Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

German court bans male circumcision, sparks outrage among Jews, Muslims
MSNBC ^ | June 27, 2012 | lde Raftery, Reuters

Posted on 06/27/2012 7:22:25 PM PDT by Colonel Kangaroo

Edited on 06/27/2012 7:55:55 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]

BERLIN - Jewish and Muslim groups protested on Wednesday after a German court banned the circumcision of young boys for religious reasons, Reuters reported. The ban applies to the Cologne region of Germany.

The court in the western city of Cologne handed down the decision on Tuesday in the case of a doctor who was prosecuted for circumcising a four-year-old Muslim boy.


(Excerpt) Read more at worldnews.msnbc.msn.com ...


TOPICS: Current Events; Islam; Judaism
KEYWORDS:
Maybe it's Germany's plan to bring Jews and Muslims together in common cause.
1 posted on 06/27/2012 7:22:32 PM PDT by Colonel Kangaroo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo
Maybe it's Germany's plan to bring Jews and Muslims together in common cause.

It's ingenious, and possibly the only topic on which they could agree.

Of course, it won't take much to break them apart--just throw in female circumcision.

2 posted on 06/27/2012 7:30:13 PM PDT by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

I don’t guess these people ever studied much history, because if they did, they would know that Germany is not known so much for religious tolerance. I guess they should have thought of that before they went there.


3 posted on 06/27/2012 7:34:21 PM PDT by mtrott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine
Maybe it's Germany's plan to bring Jews and Muslims together in common cause.

Just like the British Enfield Rifle united hindus and muslims by using cartridges packed in beef grease and pig lard.

4 posted on 06/27/2012 7:36:14 PM PDT by Repeat Offender (While the wicked stand confounded, call me with Thy Saints surrounded)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Admin Moderator
I erred in providing a proper link to the article.

http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/27/12446284-german-court-bans-male-circumcision-sparks-outrage-among-jews-muslims?lite

5 posted on 06/27/2012 7:38:21 PM PDT by Colonel Kangaroo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

God put a foreskin on a man for two reasons.. The notion that a foreskin is ‘unsanitary’ is bogus in the modern era. It’s wrong that the first thing a doctor does to a newborn boy is cut part of this penis off..


6 posted on 06/27/2012 7:38:21 PM PDT by GeorgeWashingtonsGhost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

Somewhere in the US, Dr. Dean Edell must be celebrating.

Why would not the court’s ruling also apply to the barbaric practice of the Muslims to circumcize females, e.g., female genital mutilation?


7 posted on 06/27/2012 7:40:47 PM PDT by miele man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Repeat Offender
Just like the British Enfield Rifle united hindus and muslims by using cartridges packed in beef grease and pig lard.

Did you see that on PBS the other night? I did, on the program about Queen Victoria and the Indian revolts around 1860. Quite the move, mixing both beef and pig grease--not halal, and tough on the sacred cow. And this was just at the dawn of the petroleum age, which brought non-animal based grease. Talk about bad timing.

8 posted on 06/27/2012 7:42:05 PM PDT by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Colonel Kangaroo

9 posted on 06/27/2012 7:44:29 PM PDT by FreedomPoster (Islam delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeorgeWashingtonsGhost
Dude, its in the bible.

Do you support this law?

10 posted on 06/27/2012 7:45:00 PM PDT by Copenhagen Smile (Are you not entertained?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: GeorgeWashingtonsGhost

The real ghost of Washington would not speak so.


11 posted on 06/27/2012 7:50:40 PM PDT by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine
Did you see that on PBS the other night?

Can't say that I did.....call me ignorant; while I have a tv, I rarely watch it and I'm not sure I even have PBS. Although since it is "public broadcast" I'm guessing I must.

I do wonder why there isn't any outrage from Christians? Maybe because they aren't a protected class under the west's leftist ideology? Both of my sons were circumcised at birth.

12 posted on 06/27/2012 7:51:06 PM PDT by Repeat Offender (While the wicked stand confounded, call me with Thy Saints surrounded)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine

Sounds to me like a plan to nudge both groups out of Germany....


13 posted on 06/27/2012 7:59:46 PM PDT by Bshaw (A nefarious deceit is upon us all!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Repeat Offender
Can't say that I did.....call me ignorant(re PBS as source of beef/pig grease combo)

No, I'll call you erudite. It's a factoid I was unaware of, and was only brought to my attention by the tube.

14 posted on 06/27/2012 8:01:43 PM PDT by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: All

Looks to me like Jews need to head out of Germany, and head for Israel.

Is this thing being done in Germany under the Auspices of ‘rights of the child” international laws?


