There is no such thing as “religious rights”.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

Cutting off a part of your penis is not a “religious right”, it was a sanitary measure against infections and diseases in ancient times when people couldn’t take a shower every day.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

As I’ve written here, the arguments offered by outraged members of Germany’s Jewish community in defense of their tradition are rather pathetic:

The head of the Central Committee of Jews, Dieter Graumann, said the ruling was “an unprecedented and dramatic intervention in the right of religious communities to self-determination.”

But “self-determination” needs to be determined by each individual for himself. A community doesn’t have the right to force an unnecessary medical procedure on anyone, least of all a child who hasn’t had the chance to determine whether he wants to be part of that community or not.

The judgement was an “outrageous and insensitive act. Circumcision of newborn boys is a fixed part of the Jewish religion and has been practiced worldwide for centuries,” added Graumann.

Just like slavery used to be.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

“This has been tradition for thousands of years…”

Just because something is a tradition, doesn’t mean it should be continued.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

Eugene, I respectfully disagree.  In the USA, the First Amendment enshrines such rights, including our precious right to be free from all religion.  The point is, these rights are personal to oneself.  A parent can’t exercise his child’s rights on his child’s behalf.  Nor does a parent’s right extend to imposing his own religious practices upon his child, especially where the child’s own rights are thereby violated, as in the case of genital mutilation.  This is a significant ruling from the German court and will provoke enormous controversy.  Too bad the point will be missed by most.  My bet is it will be viewed as German anti-Semitism, rather than an affirmation of the child’s fundamental human right to be free from religious tyranny.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

This is a very complex issue.  As someone who was raised a very religious Jew, and am currently a devout atheist, I struggle with it, although I’m leaning toward the side that views this as a religious freedom issue.
The reason is that rather than deciding this on the basis of figuring out the moral/ethical ramifications and coming down with a hard “yes” or “no”, I think some weighting needs to be applied.  This particular rite is both completely fundamental to Judaism and very much unknown as to the medical pros/cons (which probably means they are minor).  Which is why I would lean against disallowing it, much as I don’t think we should disallow baptisms because a child may catch cold or drown from them.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

Just wanted to add that the psychological damage caused by the indoctrination of children with (any) religion far outweighs any of these physical issues, but I don’t think we’re in favor of disallowing that, right?

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

While some people here seem to be confused about the legal rights of a guardian, I’d still draw the line at genital mutilation.

I’m glad to see that female genital mutilation is already illegal in Germany.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.