Norway to ban circumcision, maybe...

[Polarbear]

The Center party, Social services and the Humanist union of Norway wants to ban circumcision and has branded the practice child abuse, thoughts?

Links:

Religious leaders furious over Norway?s proposed circumcision ban

10 good Norwegians – protesting the circumcision ban proposal | Norway, Israel and the jews

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I think I would agree that routine infant circumcision is a form of abuse. However, I also think that unenforceable law is bad law, and I don't think that banning circumcision would actually stop it.

I wouldn't support an outright legal ban. I would support upholding the right of any doctor not to do it. I would also support non-legislative methods to reduce the number of circumcisions (ad campaigns, for instance). I think I might also support it being a factor in legal decisions... for instance, in custody proceedings, if one parent would circumcize the child and the other wouldn't, this (along with all the other factors at play) would play a role in deciding which parent could provide a better home for the child.

 

[Revoltingest]

There are those who cite religious freedom in circumcising girls too, yet that is banned....at least until the girl is old enuf to
decide for herself. So I don't buy the argument that it's anti-Jew or anti-Islam. Let the boy decide when he's older & ready.

 

[Breathe]

I think I would agree that routine infant circumcision is a form of abuse. However, I also think that unenforceable law is bad law, and I don't think that banning circumcision would actually stop it.

I wouldn't support an outright legal ban. I would support upholding the right of any doctor not to do it. I would also support non-legislative methods to reduce the number of circumcisions (ad campaigns, for instance). I think I might also support it being a factor in legal decisions... for instance, in custody proceedings, if one parent would circumcize the child and the other wouldn't, this (along with all the other factors at play) would play a role in deciding which parent could provide a better home for the child.

Sounds pretty good to me.

A problem with this is that Norway would risk illegal, unskilled circumcisions, which could go very wrong.

 

[Wirey]

I was circumcised when I was four days old, and it still took four lumberjacks and a hedge trimmer. True story.

I say ban it. Let each guy decide if he wants a turtle neck or a crew neck when he's old enough to decide on his own. If it's truly a covenant with God, how much better if the guy makes the decision himself.

 

[Shuddhasattva]

About time.

 

[Skwim]

About time.

Agreed.

What if a religion demanded that one's nose be converted to a single nostril.

​

Would that be acceptable?

How about eyelid surgery?

​

Or,

tattooing?

​

Think these would be acceptable?

I don't see male circumcision as being any different.

 

[mycorrhiza]

I do see problems with a ban (they might do the circumcisions anyway, leading to further complications), but male circumcision shouldn't be any more legal than female circumcisions. That some people, as they grow up, wish that they were never circumcised is reason enough. The individuals who, when they turn eighteen, want to be circumcised should be allowed to be so.

It's the same as with tattoos or piercings. They should be allowed for 18 years and up, but you shouldn't be allowed to give them to children.

It has nothing to do with any form of anti-semitism or religious freedom, it's simply to protect children from harm.

 

[Rakhel]

From the first article

She stressed that boys who have been ritually circumcised can never remove what she called “a religious marker” if they choose to convert to another religion or have no religious beliefs.

I’m not buying the argument that banning circumcision is a violation of religious freedom, because such freedom must involve being able to choose for themselves.

Since when has circumcision prevented anyone from converting to another religion or giving it up at all?
She can't disavow a religious claim then use it to suit her her argument.

 

[Skwim]

I do see problems with a ban (they might do the circumcisions anyway, leading to further complications).

It would come to a swift end in years to come should circumcised people start suing the circumcisers for breaking the law.

 

[lunakilo]

From the first article


Since when has circumcision prevented anyone from converting to another religion or giving it up at all?
She can't disavow a religious claim then use it to suit her her argument.

She is not saying that circumcision prevents anyone from converting to another religion, just that you cannot be un-circumcised and thus cannot remove this "religious marker".

 

[lunakilo]

It would come to a swift end in years to come should circumcised people start suing the circumcisers for breaking the law.

This is Norway we are talking about, NOT the US.
People don't sue like in the US (not very often anyway)

 

[Rakhel]

and may be that is where the difference is. Those that aren't Jewish, at least in the US, don't typically see circumcision as a "religious marker."

But seriously, I cannot see having this "religious marker" preventing one from not believing is a god or any god for that matter. Not like there is a national registry where you have to identify what religion you are and that you have to prove you are not circumcised to be a member. Unless that is the case in Norway.

 

[Skwim]

This is Norway we are talking about, NOT the US.
People don't sue like in the US (not very often anyway)

for Norway.

 

[Wirey]

I was clipped young, and I'm grateful. My back is sore enough as it is. Whe I woke up in New York, a giant monkey was trying to climb it. True story.

God, I'm ashamed of myself for posting a joke this lame, and yet.....

Editted to remove the reference to Revoltingest's raincoat.

 

[Panda]

and may be that is where the difference is. Those that aren't Jewish, at least in the US, don't typically see circumcision as a "religious marker."

But seriously, I cannot see having this "religious marker" preventing one from not believing is a god or any god for that matter. Not like there is a national registry where you have to identify what religion you are and that you have to prove you are not circumcised to be a member. Unless that is the case in Norway.

Outside of the US it is not a routine matter to be circumcised and is far more a religious matter.

 

[Caladan]

Later on we should ban Polynesian, African, East Asian, and South American rights of passage. Until all is conformed with the cultural standards of a white-European majority.
I can't believe what some social sectors are wasting their time on. Don't they have real problems in Norway?

 

[Rakhel]

so if this is about removing a "religious marker" or the ability not to? wouldn't that make the argument against circumcision an anti-religious one? Or am I pulling the nazi card too soon

 

[YmirGF]

Don't they have real problems in Norway?

My thoughts, exactly. Can you actually imagine a group of adults sitting around in rooms debating about this? The mind reels...

 

[Polarbear]

Later on we should ban Polynesian, African, East Asian, and South American rights of passage. Until all is conformed with the cultural standards of a white-European majority.

Well the Secular humanist association has only targeted circumsion so far so we don't know for sure how far they want to take this.

I can't believe what some social sectors are wasting their time on. Don't they have real problems in Norway?

Yes, we do have real problems in Norway, we don't know what to do with all our oil money!