German judges rule parents can be brought to court for circumcising children

MAXAMEYES;490951 said:
Instead of injecting your own prejudices and fears into your invectives and accusations, why don't you pretend that you are actually a reasonable adult, although it may be difficult for you, and simply answer the questions I have raised?
Click to expand...

The only reasonable position is to ban all forms of genital cutting against people who do not consent, unless it's absolutely medically necessary, you know, treat the penis like any other part of the body.
 
MAXAMEYES;490951 said:
Instead of injecting your own prejudices and fears into your invectives and accusations, why don't you pretend that you are actually a reasonable adult, although it may be difficult for you, and simply answer the questions I have raised?
Click to expand...

If Sharia law was enacted, then it would be the business of intelligent people to change the law.

I'm not saying the law is perfect. If it were, male circumcision would be banned. But laws matter. You seem to hold that laws are universally unacceptable if they in any way interfere with how you want to live your life.

This isn't about law anyway. It's about basic human rights. I say that genital integrity is a basic human right for all people, women AND men, and the law needs to be changed to suit that. And yes, if you're found guilty of cutting he genitals of a child, the State should punish you severely.
 
Your response in no way, by any stretch of the imagination answers the questions I raised.

And your conclusion "this isn't about the law anyway"is completely wrong. If a judge is not a direct representative of the judicial (law) system then what position in society does he/she actually hold?

I'm not sure about the GDR, but in America we have three branches of Government: Executive, Legislative & Judicial.

Fortunately there is no prescribed "religious" branch of government. Yet it makes sporadic intrusions from time to time.
 
MAXAMEYES;491392 said:
Fortunately there is no prescribed "religious" branch of government. Yet it makes sporadic intrusions from time to time.
Click to expand...

Unless you are Jewish:) Like me:)
 
Here in America the whole foundation of our nation is based upon religious freedom; freedom from the government deciding how we will worship; to whom we pay tithes ect.

This accusation against circumcision as if it were an act of violence is absurd. Health reasons alone would be reasons enough.
Neither is it the Federal Governments responsibility to dictate how we will raise our children.

In our Declaration of Independence it states that we as a people give the government its power; but in the end the ultimate power remains with the people.
It states that our Creator gave us the right to have: life; liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
These are God given and what God gives man cannot take away.

Judges on the courts assume the role of legislatures thus leaving the people out of major decisions that involve their lives.

Even though we as Americans have seen the transmogrification of our Federal Government assuming powers it was never intended to have; the spirit of the revolution and reasons why this country was first founded still run deep.

Only those who want power want to destroy individual and religous liberties and are more than willing to give an accountable; unelected official ultimate power over the populace.

In this argument it is important to compare apples with apples otherwise all things become obscure and inane
 
MAXAMEYES;491418 said:
I thought you guys controlled Hollywood?!?!?:(
Click to expand...


Hollywood controls the Government:)
 
Face it guys, there are rights that are more important than human rights. These are the rights of the parent and they include to needlessly cut your child!
 
anth1225;491416 said:
Here in America the whole foundation of our nation is based upon religious freedom; freedom from the government deciding how we will worship; to whom we pay tithes ect.

This accusation against circumcision as if it were an act of violence is absurd. Health reasons alone would be reasons enough.
Neither is it the Federal Governments responsibility to dictate how we will raise our children.

In our Declaration of Independence it states that we as a people give the government its power; but in the end the ultimate power remains with the people.
It states that our Creator gave us the right to have: life; liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
These are God given and what God gives man cannot take away.

Judges on the courts assume the role of legislatures thus leaving the people out of major decisions that involve their lives.

Even though we as Americans have seen the transmogrification of our Federal Government assuming powers it was never intended to have; the spirit of the revolution and reasons why this country was first founded still run deep.

Only those who want power want to destroy individual and religous liberties and are more than willing to give an accountable; unelected official ultimate power over the populace.

In this argument it is important to compare apples with apples otherwise all things become obscure and inane
Click to expand...

It's incredible that a person who can tie their own shoes can't see how absurd what you have written is.

Taking a knife to a child's genitals is violent. If it were done to a girl it's an act of violence. Agree or disagree?

If the following video is not violent, sexual torture even, then NOTHING is, and the concept of violence is meaningless.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmX6RdRNoqk

You do not have an individual freedom to chop off part of another person's body. That infringes on their freedom.

