German Parliament circumcises Cologne Judge

Five months ago, a judge in Cologne ruled that circumcision was to be considered bodily harm and that religious freedom did not have priority over the welfare of a child. All hell broke loose in the Jewish community of Germany and Frau Merkel promised the Jewish community to sort it. She has. Now, the Bundestag, the German parliament, has overruled the judge.

Merkel did not need much convincing. She did not want Germany to be the one country that prevents Jews from practicing their religious practices and rituals. This is understandable. 

And yet, it is a bit of a shame, not because of the boys but because it would have been interesting to see how the supreme constitutional court of Germany would have dealt with this important question of how far you can go in the name of religious freedom.

Everyone can breathe freely again and the little boys get cut, or as some have it, mutilated. Take it from me: the trauma – if there is trauma - does not last long. 

Circumcision II

The Cologne court’s ruling that circumcision is tantamount to committing bodily injury continues to cause unrest. German politicians needed this ruling like a hole in the head. If they could, they would probably have the Cologne judge circumcised without anaesthetics. 

Everybody, rabbis, politicians and blog writers like me, are all chewing on the forbidden foreskin. Mrs. Merkel has warned that Germany might become a laughing stock of the world for banning circumcision. Her ministers are searching for ways to pass legislation that will allow such bodily harm (i.e. circumcision) for reasons of “religious freedom”.

Israel’s President Peres has also given it a tug: In a letter to his German counterpart Gauck, Peres explained that circumcision was a “crucial” Jewish custom, “a central aspect of our nation’s Jewish identity.” Now, 79-year-old Charlotte Knobloch, a former chairperson of the Central Council of German Jews, has come out with a bitter howl published by the Süddeutsche Zeitung. For Knobloch, who survived Nazi Germany and life in post-War yet Nazi-ridden Germany, this ruling is more than she can swallow.

This general panic is a shame, as the issue deserves unhurried consideration. Everyone is talking about religious freedom – whatever that is - instead of going for a serious investigation into the fascinating questions of a baby boy’s rights and the extent to which circumcision is indeed harmful and/or traumatic.

Circumcision, Germany, Israel, Merkel, Peres

Cut that dick! Oh no you won't?

Years ago, an Israeli friend of mine told me that he considered the fact that he was circumcised at birth, an offence caused to him by his parents. He believes that he was deprived of the fullness of sexual pleasures as a result.

A few days ago, a German court ruled that male circumcision was equal to grievous bodily harm and could only be permitted for medical reasons. Germany is a federal country and the state court ruling is not binding in the other German states. In all likelihood, however, it will be tested in the other states and probably also go up to the High Court.

Four million Muslims and about 100,000 Jews who live in Germany may have a problem. How many 18-year-old men would voluntarily undergo circumcision? The speaker of the Jewish community has already reacted with anger: "Circumcision of newborn boys is a fixed part of the Jewish religion and has been practised worldwide for centuries. This religious right is respected in every country in the world."

For many, circumcision is a cultural ritual that is almost as powerful as a religious command. A thirtsomething year old friend of mine told me that when his wife had announced to him that she was not having her son circumcised, he at first found it hard to accept. They are both Israeli Jews and atheists and he told me "I found it difficult to even consider that my son should not have the same kind of dick as I."

But are we to allow grievously bodily harm to our children just because it is a religious ritual that has been practiced for centuries? In addition to the human rights question, this could also add to the friction and issues with the growing Muslim population. This exciting decision might force the courts to define religious freedom in an ever less religious Europe. I am looking forward to it.