15 posted on 06/27/2012 8:03:47 PM PDT by PrairieLady2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine
No, I'll call you erudite.

Sticks and stones...... ;)

16 posted on 06/27/2012 8:04:23 PM PDT by Repeat Offender (While the wicked stand confounded, call me with Thy Saints surrounded)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Repeat Offender

The apostle Paul was telling both Jews they no longer needed to be circumcised some 2,000 years ago. Gentiles never had to be circumcised.

Read Galatians 5 and 6.

Good on Germany that a judge there ended this barbaric practice.


17 posted on 06/27/2012 9:06:17 PM PDT by Stingray (Stand for the truth or you'll fall for anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Stingray

Ah...so you believe Government is better than religion.

You DO realize Jews don’t accept the Apostle Paul as authoritative, don’t you?


18 posted on 06/27/2012 9:19:10 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (A conservative can't please a liberal unless he jumps in front of a bus or off of a cliff)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Cut me some slack. I’M A GHOST NOW AND IT’S 2012!


19 posted on 06/27/2012 11:09:35 PM PDT by GeorgeWashingtonsGhost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Copenhagen Smile

First of all, ‘Bible’ is always capitalized. Secondly, I think it’s the parents decision, not the government’s. I just have a problem with circumcision because I don’t think it applies in the modern era due to abundance of soaps and bathing facilities (improvement of sanitary conditions).


20 posted on 06/27/2012 11:15:34 PM PDT by GeorgeWashingtonsGhost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Repeat Offender

You saw that on PBS, didn’t you? I cringed when I heard that, because Lee-Enfield rifles hadn’t been invented at the time of the Sepoy Mutiny.


21 posted on 06/27/2012 11:43:34 PM PDT by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GeorgeWashingtonsGhost

Be that as it may, they are proscribing a sign of religious covenant that dates back to Abraham.


22 posted on 06/28/2012 12:01:32 AM PDT by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Stingray

“Barbaric”?


23 posted on 06/28/2012 12:04:26 AM PDT by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Stingray

So, God was barbaric for insisting on circumcision?


24 posted on 06/28/2012 2:19:00 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

Some how Germany worrying about humane treatment seems like an oxymoron. Didn’t they just exterminate 10 million people a generation ago? Oh, that’s right it’s something the Jews believe in. Well, there you go.


25 posted on 06/28/2012 12:14:54 PM PDT by Cowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Copenhagen Smile
Dude, its in the bible.

So is killing someone because they use two different kinds of cloth to make their clothes. Do you support that?

26 posted on 06/28/2012 12:24:48 PM PDT by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is, it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ozzymandus
You saw that on PBS, didn’t you? I cringed when I heard that, because Lee-Enfield rifles hadn’t been invented at the time of the Sepoy Mutiny.

A I told another poster, no I did not see it on PBS, as I don't really watch TV. I'm sorry you cringed when you saw it. While the Lee-Enfield rile with brass cartridge ammo had not been invented yet.....the Pattern 1853 Enfield were first used by the Brits in well, 1853.

The Indian mutiny was in 1957.......four years after the introduction of the Pattern 1853 Enfield rifle.

27 posted on 06/28/2012 2:43:27 PM PDT by Repeat Offender (While the wicked stand confounded, call me with Thy Saints surrounded)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
Context context context. The passage in Leviticus you are referring to is discussing the mixing of similar things and why it was a bad idea.

Nowhere in Leviticus 19 does it say those who mix two types of cloth are to be killed. Did you even double check that before posting or just repeat what somebody told you? Remember, trust but verify.

28 posted on 06/28/2012 2:58:21 PM PDT by Copenhagen Smile (Are you not entertained?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: GeorgeWashingtonsGhost
Doubletalk! You say its the parents decision, and then go on to say you are against circumcision.

For or against this law?

29 posted on 06/28/2012 3:00:16 PM PDT by Copenhagen Smile (Are you not entertained?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: GeorgeWashingtonsGhost

You’re missing the point in an EPIC way.


30 posted on 06/28/2012 3:19:30 PM PDT by steve86 (Acerbic by nature not nurture TM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Repeat Offender

The “historian” on PBS actually said Lee-Enfield, not Enfield, and as a nit-picking point, I doubt Enfield rifles were being issued to Indian troops 3 years after their introduction. Native troops usually were issued previous-generation arms that became available when front-line troops were issued new weapons. I’ll try to look up the dates when Enfield-pattern rifles were issued to Indian troops.


31 posted on 06/29/2012 11:59:58 AM PDT by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Repeat Offender

Well, wikipedia says the 1853 Enfield was considered a cause of the mutiny, so I guess that’s that. I stand corrected.


32 posted on 06/29/2012 12:07:13 PM PDT by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson