Religious Freedom?

Male circumcision can be dated back to ancient Egypt. It is said that circumcision is performed as a religious sacrifice and as a rite of passage marking a boy's entrance to adulthood. It is a religious law and tradition in Judaism and Islam.

The foreskin is opened and then separated from the glans after inspection. Though anesthesia is an option, many procedures done worldwide are often performed without a specialized circumcision device. Bleeding and infection are the most common complications.

Infant circumcision has been debated over many years. Many medical associations take the position that the parents should determine what is in the best interest of the infant or child, but some think it is unethical to perform the act without the child's consent.

In the U.S., professional associations and legislators lean towards the attitude that circumcision is a non-recommended routine, but they also think there is no need to prohibit the practice.

However, on June 26th, 2012, a court in Cologne, Germany equated the practice of circumcision with inflicting bodily harm on boys too young to consent. It brought an international criticism as an infringement of religious freedom and also caused legal confusion. Due to this case in June, many hospitals in the country, and even in neighboring Austria and Switzerland recommended doctors to refrain from carrying out circumcisions until legal clarity is created.

Later in the year, German lawmakers passed a resolution to ensure that the practice could be carried out safely. "Jewish and Muslim religious life must continue to be possible in Germany."

After passing this law, I thought everyone was happy with this outcome with their right to practice circumcision, but the visiting rabbi, Yona Metzger stated that the proposed compromises that would allow doctors to perform the rite in the presence of mohelim, or the use of anesthesia during the practice were seen as unacceptable because of the sacred significance of the rite, passed down as a decree from God, for Jews.

However, what about the consent of the child? It is no doubt a violation of a child's bodily integrity, and I think it should not be carried out until the boys are much older, at least when they have the knowledge in the procedure and right to choose to do it or not.

"Religious freedom cannot be used as an excuse for carrying out violence against an under-age child," the Bavarian Radio quoted the petition to prosecutors as saying.

Though personally I don't think it is a kind of violence per se, but I do agree that religious freedom shouldn't be abused.