Oh please... circumcision is rarely a religious thing nowadays... look up all the discussion on the topic. I never heard anything on the lines of "we 're against it but our religion requires us so we're doing it"

That's crap. Have you ever been to Germany? So if someone says that their religion calls for female circumcision, that should be an exception then, too? That's the issue with bringing religion into the courtroom.

Anonymous wrote:WOW, I'm surprised Germany would enforce anything remotely anti Semitic

I'm not at all surprised. This just proves they have not come nearly as far as they may think they have. I find this ruling highly anti-semitic. I've been taught to always remember and never forget and THIS is why. Germany doesn't seem to be headed in the right direction.

WOW, I'm surprised Germany would enforce anything remotely anti Semitic

Anonymous wrote:Hey, Jeff - shouldn't this be over in Expectant or General Parenting?

OP here, it's not advice or helpful to people in those forums. It's not quite right for the political forum. It's off topic, don't you think?

That said, I'm surprised there's little interest in the topic. In the Expectant forum it would just become a fight over whether you should or shouldn't circumcise.

I'm American, but moved to Germany when I was 11 (dad was US Army). When we went to the pool, all the little kids were nude. I had only seen my little brother's equipment up until then, and I wondered why the other boys looked different. Uncircumcised penises still look strange to me.

During WWII (as a PP alluded to) circumcised penises were proof you weren't a "real" German.

Hey, Jeff - shouldn't this be over in Expectant or General Parenting?

I wonder how they feel about pierced ears on young children?

Anonymous wrote:All you need is to say it is for hygenic reasons. It is not really that big of a deal.

Did you get that from reading the opinion? The news reports I've seen suggest that "medical reason" requires more than that.

Just for info purposes, Germans don't circumsise anyway--unless it's for medical or religious reasons. My mother was quite convinced for a while that my American father was Jewish after she, uhm, "discovered" that he was circumcised (in keeping with the custom of his birth year, 1927).

All you need is to say it is for hygenic reasons. It is not really that big of a deal.

Anonymous wrote:There's not a religious exemption?

None, that's the point of the ruling. The court finds it to be assault unless there is a medical reason. The parties involved were Muslim but of course there has been outcry from both the Muslim and Jewish communities.

100 years? Hopefully a little sooner than that -- we're not THAT far behind Germany I hope.

There's not a religious exemption?

It's a regional appellate court decision. I assume it will be appealed to their highest court, but I don't know how their legal system works.

Is this where we are headed in the next 100 years?