How can you support individual freedom and claim the right of one person to deny another person access to an important part of their body, I mean, their genitals of all things. You recognize the wrongness of this for girls. But you have a double standard and do not recognize it for boys.

You do not have a religious right to brand your children. If you tattooed your child, you would be punished. Circumcision is FAR, FAR more damaging than a tattoo, and cannot be reversed, while a tattoo can be reversed.

Religious freedom is not unlimited. Agree or disagree?
 
anth1225;491416 said:
Here in America the whole foundation of our nation is based upon religious freedom; freedom from the government deciding how we will worship; to whom we pay tithes ect.

This accusation against circumcision as if it were an act of violence is absurd. Health reasons alone would be reasons enough.
Neither is it the Federal Governments responsibility to dictate how we will raise our children.

In our Declaration of Independence it states that we as a people give the government its power; but in the end the ultimate power remains with the people.
It states that our Creator gave us the right to have: life; liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
These are God given and what God gives man cannot take away.

Judges on the courts assume the role of legislatures thus leaving the people out of major decisions that involve their lives.

Even though we as Americans have seen the transmogrification of our Federal Government assuming powers it was never intended to have; the spirit of the revolution and reasons why this country was first founded still run deep.

Only those who want power want to destroy individual and religous liberties and are more than willing to give an accountable; unelected official ultimate power over the populace.

In this argument it is important to compare apples with apples otherwise all things become obscure and inane
Click to expand...


You have no idea what you're talking about. This country was not founded on religious freedom. It was founded on INDIVIDUAL freedom, of which religion is a component. Yet, if my parents mutilate my genitals, they forever have violated my religious freedom not to be a part of their religion. Therefore my rights were violated.

The individual freedom of women is what protects them from their parents religious freedom to cut their genitals. The same principle should apply, to any rational person, to men.

Genital mutilation is not a religious right.

The health justifications are bogus. Few, if any organizations in the world say there is any merit to medical reasons for routine circumcision. And far more specifically say it's not worth it. Others, rightly identify it as a human rights violation. Genital integrity is a human right. Taking a knife to the genitals of a child is not a right. If you don't like it, then civilization will soon put people like you in prison, with the rest of the child rapists.
 
pest;491563 said:
Face it guys, there are rights that are more important than human rights. These are the rights of the parent and they include to needlessly cut your child!
Click to expand...

Anyone who insists on the right to take a knife to a child's body, let alone their genitals, and amputate perfectly healthy, normal, functional tissue, has serious issues.
 
Gumbercules;491636 said:
You have no idea what you're talking about. This country was not founded on religious freedom. It was founded on INDIVIDUAL freedom, of which religion is a component. Yet, if my parents mutilate my genitals, they forever have violated my religious freedom not to be a part of their religion. Therefore my rights were violated.

The individual freedom of women is what protects them from their parents religious freedom to cut their genitals. The same principle should apply, to any rational person, to men.

Genital mutilation is not a religious right.

The health justifications are bogus. Few, if any organizations in the world say there is any merit to medical reasons for routine circumcision. And far more specifically say it's not worth it. Others, rightly identify it as a human rights violation. Genital integrity is a human right. Taking a knife to the genitals of a child is not a right. If you don't like it, then civilization will soon put people like you in prison, with the rest of the child rapists.
Click to expand...

Female circumcision is mutilation and designed to prevent the woman from having orgasms; thereby making them "pure".

Male circumcision is not mutilation; it does not affect the sexual function or enjoyment.
As I said earlier it is always best to compare apples with apples instead of having a blithering emotional response not based on fact; but more based on trying to make a personal attack thereby trying to bully your position to make yourself right.

You are not right nor will you bully me.

Male circumcision prevents diseases such as yeast infections and is easier to keep clean without the foreskin.
To call foreskin: "genitals" is as misleading as you pretending to know the foundations of our great country.

From the first colonists who came here escaping religious persecution; to the original 13 Colonies which each had a state established denomination; from our Declaration of independance which states where our inalienable rights come from.

It was from the outset for Christian religious liberty through which all other religions were able to benefit.

The inalienable rights are for all: religious or irreligous but the rights are from God so man may not upsurp them.
 
Gumbercules;491637 said:
Anyone who insists on the right to take a knife to a child's body, let alone their genitals, and amputate perfectly healthy, normal, functional tissue, has serious issues.
Click to expand...

