Bertrand Audoin
: From Paris, With Hope
Gabriel Byng
: The Shard Is the St Paul's Cathedral of Our Times
Karen Ruimy
: Glamour and Riots in Paris: An Evening With Eva Longoria and David Beckham
David Burrowes MP
: It Is Time to Support the British Traditions of Free Speech, Tolerance - And Marriage
Chris Rooney
: The Day I Was Deceived Online
Male circumcision has been a fundamental practice in Jewish life for over 3,500 years, originating with Abraham.
It is more than just a rite of passage; it is an essential link to our heritage and our culture. It is a joyous family celebration. This is a position shared with many in the Muslim community, where circumcision is a near universal rite.
There are numerous religious reasons behind brit milah, as the practice is called in Judaism, as well as the widely accepted health benefits.
An expert study just released by John Hopkins University concludes that the procedure is linked to the prevention of sexually transmitted infections and related cancers.
It warns that declining rates of US infant male circumcision could add billions to health care costs. Nowadays those who are trained to perform circumcisions, mohels, are often doctors using anaesthetics and are so proficient that hospitals frequently ask them to perform non-religious circumcisions.
Beyond public policy concerns, and contrary to dogmatic rationalist thought, circumcision is not viewed by Judaism as an act of destruction. It is believed that humanity must finish God's work by removing the unnecessary. The very same belief that is the root of the Jewish idea that we must play an active role in shaping the world, paramount to all aspects of Jewish life; charity, family, community, self-improvement and philanthropy.
Those considering a ban must consider the devastating impact it will have on Jewish and Muslim communities.
Those who understand the true nature of religious circumcision understand the deep communal and familial links created in the process.
Those who wrongly portray circumcision as a sacrifice like ritual, who believe that Jewish and Muslim communities seek mutilation of their children, are either gravely misguided or have sinister motivation.
These images hark back to antisemitic and Islamophobic attacks that have occurred throughout history. If the society we live in is willing to deny one of our most fundamental rituals, what else are they willing to prohibit?
There are two sides to the 'pro-ban' camp. The first are those mentioned above, the xenophobes, who wish to excommunicate and ban 'the other'. Alongside the rise of Islamophobia in Europe we hear calls from the far-right to ban circumcision, using shadowed pretences to conceal their racism.
The other camp is the humanists and individualists who lead the attack on this fundamental religious practice and seemingly care nothing for the essential connection that Jews and Muslims feel with their co-religionists through this rite.
Those who deride religious practices as ancient and barbaric with no place in a modern society - seeing circumcision as easily replaced by a 'modern' alternative - are unable, or unwilling to tolerate religious values. Freedom of religious practice is a cornerstone of liberal democracy.
Angela Merkel was right to distance her government from the recent Cologne court ruling and to introduce legislation to ensure the continuation of brit milah in Germany. This challenge to Jewish practice has already created a snowball effect. The prospect of a German Rabbi being arrested for performing brit milah has sent shivers through the spine of European Jewry - and rightly so.
As any parent can attest to, many difficult choices are made for their children before they are old enough to do so for themselves. These choices affect a person's entire life and personality. Brit milah is not unique; it is another one of these choices. Education, values, religion, and other matters such as vaccinations are all such choices, made without the child's express consent. Nobody seeks to curtail the rights of parents in any of these matters. Why should circumcision be treated any differently?
This piece was authored with input from Jon Benjamin, CEO of the Board of Deputies of British Jews
Follow Jeremy Newmark on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Jeremy_Newmark
Jordana Horn: Why I Circumcised My Sons
Our nation has limits on secular power to take away the religious rites of our citizens, and this is more of a factor when those citizens have been citizens for generations. We can't destroy the Amish way of life by forcing them to send their kids to more years of school. We can't destroy a basic aspect of Jewish faith which is marking the covenant of Moses on the male body through circumcision. We can't take animal sacrifice away from the Santaria or Vodoun groups either, nor can we require that the Catholic church ordains women.
There are limits that our Constitution requires and our courts enforce.
Nothing more clearly demonstrates how religion can addle some people's brains.
Who really considers themselves linked to their heritage and culture via their penis. And in what way could this possibly be "essential". And how can watching an 8 day old baby having a part of his penis being cut off be considered a joyous family occasion? I can't imagine anything more sick making.
Here's a thought experiment, if there were no tradition of this practice dating back to the primitive history of our species, what would we think of anyone who suggested taking a knife to a baby's genitalia? Imagine the scientologists were to declare that they were henceforth to gather round in joyous family celebrations to watch as 8 day old babies had their earlobes cut off "as an essential link to their heritage and culture". Would you support that?
Only the religious could ever look at a newborn baby and decide that it was imperfect.
