Total Enttäuschendes aus Dänemark :(

87% der Dänen, also fast neun von zehn wollen nach neuster Umfrage ein Verbot der Jungenverstümmelung.
Und was machen die sogenannten "Volksvertreter"? Erklären es zum Menschenrecht Jungen genital zu verstümmeln. Volksverräter passt besser.

Zitat

Jair Melchior thinks that a ban would be undemocratic...

Das ist überhaupt der Knaller. Wenn 87% der Bevölkerung für ein Verbot sind, dann wäre ein solches undemokratisch.
Demos, gr. das Volk. Kratia, die Herrschaft.

http://politiken.dk/kultur/kultur_…af-drengeboern/

[Blockierte Grafik: http://multimedia.pol.dk/archive/01042/…ng_1042483y.jpg]

Sie sind gut organisiert, international vernetzt – und geben nie auf. Jahr für Jahr betreiben Gruppen wie "circinfo", "Gilgal Society", die Europäische Janusz Korczak Akademie (mit Hilfe von Elke Wittich) u.v.a.m. erneut Propaganda für die Genitalverstümmelung von Jungen. Die Auseinandersetzungen sind meistens von unverhohlen Beleidigungen und Diffamierungen gegen Kinderschützer und einer Dämonisierung der Penis-Vorhaut geprägt sowie von Bedrohungen gegen die rund 1,4 Milliarden Jungen auf der Welt.
Nicht erst seit das Kölner Landgericht im Sommer 2012 in einem Fall von Jungenverstümmelung auf strafbare Körperverletzung erkannte nimmt auch die breite Öffentlichkeit die Angriffe gegen wehrlose Jungen zur Kenntnis. Der feindseligen Ton der Debatte muss angesprochen werden, die vehemente Kritik am Schutz wehrloser Kinder, die Diffamierungen (Antisemitismus, Religionsfeindlichkeit, u.a.). Die meist anonymen Leserreaktionen reichten zum Entsetzen vieler bis zu offenem Deutschenhass. "Wartet nur, bald heulen die Sirenen, und dann heult ihr!" "Germany has a foreskin the size of an umbrella and the underlying schmutz to accompany such an appendage can only be the reasoning why the Germans act so irrationally – yes, it must be the balanitis which gives them the hatred of all things credible" "The goyim like to be able stick their greasy smegma covered glans penis into any dry hole they come across whether willing or not", usw, usw...

Befeuert wird die Jungenverstümmelungspropaganda regelmäßig durch den Verstümmelungsfan und Biologen Brian Morris, der früher mal an der Uni Sydney arbeitete. Morris Studien werden von den Promotern der Jungenverstümmelung begeistert aufgenommen und verbreitet. Morris behauptet unter anderem, dass die Verstümmelung von nicht zustimmungsfähigen Jungen, die noch gar keinen Sex haben diese bestens vor einer HIV-Infektion schützen würde.

Experten halten diese Studien allein schon aus statistischen Gründen für unseriös: In Mitteleuropa ist bei einer geringen Verbreitung der Vorhautlosigkeit die HIV-Inzidenz wesentlich niedriger als in den USA, wo 70-80 der Männer unten ohne sind.

Morris will weiter"forschen". Viel kleine Jungen auf der Welt befürchten, dass die Jungenverstümmelungsfans keine Ruhe geben werden.

Es gehören immer zwei dazu. Eben auch eine Zeitung, die so etwas veröffentlicht. Die Zeitung des Zentralrates. Und wir wissen ja - die pösen Vorhäute lassen das Getreide verderben, und dann müssen wir alle verhungern!

http://www.juedische-allgemeine.de/article/view/id/20994

Und überhaupt....

Da findet man viele aufschlussreiche Artikel (über die JA, und den Zentralrat), auch zur Frage der Betäubung:

Zitat von Michael Rosenkranz

Da beim acht Tage alten Neugeborenen die Schmerznerven noch nicht voll ausgereift sind, läßt sich, bis maximal zum zehnten Tag, die Beschneidung ohne Betäubung durchführen, ohne daß das Kind wesentliche Schmerzen empfindet.

