: July 5th, 2007, 5:53 pm

Re: Should religious circumcision be banned?

#8 Post by jaywhat » April 22nd, 2016, 7:13 am

This subject was 'discussed' in 'The Big Bang Theory' yesterday evening when one of couples discovered they were to become parents - one of whom is Jewish. The comedy show was at its best.

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Should religious circumcision be banned?

#9 Post by Alan H » April 22nd, 2016, 11:50 pm

Secular medics welcome religious circumcision ruling
Posted: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 10:37
Secular medics welcome religious circumcision ruling

A High Court judge has ruled against a devout Muslim who wanted his children circumcised, finding that the boys should be able to make the choice themselves in a judgement welcomed by the Secular Medical Forum.

Dr Antony Lempert of the SMF described the ruling as a small but "welcome" step "towards safeguarding children from forced genital cutting."

Religious requirements "should not be allowed to override a person's most fundamental right to grow up with an intact body and to make their own choices about permanent bodily modifications," he said.

"It is a procedure that permanently removes healthy, erogenous and functional tissue from the most intimate part of a person's body without that person's consent and for no medical reason.

"That it should take a parental disagreement in court for a child to be protected from forced genital cutting remains a serious concern from a child safeguarding perspective."

The judge said that the boys' mother was "resolutely opposed" to having the children circumcised and ruled that "There is no guarantee that these boys will wish to continue to observe the Muslim faith with the devotion demonstrated by their father, although that may very well be their choice."

She added: "They are still very young and there is no way of anticipating at this stage how the different influences in their respective parental homes will shape and guide their development over the coming years."

James Chegwidden, who acted as junior counsel for the mother in the case, said that while he could not comment on the specifics of the case, the ruling was "an encouraging step towards the legal protection every child deserves."

He said that the decision was "a reminder that, together with the freedom to practise a religion or philosophy for oneself, comes the necessary obligation not to impose that religion or philosophy on others."

But he warned that the case revealed "just how limited our current legal protection of our children is."

"Bodily autonomy is a right of every child – it cannot be reduced or ignored simply because both its parents happen to be religious. For a right so fundamental as bodily autonomy for a child to depend totally on the whim of an adult is simply unacceptable.

"The court has still yet to classify infant circumcision as 'significant harm', despite the significant evidence that male genital cutting is at least as invasive as some forms of FGM."

The father, an Algerian-born Muslim who has lived in England for fifteen years, is now separated from the boys' mother, whom he had met ten years ago and subsequently lived with. He entered the UK using false travel documents but was subsequently given a British passport.

The couple separated after the mother, from Devon, and the two boys had to flee their home when he violently attacked her in 2012. He was described as "an increasingly controlling and violent individual who sought to impose restrictions on how she lived her life." He had previously "threatened many times that he will abduct the children to Algeria" and was "violent, threatening and controlling towards the mother."

Mrs Justice Roberts said that the father was a "devout Muslim" committed to ensuring that as part of his son's "dual heritage" they "grow up as Muslims observing all the tenets and practices" of Islam.

The children are currently aged six and four, and the judge said that she had reached a "clear conclusion" about the "irreversible procedure" and that the children should have the right to choose for themselves.

"I am simply deferring that decision to the point where each of the boys themselves will make their individual choices once they have the maturity and insight to appreciate the consequences and longer-term effects of the decisions which they reach," the judge said.

"There are risks, albeit small, associated with the surgery, regardless of the expertise with which the operation is performed.

"There must be clear benefits which outweigh these risks which point towards circumcision at this point in time being in their best interests before I can sanction it as an appropriate course at this stage of their young lives."

The judge's warning about the risks of circumcision came as a medical tribunal heard the case of Dr Muhammad Chaudhary, a doctor accused of bungling a circumcision on a two month old baby, who then allegedly tried to bribe the child's family into dropping a claim against him.

He reportedly told the Muslim family that "Litigation in Muslim culture is not usually a route to adopt especially in ritual matters" in an attempt to stop action being taken against him.

Dr Chaudhary failed to repair the damage he had caused during four further surgeries. After he failed to fix the damage he had caused in the initial operation, he advised the family to "treat him [their son] like the Quran and be gentle."
The child was finally referred to a specialist surgeon, the Mirror reported, and had to endure three additional operations in a hospital.

Doctor Lempert said these cases occurred with "nauseating regularity."

"There are practically no restrictions on who can perform forced genital cutting on young (male) children in the UK. The procedure is almost wholly unregulated in the UK. The reality is that we simply don't know the extent of harm caused to young children by ritual circumcision. We do know that many such children turn up in A&E and some need treatment in paediatric Intensive Care Units as a direct result of non-therapeutic circumcision.

"Dr Chaudhary is being investigated because he is a doctor who is alleged to have behaved dishonestly. Ironically, should Dr Chaudhary be removed from the medical register, he would no longer be required to satisfy even the limited requirements of the GMC in this matter and would be free to continue cutting young boys' genitals."
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

VINDICATOR
Posts: 596
Joined: December 22nd, 2016, 11:07 am

Re: Should religious circumcision be banned?

