There was an error in this gadget

Friday, 20 July 2012

Circumcision Debate

Yesterday the German 'Bundesrat,' the Upper House of the German Parliament, struck down the court decision that circumcision of boys was Grievous Bodily Harm or a form of assault. The mechanism, before all the legalists get themselves worked up, was to pass an amendment to the existing legislation that 'clarifies' the intent of the legislation by the simple expedient of excluding the circumcision of boys for religious or health grounds from the legislation addressing assault in any form.

It must still, as I understand it, pass the Constitutional Court, but there is little doubt, from the storm the original court ruling has sparked, that it will. Of course, various anti-religion, anti-parental choice 'protection' agencies are squealing about it, but they are very much minority voices here. And thankfully, what the majority think and want is still what rules.

The Bundesrat was pretty clear that this in no way condones or approves the mutilation of girls for 'religious' reasons, neither does it permit any other form of 'initiation' rite for children of either sex. It is worth noting that the original complaint was brought by a 'children's protection society' which is opposed to religious teaching for children as well. There seems to be no depth to which some activist groups will not sink in their attempts to impose their 'vision' on the rest of society.

Hope fully others will now take note and back off.

2 comments:

  1. Of course they won't take notice and back off! Unfortunately the cultural marxists are like the Hydra - cut off one head and two more will take its place. I just wonder if a similar outcome would be arrived at if the British judiciary and political class were dealing with it...

    Slim Jim

    ReplyDelete
  2. Slim Jim, probably not, there's bound to be a civil servant somewhere in Whitehall who would tell the relevant Minister, "You can't do that Minister, it would set a precedent which would be unfortunate." Plus, we don't have an effective Upper Chamber any longer and the Other Place is stuffed with anti-religionists anyway who would want to make sure the ruling stood.

    ReplyDelete