It has nothing to do with that. It has to do with the idea of cutting off parts of your child. I'm assuming the Netherlands doesn't allow parents to beat their kids or scar their faces. Banning circumcisions is no different. It's also not a Jewish or Muslim thing. It's done by many Christians and non-Christians, too.
Of course it's different. Circumcision, by nearly all reputable medical testimony, has negligible negative effects on sensation and function of the penis, and if anything may have some minor positive effects in prevention of fungal and bacterial infections of the penis, disease transmission, and reduction in penile cancer. There is little reliable evidence that circumcision, if properly done, is any more painful than getting injections, or any number of other medical tests and procedures we all regularly have done to our children.
It is no more invasive than standard operations on infants to remove webbing between fingers or toes, or unsightly moles and birthmarks, or other simple procedures of the sort, provided it is properly done. And the percentage of circumcisions in the United States and Europe that are reported to be botched is vanishingly miniscule.
I have worked with many doctors and mohalim (trained ritual circumcisers) in fighting attempts to slur or criminalize circumcision; we spoke to many hundreds of men, and doctors of both genders (including ranking members of the AMA, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Urologists, and members of the World Health Organization), and with the exception of a tiny fringe of radicals (none of whom were members of the above organizations, and most of whom were found on the internet), we never encountered men who regretted being circumcised, men who complained of lack of sexual sensation or gratification, or doctors who gave evidence that circumcision, if properly done, was unduly risky or harmful. And what is more, even of the tiny fringe of naysayers, the majority were neither Jewish nor Muslim.
The simple fact is that if one does not wish to have one's son circumcised, no one will force one to do so. There is noplace on earth that I know of where circumcision is compulsory and enforced-- even in Israel, even in Muslim countries (for non-Muslim residents, at least, and possibly there isn't enforcement for Muslims, either, although I don't know for certain if that is true in all Muslim countries).
And circumcision itself is a procedure which is, at worst, harmless. And so since there is little, if any, real objection to the practice of circumcision in the Jewish and Muslim communities, who are the only communities doing this for reasons of spirituality and religious tradition rather than medical or aesthetic purposes, there is no reason that circumcision should be universally banned, without exception for religious reasons, except as a form of legalized discrimination against the religious communities who do practice circumcision as a matter of ritual law, designed to force Jews and Muslims to leave the jurisdiction, or to apostasize and assimilate.
It is ridiculous to suppose that religious traditions which have been maintained for over three thousand years should be banned by external enforcement, simply because a few non-Jews-- who are not even required to circumcize their children if they don't want to-- are a little uncomfortable about it. Clearly such arguments are red herrings or straw men, since the actions in question are entirely contrary to the modern Western spirit of religious freedom and toleration.
I don't think it's Anti-Semitism or Anti-Islamism, it's just that someone should have a choice whether their genitalia is mutated.
Of course some things do fall under the jurisdiction of Parents but eating and and education don't require unnecessary mutilation.
"Mutilation" is a term subject to debate. Practically speaking, circumcision, if done properly, does not affect the proper functioning of the penis, and its effects on sensation are negligible.
Brit Milah, which means "The Covenant of Circumcision," is the most ancient and fundamental rite of Jewish identity. It could not possibly be more integral to Jewish identity, and is a key symbolic reminder for Jewish boys day in and day out that they are part of the Covenant of Abraham, just as their fathers were, and just as their sons will be. We don't do it for aesthetic reasons or for medical reasons: we do it because it has incredibly deep spiritual significance, and is a core part of Jewish practice. Jewish Law mandates that this must be done at eight days of age. Jewish men who are uncircumcised (except for medical reasons) are unable to fully participate in Jewish society.
And pretty much the entirety of the Jewish men I have spoken with have expressed relief that their circumcision was done when they were too young to remember it, and easily and quickly recovered from it-- and that they didn't have to suffer through the much more painful and uncomfortable procedure of adult circumcision.
The key here is that the overwhelming majority of Jews and Muslims are not complaining about circumcision-- they wish to keep doing it. It is non-Jews and non-Muslims who are complaining. So, fine, if they want to ban circumcision for other reasons, do it. I might consider it a stupid invasion into the rights of parents to make medical decisions for their children, but that's the business of governments, and I would keep silent about it. But include exceptions for religious purposes in the ban. Otherwise all it is is a bunch of non-Jews telling me and mine that we have no right to observe Judaism as we believe we are commanded by God to do. And, I expect, more or less the same would go for Muslims. And you can cloak that in whatever kind of "right to choose" language you like, but it still just boils down to xenophobia, anti-Semitism, and anti-Islamism, the same as when European Christian princes and kings tried to ban circumcision in the middle ages. And not to get that is plain naive.
Levite: Do you think this ban perhaps coincides with a tendency to mitigate religion's role in European society?
Yeah, I think this has a lot to do with the extreme secularization of Europe, and the increasing discomfort that Europeans show for religions that demand actions and behaviors other than mere abstract philosophies of benevolence.
