mead cohen berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn
German Parliament Endorses Circumcision

Reason and humility prevailed today in Germany, where the country’s parliament passed a resolution in support of circumcision, in a rebuke to the regional court which ruled the ancient Jewish and Muslim religious practice an “assault.” Haaretz reports:

Germany’s parliament passed a resolution Thursday endorsing the right of Muslim and Jewish parents to have sons circumcised.

The resolution, passed by a large majority on a show of hands, has no binding legal effect.

It was aimed at calming an international outcry against a verdict last month in a Cologne court which ruled that the circumcision of a baby boy by a Muslim doctor was a bodily-harm offence.

The government is expected to draft legislation later this year to protect doctors performing male circumcisions from prosecution.

First Germany’s Foreign Minister, then Chancellor Angela Merkel, and now the parliament have all repudiated the dangerous court ruling which would have made it once more illegal to be Jewish in Germany. While this may disappoint the Andrew Sullivans of the world, the rest of us — committed to the respect of all religious faiths, and well aware of circumcision’s documented health benefits — can rest easy.

While we must remain vigilant against other encroachments upon religious liberty and the rights of religious minorities, liberty–for now–has been restored.

Features Icon
show comments
  • Jacko

    Most of the “health benefits” of circumcision are myths. Here’s a circumcision myth-busting website:

  • Brendan Doran

    The Courts are essentially Leftist, and the Hard Left is insane, vulgar, and hysterical.

    Andrew Sullivan would have a distinguished second career on the bench.

  • Corlyss

    Resolutions are empty feel-good fluff. They ain’t laws. IOW the German high court hasn’t been overruled. Which means, decision in hand, someone can still sue and prevail.

  • Luke Lea

    Endorses the right to circumcision, not circumcision itself. Let’s get those headlines right. The commercial press frequently deliberately using misleading headlines to get readers; I presume ViaMedia would not stoop so low.

  • Luke Lea

    Uses, not using. I wish you had an edit button.

  • ahad ha’amoratsim

    I checked the site that Jacko linked to. It was the usual collection of intactivist biases disguised as self-evident and irrefutable fact. The fact that they refer to circumcission as Male Genital Mutilation tells you everything you need to know. I do give them credit, though, for saying “The contents of this site are not intended to replace the professional medical advice of a licensed practitioner.” It seems to me that it is the risks and harm of circumcission, not the health benefits, that have been overstated.

  • vanderleun

    As usual it takes about one nano-second for the pro-foreskin fluffers to hit any thread with the word “circumcision” in it.

  • Jim.

    So democratically elected representatives (or plebiscites) pass legislation that turns out to have no force, while radicals in robes make laws against religion.

    The situation in Germany has only superficially improved. The situation in the US hasn’t even improved superficially.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2016 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service