Was allerdings schon 2006 längst überholt war.

Und was "wesentlich" ist bestimme ich.

Interview mit Kristina Schröder:

Zitat von JA

Sie haben als Voraussetzungen für die Beschneidung angemessene Betäubung und ärztliche Mitwirkung genannt. Ist
Ihnen bewusst, dass diese Forderung der jüdischen Tradition widerspricht?
Ich erkenne in der jüdischen Religionspraxis durchaus Wege, eine maximale Schmerzfreiheit und ärztliche Standards mit den religiösen Vorschriften in Einklang zu bringen.

Was diese "Wege" sein sollen, hat Schröder nie verraten. Auch nicht, wie man "Schmerzfreiheit" steigern kann. Schmerzfrei ist schmerzfrei, schmerzfreier "maximal schmerzfrei" geht nicht. Ansonsten behauptete nur Persil mal weißer als weiß zu waschen.

Die Parlamentsmehrheit hat sich in der Frage der Betäubung durch Nichtmediziner einfach "einen in die Tasche gelogen" Augen zu und durch! Und anschließend war die Devise "Schnauze halten - das Thema ist gegessen!" Bloß kein staatliches Wächteramt, ob Babys bei Operationen tatsächlich angemessen betäubt werden - das geht doch wohl niemanden etwas an!

Wie sagte Adriana Altaras im Fernsehen? "Waren die [ihre Söhne] betäubt?" "Nein!!!"

Aufschlussreich auch:

Zitat von JA

Änderungsanträge gab es zudem von dem Grünen-Abgeordneten Jerzy Montag, wonach Mohalim nur bis 14 Tage nach der Geburt den Säugling ohne Betäubung beschneiden dürfen.

Im Änderungsantrag von Montag, Beck & Co. stand tatsächlich:

Zitat

2. In Absatz 2 werden die Wörter „sechs Monaten“ durch die Wörter „vierzehn
Tagen“ ersetzt.

Und in der Begründung:

Zitat von Montags Produktion

Dies bedeutet im Er-
gebnis, dass – wenn der Eingriff ohne Assistenz eines Arztes oder einer Ärztin
erfolgt – in den ersten sechs Monaten nach der Geburt die Schmerzlinderung
nicht mittels Narkosemittel durchgeführt werden kann.

Was sachlich richtig ist - allerdings gilt das die ersten 14 Tage genauso. Wenn mit "Narkosemittel" Vollnarkose gemeint ist, ist das Risiko sogar die ersten zwei Lebensjahre bei nicht zwingend notwendigen oder aufschiebbaren Operationen nicht vertretbar.

Zitat

Vielmehr ist darauf abzustellen, dass bei Neugeborenen die Belastungen einer
Anästhesie (Narkose) so beträchtlich sind, dass kleinere medizinische Eingriffe
unterlassen oder auf ein Alter verschoben werden, in dem solche anästhetischen
Maßnahmen relativ komplikationslos eingesetzt werden können.

Völlig richtig - OMG, Montag und Beck haben tatsächlich mal Durchblick!

Und dann kommt der Fallrückzieher. Die schwachsinnige Begründung, warum das die ersten 14 Tage nicht gelten soll:

Zitat

In der Praxis
werden Beschneidungen an Neugeborenen in Deutschland nur bis zu zweiten
Lebenswoche nur unter Anwendung von schmerzlindernden Salben oder Zäpf-
chen durchgeführt.

S'ist halt so Praxis!

Und deswegen ist auf einmal nicht mehr darauf abzustellen, "dass kleinere medizinische Eingriffe unterlassen oder auf ein Alter verschoben werden, in dem solche anästhetischen Maßnahmen relativ komplikationslos eingesetzt werden können"

Die einzige deutschsprachige jüdische Zeitung, die auch mal kritische Artikel über MGM gebracht hat, die "Jüdische Zeitung", die gibt es leider nicht mehr.

