Kein Asyl wg. Beschneidung

Der Kommentar von "Kevin" unter dem Artikel macht deutlich, worum es geht.

Zitat

"If it were her daughter, and she said she needed to protect her from female circumcision, there would have been no issue. This despite the fact that the form of female circumcision commonly practiced in Malaysia is far less harmful than the typical male circumcision.
This has everything to do with the West’s inability to see male circumcision for what it is — genital mutilation, an abhorrent , permanently damaging sexual violence against a child and a gross violation of human rights."

Wenn ich das Urteil so lese, war die Zirkumzision überhaupt nicht der Grund für die Appelation sondern die Konversion des Ehemannes.

Die Antragstellerin hat ja anscheinend selbst zugestimmt, daß der Junge zirkumzidiert wird, wenn ihre sonstigen mütterlichen Rechte gewahrt blieben.

Sie hätte es in D versuchen sollen - dann hätte man mal 1631d vor das BVerfG zerren können...

(Im übrigen wie nebenan: eine christliche Erziehung zählt vor Gericht überhaupt nichts...)

Zitat von Hickhack

Die Antragstellerin hat ja anscheinend selbst zugestimmt, daß der Junge zirkumzidiert wird, wenn ihre sonstigen mütterlichen Rechte gewahrt blieben.

"She accepted that circumcision could be carried out without violating the child's rights under the Convention, but only if it were carried out in the context of loving family relationships and was supported by both parents. Those conditions, she said, were not satisfied in the present case, since the appellant was strongly opposed to the procedure. She submitted that in those circumstances it would not be in the child's best interests to return him to Malaysia where his father's wishes would prevail over those of his mother."