Dutch circumcision ban call sparks row

General discussions
Tulip1
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 1529
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 1:07 pm
Location: Sligo

Dutch circumcision ban call sparks row

Post by Tulip1 » Thu Nov 03, 2011 12:51 pm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15486834
Male circumcision is legal in the Netherlands but the body representing the country's doctors wants to end the practice.

The association is urging politicians to put it on the political agenda.

It is asking parents to think twice before having their sons circumcised because it regards the procedure as dangerous and unnecessary.
Pope says atheists pick & choose their morals. Correct. Today I will be frowning on child abuse & not having a problem with homosexuality.
aZerogodist
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 1280
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 6:04 pm
Location: Co. CORK
Contact:

Re: Dutch circumcision ban call sparks row

Post by aZerogodist » Thu Nov 03, 2011 1:18 pm

Tulip1 wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15486834
Male circumcision is legal in the Netherlands but the body representing the country's doctors wants to end the practice.

The association is urging politicians to put it on the political agenda.

It is asking parents to think twice before having their sons circumcised because it regards the procedure as dangerous and unnecessary.
But wouldn't they just do it themselves anyway, which would be more dangerous. I recall a home-made attempt in Ireland a while back :roll: , at least in the hands of the professionals there is accountability.
aiseiri47
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 177
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 1:25 pm

Re: Dutch circumcision ban call sparks row

Post by aiseiri47 » Thu Nov 03, 2011 1:49 pm

aZerogodist wrote: But wouldn't they just do it themselves anyway, which would be more dangerous. I recall a home-made attempt in Ireland a while back :roll: , at least in the hands of the professionals there is accountability.
This is a fair point; but at the same time, if they do try to do it at home they should be held legally accountable for physically maiming an infant or child. I imagine Western medical practitioners don't perform female genital mutilation either, but nobody would dream of adding that to available medical services to make sure parents don't do it themselves.
aZerogodist
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 1280
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 6:04 pm
Location: Co. CORK
Contact:

Re: Dutch circumcision ban call sparks row

Post by aZerogodist » Thu Nov 03, 2011 1:53 pm

aiseiri47 wrote:This is a fair point; but at the same time, if they do try to do it at home they should be held legally accountable for physically maiming an infant or child. I imagine Western medical practitioners don't perform female genital mutilation either, but nobody would dream of adding that to available medical services to make sure parents don't do it themselves.
Very true, didn't think of that, this will make an interesting debate.
paolovf
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 257
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 3:58 pm

Re: Dutch circumcision ban call sparks row

Post by paolovf » Thu Nov 03, 2011 2:27 pm

And that is essentially what makes this such a fiercely contentious issue: the rights of the child versus the rights of religion.
That last line really sums it up. I'd be very angry with my parents if they had done this to me as a child. If I was a doctor I would refuse to carry out the procedure on the grounds of it being medically unethical.

I can't envisage how this would work out if the ban was passed. I don't know many Jewish or Muslim people so don't know how they'd react - the article seems to have interviewed fairly devout people. Does anyone else have a better perspective on how it would be taken by the wider community?
Dr Raskolnikov
Posts: 197
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 11:16 pm
Location: "In the beginning there was the word, and the word was "word up biatch""

Re: Dutch circumcision ban call sparks row

Post by Dr Raskolnikov » Thu Nov 03, 2011 2:31 pm

aZerogodist wrote:But wouldn't they just do it themselves anyway, which would be more dangerous. I recall a home-made attempt in Ireland a while back :roll: , at least in the hands of the professionals there is accountability.
My view is that unless there is a medical reason for the op (which is sometimes the case), no medical professional should be obliged to perform this "service".
Science is like a blabbermouth who ruins the movie by telling you how it ends. Well, I say there are some things we don't want to know. Important things. - Ned Flanders
aiseiri47
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 177
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 1:25 pm

Re: Dutch circumcision ban call sparks row

Post by aiseiri47 » Thu Nov 03, 2011 4:13 pm

I can't envisage how this would work out if the ban was passed. I don't know many Jewish or Muslim people so don't know how they'd react - the article seems to have interviewed fairly devout people. Does anyone else have a better perspective on how it would be taken by the wider community?
My particular experience with Jewish and Muslim people is that they are generally far more devout in their respective religions than the average Western Christian. I think it's a result of two main factors: One, both religions have laws that apply to daily life in a more pervasive way than Christianity, dietary laws being a prime example. Two, Islam and Judaism haven't adapted to modern Western values. They haven't had to: Islam has mostly been practised in largely traditional, Eastern countries and immigration of Muslims to Western countries is still a very recent occurrence. Jewish people have of course lived in the West for longer, but mostly in very insular communities.