#10 Post by VINDICATOR » January 9th, 2017, 12:39 pm

Circumcision (on boys) is fine, It just cuts off some useless skin and is actually beneficial for hygienic purposes.
"Circumcision" on girls, called FGM (Female Genital Mutilation) is something entirely different! They take the young girl before puberty and cut out her clitoris and all the other erogenous zones with a razor blade without any anaesthetics or antibiotics! The purpose is to rob her of any enjoyment of sex so she will be the husband's sex robot but there won't be any danger of her looking for sex for herself! 130 million girls have undergone FGM in North Africa, 92% of the girls in Egypt have been FGMed! Although the Shariah Law does not expressly demand it, still almost all Muslim girls have been FGMed! It is one of the most barbaric practises of humanity! Stop calling it female "cicumcision"!

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Should religious circumcision be banned?

#11 Post by Alan H » January 9th, 2017, 12:51 pm

VINDICATOR wrote:Circumcision (on boys) is fine, It just cuts off some useless skin and is actually beneficial for hygienic purposes.
No, it's not. It is unnecessary and abusive and can cause serious harm.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Should religious circumcision be banned?

#12 Post by Alan H » January 9th, 2017, 1:01 pm

You may find the articles on this curated list interesting: Ethics and evidence: routine infant circumcision
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

coffee
Posts: 1580
Joined: June 2nd, 2009, 4:53 pm

Re: Should religious circumcision be banned?

#13 Post by coffee » January 12th, 2017, 1:23 pm

Yes, it should be banned

Zeff
Posts: 142
Joined: August 6th, 2016, 2:13 pm

Re: Should religious circumcision be banned?

#14 Post by Zeff » January 14th, 2017, 5:31 pm

Okay, so FGM causes worse pain and suffering and FGM is a much bigger scandal. Agreed, but not only can MGM be compared to FGM but MGM is abhorent in its own right, without regard or reference to FGM.

VINDICATOR
Posts: 596
Joined: December 22nd, 2016, 11:07 am

Re: Should religious circumcision be banned?

#15 Post by VINDICATOR » January 20th, 2017, 3:04 am

There is no way you can compare FGM with circumcision. If you wanted to do the equivalent to FGM on a male, you would have to cut off the entire penis to make sure he would have no pleasure in sex. Circumcision does not influence a man's sexual pleasure in any way! Anyone who says FGM is just the same as circumcision is very ignorant!

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Should religious circumcision be banned?

#16 Post by Alan H » January 20th, 2017, 11:01 am

VINDICATOR wrote:There is no way you can compare FGM with circumcision. If you wanted to do the equivalent to FGM on a male, you would have to cut off the entire penis to make sure he would have no pleasure in sex. Circumcision does not influence a man's sexual pleasure in any way! Anyone who says FGM is just the same as circumcision is very ignorant!
Please see the list of articles I linked to above. I don't think anyone is saying they are equivalent, but there are many valid comparisons that can be made.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Tetenterre
Posts: 3244
Joined: March 13th, 2011, 11:36 am

Re: Should religious circumcision be banned?

#17 Post by Tetenterre » January 20th, 2017, 12:12 pm

Alan H wrote:
VINDICATOR wrote:There is no way you can compare FGM with circumcision. If you wanted to do the equivalent to FGM on a male, you would have to cut off the entire penis to make sure he would have no pleasure in sex. Circumcision does not influence a man's sexual pleasure in any way! Anyone who says FGM is just the same as circumcision is very ignorant!
Please see the list of articles I linked to above. I don't think anyone is saying they are equivalent, but there are many valid comparisons that can be made.
If I may add: merely because two things are not equivalent does not automatically make either of them a good thing to do. In the case of FGM and (male) circumcision, both are barbaric acts unless performed for necessary medical reasons.
Steve

Quantum Theory: The branch of science with which people who know absolutely sod all about quantum theory can explain anything.

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Should religious circumcision be banned?

#18 Post by Alan H » January 20th, 2017, 1:00 pm

Tetenterre wrote:
Alan H wrote:
VINDICATOR wrote:There is no way you can compare FGM with circumcision. If you wanted to do the equivalent to FGM on a male, you would have to cut off the entire penis to make sure he would have no pleasure in sex. Circumcision does not influence a man's sexual pleasure in any way! Anyone who says FGM is just the same as circumcision is very ignorant!
Please see the list of articles I linked to above. I don't think anyone is saying they are equivalent, but there are many valid comparisons that can be made.
If I may add: merely because two things are not equivalent does not automatically make either of them a good thing to do. In the case of FGM and (male) circumcision, both are barbaric acts unless performed for necessary medical reasons.
...or with fully informed consent.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Tetenterre
Posts: 3244
Joined: March 13th, 2011, 11:36 am

Re: Should religious circumcision be banned?

#19 Post by Tetenterre » January 20th, 2017, 6:13 pm

Alan H wrote:
Tetenterre wrote:
Alan H wrote:Please see the list of articles I linked to above. I don't think anyone is saying they are equivalent, but there are many valid comparisons that can be made.
If I may add: merely because two things are not equivalent does not automatically make either of them a good thing to do. In the case of FGM and (male) circumcision, both are barbaric acts unless performed for necessary medical reasons.
...or with fully informed consent.
Yup.
Steve

Quantum Theory: The branch of science with which people who know absolutely sod all about quantum theory can explain anything.

User avatar
jaywhat
Posts: 15807
Joined: July 5th, 2007, 5:53 pm

Re: Should religious circumcision be banned?

#20 Post by jaywhat » January 22nd, 2017, 7:42 am

All male circumcision and FGM is wrong if it is for religious reasons. If there is a medical reason, then that is different.

Post Reply