Zitat von Elke Wittich

Seit der Religionswissenschaftler Jens-André Herbener am 28. September in der Zeitung »Politiken« einen Beitrag gegen ein Beschneidungsverbot veröffentlichte, nimmt auch die breite Öffentlichkeit die Angriffe zur Kenntnis.

Wittich meint am 13.10.2016 mit "September" den September 2015, wie clever! Da kann man sich dann natürlich die Finger wund suchen.

http://politiken.dk/debat/profiler…edoms-endeligt/

Zitat

Die meist anonymen Leserreaktionen reichten zum Entsetzen der liberalen Dänen bis zu offenem Judenhass.

Na dann gugge mer se uns doch einfach mal an! (leider nur in der sehr holprigen google-Übersetzung)

Zitat

Tino Rozzo

July 14
If there is more to topple a world religion than banning followers to cut toddlers, so peace be upon it.
Recommend (0) Complain about post
Bo Kristensen

05 May
It would certainly be regrettable if our Jewish citizens choose to leave Denmark because they do not have to make circumcision!
But I think all our politicians and Jewish citizens would take the trouble to find out why the custom originally occurred. If they knew it would most probably stop immediately. Muslims because it is a custom inherited from the Jews and the Jews because the practice is not at all Jewish.
I have previously written about the politics, but the newspaper does not seem appropriate. And it is not if you have the editorial line that it would maintain dogmas and superstitions.
Recommend (0) Complain about post
Erling Jensen
LLM,

05th October

Children have rights which must be respected, regardless of religious, cultural or ethnic background. Several people have gone out in public and have very admirable told about the costs circumcision has had on them personally as a result of being exposed to such a barbaric custom.

Martin Krasnik have the debate on male circumcision distinguished himself as a fanatical fundamentalist circumcision. His raging fury concerning. male circumcision did not prevent him from describing, inter alia, Keld Koplev in the most derogatory manner, "Keld Koplevs miserable self-pity and allegations of torture and" medieval genital mutilation. "To adhere to good discussion custom and respect for others with differing opinions.

As he described it in an article in 2008, the boy circumcision only "a small lev in pee man, or:" Now we know again that large parts of the Danish population, senior consultants, leading ethicists and many politicians suffering from acute spiritual and cultural phimosis ".
Recommend (0) Complain about post
Erling Jensen
LLM,

05th October
Because a society has had a millennium-old tradition of circumcision, for example, it is not necessarily a defense of its conservation; Like many other customs they must adapt modern conditions. It's happened to many customs and rituals.
There is no medical reason for routine circumcision of boys; for that reason alone it should be banned.
The foreskin of the penis is not a birth defect.
In Denmark would not dream of circumcising a girl.
A newborn baby does not want to be circumcised.
Circumcision with removal of part of the child's penis is painful, risky and have an adverse late effects for many men. They create immediate health risks and can lead to serious complications. Risks include infection, bleeding, scarring, difficulty in urination, even death, in addition to the trauma that is found in many adult men because of their circumcision.
Children must be protected from permanent body modification caused to them without their consent.
Recommend (0) Complain about post
Erling Jensen
LLM,

05th October
Male circumcision - seen through sagkundskabens glasses.
Both Morten Staberg, a specialist in children's diseases, and Morten Frisch, professor, consultant, both have committed quite excellent and readable articles on the subject. I do not think that I am saying too much when I describe them as just as strongly oppose this antiquated ritual of the undersigned.
Nikolaj Krak highlights in an article in Etik.dk that every 20 uncircumcised boy experiencing complications. "This is the conclusion of a new study that for the first time analyzes the risks of a religious circumcision in Denmark. The result shows that the risk of a religious circumcision is more than twice as high as the Board of Health earlier this summer stated in a memorandum to the Minister of Health" .
Recommend (0) Complain about post
Just Bidstrup Kristensen
Retired senior teacher

04th October
Is there not another issue that is more important to discuss than circumcision.
Circumcision is no problem, that is, a non-problem.
I have never met a circumcised who was sorry to be circumcised, including myself.
Here reigns some emotion, but absolutely no sense.
And people with no sense is like a ship without a rudder. That is sheer madness.
And women think in this case I can therefore not give any value for the projecting them a stick.
Female / female circumcision is quite a different matter, so all the worried women have here an area where they can play. On top of that in an important area.
But men are circumcised, is not a problem and I never will be.
Recommend (0) Complain about post
Kristoffer Nørhave

04th October
"Exit Denmark" website gather debate about boy circumcision. However, it is only messages from circumcision critical thinkers gathered.