It is also worth noting that for all its faults, Israel does recognize Sharia law for settling civil disputes between Israeli Beduin, Arabs, and Druze.
Evolution is a way of proving that the earth we were given is not fixed in stone but a living entropy which changes and develops and possibly is improving as time goes by. So if god made the earth, then he made it and left it to get on with itself. So I can accept that as men, we have developed in our understanding, and can change our laws and beliefs as time goes on. So, we don't think the earth is flat or the centre of the universe and we do not have to continue to mutilate babies in the name of a god who has allowed us to develop and learn & invent iphones & penecillin, because we arrogantly believe that god didn't get it right 1st time.
By the same token why not also support female genital mutilation and say it's part of xyz life?
Cutting off parts of your child's anatomy is barbaric and throws us back to an age when people thought the earth was flat and the sun might not rise again tomorrow.
That is, simply, untrue.
If circumcision for religious reasons was banned overnight nobody would die as a direct result.
If "humanity must finish God's work...." why does not Judaism insist on the removal of all bodily hair? What about removal of toenails? Why doesn't every Jewish baby have an appendectomy?
There is nothing to prevent a person, sufficiently mature to arrive at the decision, from having an elective circumcision.
The pretence that there is an equivalence between the removal of a baby's foreskin and "Education, values, religion, and other matters such as vaccinations are all such choices, made without the child's express consent" is farcical.
Which bits of a child's body are removed when choices for education, and so on, are made?
In every civilised country that I can think of, the physical abuse of children is prohibited.
What takes "religious" circumcision out of the realms of child abuse?
"Freedom of religious practice is a cornerstone of liberal democracy."
Sure. So carry on your religious practice without abusing babies.
Your enthusiasm for circumcision on traditional grounds is strong, so I take it that you have no objections to female circumcision among those peoples who find that practice important to their belief systems?
Join me at the "Church of Jesus Christ Already"! We're going to do whatever we want, and all tax-free!
The practice may not be banned in the near future, because for some reason "religious rights" enjoy undeserved and unjustified privilege; but I believe lawsuits have already begun in which adults who were circumcised without their consent as children are suing their parents and the one who performed the 'ritual'. We'll see how many are prepared to inflict it on their children once they have to deal with the prospect of paying enormous reparations later on. My guess would be that the ritual will no longer be considered as sacred or "vital".
Who did his, and what was the rationale put forward? Was it perhaps a way of encouraging fecundity?
“the procedure is linked to the prevention of sexually transmitted infections and related cancers.”
Wouldn't that place it on a par with a recall procedure? As with products having an unforeseen design flaw?
“humanity must finish God's work by removing the unnecessary.”
If unnecessary, why is it there? In comparison with humanity’s many shortcomings, this seems a minor consideration.
“Those who understand the true nature of religious circumcision”
Are all scholar's views identical? If not, what is the process by which the correct interpretation is determined?
“These images hark back to antisemitic and Islamophobic attacks”
If an understanding is correct, isn’t it confirmed by any and all examination? Thereby commending itself for universal acceptance. If an understanding does not merit examination, what commends it?
“the xenophobes, who wish to excommunicate and ban 'the other' ”
belief systems.
“the humanists and individualists who lead the attack on this fundamental religious practice”
imposed on those unable to object.
“Freedom of religious practice is a cornerstone of liberal democracy.”
As is confining chosen practices to consenting individuals.
"The prospect of a German Rabbi being arrested for"
simply following (sacred) orders.
"difficult choices are made for their children before they are old enough to do so”
If the intention is to raise humans capable of discharging that responsibility. Wouldn’t teaching them how to test for veracity be paramount?
So Jews and Muslims are brought together only when loping unnecessary bits off of male infants the rest of the time spent together isn't exactly harmonious. Why not remove their nipples while your at it and what about the appendix.
I am not against consenting adults doing all or any of the above, but not children. As professor Dawkins said, a child is no more a christian Jew or Muslim than he is a socialist, Tory, or member of the mine workers union.
How about this for an idea let one child born to a Jew or a Muslim go uncircumcised and see what happens, watch him grow and teach him about all faiths and non at all then allow him to decide. If he still wants to be circumcised more power to his elbow.
Anti Semitism definitely exist but so does the statement chosen people. I can think of no religion in the world that doesn't think it is exclusively right.
Far better at 21 he decides he would agree to having it removed, for whatever reason, not just to suit some control freaks with ridiculous notion that some sky fairy has decreed it.
If a kid get appendicitis, and to save his life it needs to be removed, that is one thing, but what life threatening necessity comes from circumcision?
An UNNECESSARY operation on a child,when it is vulnerably subjected to religious and parental pressures should be considered child abuse, and dealt with, by law, accordingly.