To what degree are you actually mutilated? If I may ask.
How much of your penis are you actually missing?
Do you have a glans?
Was there any loss of erectile tissue?
After your circumcision was there any discussion of gender reassignment surgery?
Can you still actually function as a male-outside of simple urination?

From the way you post, it sounds as though you are missing a substantial portion of your penis, either directly through the circumcision process or subsequently via infection and necrosis.
If this is actually your case then I'd say you have a fairly good case to present against your child rapist parents and the equally evil medical horde they conscripted to do their bidding.
Perhaps you should pursue a civil liabilities suit.
 
Things are just starting to heat up!
 
MAXAMEYES;491643 said:
To what degree are you actually mutilated? If I may ask.
How much of your penis are you actually missing?
Do you have a glans?
Was there any loss of erectile tissue?
After your circumcision was there any discussion of gender reassignment surgery?
Can you still actually function as a male-outside of simple urination?

From the way you post, it sounds as though you are missing a substantial portion of your penis, either directly through the circumcision process or subsequently via infection and necrosis.
If this is actually your case then I'd say you have a fairly good case to present against your child rapist parents and the equally evil medical horde they conscripted to do their bidding.
Perhaps you should pursue a civil liabilities suit.
Click to expand...

The foreskin is a substantial part of the penis. If you knew anything you'd know that. It's sad how ignorant people are of normal, non-mutilated male genitalia.
 
anth1225;491639 said:
Female circumcision is mutilation and designed to prevent the woman from having orgasms; thereby making them "pure".

Male circumcision is not mutilation; it does not affect the sexual function or enjoyment.
As I said earlier it is always best to compare apples with apples instead of having a blithering emotional response not based on fact; but more based on trying to make a personal attack thereby trying to bully your position to make yourself right.

You are not right nor will you bully me.

Male circumcision prevents diseases such as yeast infections and is easier to keep clean without the foreskin.
To call foreskin: "genitals" is as misleading as you pretending to know the foundations of our great country.

From the first colonists who came here escaping religious persecution; to the original 13 Colonies which each had a state established denomination; from our Declaration of independance which states where our inalienable rights come from.

It was from the outset for Christian religious liberty through which all other religions were able to benefit.

The inalienable rights are for all: religious or irreligous but the rights are from God so man may not upsurp them.
Click to expand...


No man has a right to inflict bodily harm on another. Genital mutilation is bodily harm. What about my right to intact genitalia? Your religious rights don't extend to altering the form and function of another person's body, even if they are your child. The clealiness claims surrounding mgm are bullshit. Just ask any man from Europe where they don't perform surgical rape on their children.

To say that the foreskin is not part of your genitals is to say that your finger is not part of your hand.

Women have far more trouble with cleanliness. Why not cut them too? Male circumcision WAS done to control male sexuality. Just ask Maidmonides and Dr Kellogg's, though I'm certain you don't know who they are.

Your ignorance on this issue is sickening. Your position on this matter is based only on your indoctrination into a culture of mutilation and sexual repression and an unwillingness to question anything.
 
MAXAMEYES;491392 said:
Your response in no way, by any stretch of the imagination answers the questions I raised.

And your conclusion "this isn't about the law anyway"is completely wrong. If a judge is not a direct representative of the judicial (law) system then what position in society does he/she actually hold?

I'm not sure about the GDR, but in America we have three branches of Government: Executive, Legislative & Judicial.

Fortunately there is no prescribed "religious" branch of government. Yet it makes sporadic intrusions from time to time.
Click to expand...
So you support a parent's right to cut their daughter's genitals for religious reasons. That's pretty messed up. I'd seek help.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Lightning
Pistachios for Harder Erections - Study Inside
7 8 9
Replies
163
Views
22K
DLD
DLD
DLD
P
Please i need HELP !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2 3
Replies
56
Views
13K
DLD
DLD
DLD
S
Can i grow without jelqs?
Replies
9
Views
2K
D
dmoney101
D
youknowme123321
Need Help Brother! I may be in the wrong but feel I am not
2 3 4
Replies
68
Views
2K
Lightning
Lightning
Lightning
K
The snake man's chemical PE log
17 18 19
Replies
372
Views
182K
J
johhnyblaze99
J
Back
Top Bottom