There are less devout members of both religions, but they are the "cultural" Jews who are more about dreidels and bar mitzvahs than they are about kosher. And in Islam, we can see the affects of the West already on younger Muslims who are second-generation immigrants. I don't think it will take many generations for a Western Islam to exist alongside Western Christianity.

As for now, I think the interviewees in the article represent the demographics fairly well. Circumcision is a religious tradition akin to baptism. Luckily, the Christians went with a more benign celebration of birth, but I don't think people who practise these religions will see it that way. :?
DaithiDublin
Posts: 188
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 6:15 pm
Location: Bray, Co. Wicklow
Contact:

Re: Dutch circumcision ban call sparks row

Post by DaithiDublin » Fri Nov 04, 2011 11:43 pm

aiseiri47 wrote:As for now, I think the interviewees in the article represent the demographics fairly well. Circumcision is a religious tradition akin to baptism. Luckily, the Christians went with a more benign celebration of birth, but I don't think people who practise these religions will see it that way. :?
Which I why I like the Dutch for this. Circumcision is a ritual, not a regular religious observance. Nobody is calling for anyone to stop observing their religion. They are being asked instead to validate their ritual. Solid medical grounds are being used to oppose it, and the only reason being returned is:
It is written in the Islamic text the Hadith that Muslim men should "cut the things that grow".
And:
"It's written in the Torah, in the Bible, that we should circumcise the child when the child is 8 days old. What God tells us to do, we must do," said Rabbi Jacobs, one of the Netherlands' most senior religious leaders.
Compelling these people to give a better explanation than that brings the fallacy of their beliefs into focus.

If the Muslim motivation is simply to "cut the things that grow", they must explain why they interpret this to specifically refer to the foreskin. Why not also remove the nose and earlobes of a baby too. These too, are "things that grow"

As for the Jewish assertion that "What God tells us to do, we must do", why aren't they stoning adulterous women in Jerusalem any more?

They claim the right to mutilate their children on the basis that they are carrying our their god's instructions, and to do otherwise would go against their beliefs. In that case they should be made to answer why they do not obey every instruction from their god. Why would failing to remove their son's foreskin be more offensive to their god than failing to kill someone who turned on a light on the sabbath?

Each belief carries instructions to kill non-believers. While they happily get on with doing this in their own back yards, they cannot condone that when on the world stage. Because the world stage is secular. The global community couldn't exist if it was otherwise. And the secular moral code is of a standard that is too high for most religions. It respects people that religion would condemn. It values life, liberty and the rights of the individual. It asks people only to obey the community, the opinions of which can be challenged, not a god who's ancient word is final.

If your God told you to do something as heinous as mutilate a child, then we have a right to ask you to prove that god exists. And until you can, we say leave the kid with his foreskin until he's old enough to decide for himself what he wants to do with it. And I'd leave that decision until at least 16.
As yet I have not found a single case of a terrestrial animal which fertilises itself.

- Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species
(he obviously never went to Bray)
GT
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 145
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 6:41 pm

Re: Dutch circumcision ban call sparks row

Post by GT » Sat Nov 05, 2011 12:02 am

+1
Regards,

GT

Faith is following someone else's lies.
GeoffLillis
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:40 am

Re: Dutch circumcision ban call sparks row

Post by GeoffLillis » Tue Nov 29, 2011 3:56 pm

It's probably worth mentioning that there is a small (but growing) number of Jews who do not practice circumcision: http://www.jewsagainstcircumcision.com/
Also interesting is that circumcision is not obligatory for Muslim converts who have passed puberty. Something of a double standard.
Post Reply