Website editorial is anonymous.

In all the collected posts appear first and last names of the debaters, who speaks critically about circumcision.

There are already collected posts from this debate.
https://exitdk.wordpress.com/

Alles anzeigen

Zitat

Niels Jørgen POULSEN

02. October
Are there some who wonder why they Radigale have this on their program? This indifferent, no history, irreligious and anti-Israeli party that is desperate to be on the right side the polls.
And to read comments on this site that dogmatic assertions about who
and what is covered by the millennium the old reliøse rituals are just
easy entertaining.
I
am just as cocksure that if you made a YouGov survey of exactly 10
billion Jews and Muslims who have been circumcised since time
immemorial, they are angry at their parents, disappointed that the
community did not intervene, suffering from PTSD over it has happened, the answer would be a huge hoots.

Poulsen
Circumcisiofortaler.
Recommend (0) Complain about post
Rita Tofte
Social and health assistant

02. October
According to the Bible's explanation was male children circumcised because of cleanliness. Now I think it is a powerful symbol of the same ways that girls are circumcised cruelly. Women wear scarves even if it is not in the Koran. On the whole, becomes religion brungt as an excuse for weak people to behave foolishly. In Denmark we baptize children even if they can not take a position on religion, but it gets the child but none of. Many boys have their lives ruined if circumcision goes wrong at worst smoking it completely. Circumcision of both sexes should be prohibited by law
Recommend (1) Complain about post
Bo Christensen
Sir

01. October
Henrik Pedersen,

you "ask" about various people have reported injuries. After which you, out of what I do not conclude that they did not know
to ask for a list of people who have not taken significant damage.

Now can I tell you that the two of them. And
the rest is not known whether injury has taken place, since it is
probably few who would admit that their penis is not working as it
should. Moreover, it is probably hard to say how it feels to have arms if you were born without.
And where is it amusing to you in your tenacious quest for
Jewish-known details to your list completely forget to examine whether
they are circumcised boys.

No wonder we probably never agree, as long as you do not even agree with yourself.
Recommend (0) Complain about post

Alles anzeigen

Zitat

Eskild Nielsen
smallholder

Sept. 30
"Nature is sacred" (Book of Herbener) - Apart from the penis.
Most Americans are circumcised (See wiki)
Sensory nerves are severed.
Therefore, the eternal woman demeaning penissutteri in US porn.
https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omsk%C3%A6ring
Herbeners Article party posts. Not science.
Recommend (0) Complain about post
Jens Høybye

Sept. 30
And here render mankind so fully dressed around, with or without a
foreskin, on streets, alleys, synagogues and mosques without knowing
which of us was the chosen of God.

Therefore, what the f ..... is the purpose that believers parents must choose their infant's foreskin, but cf. especially the Danish People's Party should not choose teenagers scarf?
Recommend (1) Complain about post
Rasmus Normand
Primat

Sept. 29
Herbener asks:

"If the Radicals considered the implications of a ban on circumcision boy?"

They certainly. The consequences will be that boys are allowed to have intact pee men. Just as evolution made them.

How the adults undergoing the amputation of the foreskin of their male children, so had to behave. Yes, it is flint pending matter. It is not about them but about their boy children's integrity.
Recommend (3) Complain about post
Carsten Hansen

Sept. 29
Do not forget that religious fanatics do not deal with the health part of it all.

The only reason for amputation is a religious commandments.

That there are many who do not complain and no damage is bashing matter.
The mere fact that there is only religious (stupid) reasons for
cutting Affairs, is enough to immediately ban the practice, thus helping
those who might damage the body and soul, in the future.
Those who have been harmed for the time being, it is too late to help 100%
Recommend (2) Complain about post
Rasmus Normand
Primat

Sept. 29
@ Henrik Pedersen

Nice list you have made.

It is not known whether they have complained, perhaps. In the Danish debate has several circumcised complained that others have taken an irreversible choice on their behalf. Not necessarily due to genes, but simply for the reason that their bodies were cut into pieces no reason.

It is not about the adults who have never known anything other than to be without foreskin has a very well-functioning life.

It's all about one thing: parents must get their children's genitals
cut into pieces no other reason than that it has always done in the
culture they happen to be born into. Yes or no.

Should religion be facing law - of human rights?

It is simply direct daft to continue to make it sound as if there are no risks associated with this amputation culture.

Although there was no risk, then it is still not working to destroy another person's genitals.
Recommend (1) Complain about post
Henrik Pedersen

Alles anzeigen

Zitat

Sept. 29
God bless me - though I occasionally agree with Herbener.

Has the following, probably circumcised, Jewish philosophers reported
injuries: Adorno, Althusser, Bloch, Chromsky, Cohn-Bendit, Erich Fromm,
Glucksmann, Husserl, Lévy, Georg Lukács, Herbert Marcuse, Karl Marx,
Wilhelm Reich, Wittgenstein and many more?

Or what about Jewish doctors as Alzheimer and psychiatrists like Freud
- not to mention physicists such as Oppenheimer, Einstein, Bohr, Bethe,
Szilárd, Fermi and Landau?

Not to mention conductors such as Klemperer, Bernstein, Mahler,
Mendelssohn or musicians like Barenboim, Biermann, Cohen, Dylan, Simon
& Garfunkel, Stan Getz, Benny Goodman, Nina Hagen, Billy Joel m.
More.

Or writers such as Heinrich Heine, Kafka, Pasternak, Marcel Proust and Stefan Zweig. And chess players like Bobby Fischer and Garri Kasparow.

Can a friendly refugee does not establish a similar cubits long list
of Muslim personalities that do not significantly been damaged by ritual
circumcision?
Recommend (1) Complain about post
Bo Christensen
Sir

Sept. 29
Jette Møller,

I see you as another bitter feminist, that can only accuse men of being foaming or the like.
You write:
"No one is trying to prove that there would be a harmful intervention."

It is simply so far as it will go. The proof is of course right in front of you. Are you completely blind ?????

To remove a piece of the body that contains the largest light sensors. When activated, triggers the body chemicals that give enjoyment and in particular helps to balance the tempers.
You lose some of your senses ... how can you be in doubt it is harmful ??????

Do you not it is harmful to cut an ear off?

I can tell you that I would rather have cut an ear off than foreskin.
Recommend (4) Complain about post
Carsten Hansen

Sept. 29
Jette Møller.

Fact is that you and others make you advocate a violation of children's religious freedom.
You and others sell the individual human right to religious dreamers.

No child is born religious.
Some religious people wrap their children religious robes and jewelry. These robes and jewelry, the child was later throw if it has the desire and strength to it.

With the irreversible focal labeling, as you and others applaud, it is different to.

With your "goodness" you support fanatics and failure of the moderates. All because you equate opposition to irrelenvant religious act of racism.
Recommend (4) Complain about post

Alles anzeigen

Zitat

Farmer / Political Atheist

Sept. 29

Peter Munk
You ask where it comes from.
It is my belief that, like halal slaughter, a ban on eating pork.
Is it a health measure that is woven into a set of otherwise sensible maxims.
The problem is lack revission - time and development has superseded the kind
Recommend (2) Complain about post
Jens Kjærbøl

Sept. 29
SEA
Sick overwintered Sadism

Alles anzeigen

Zitat

Rasmus Normand
Primat

Sept. 29
@ Jette Møller

It's scary to read an adult (I suppose you are) who argue that adults
(as long as they are superstitious) must cut their children's genitals
in pieces.

Whether it is harmful. Yes it is. It destroys and removes forever, a vital part of pee man. It is harmful. Sometimes dying children. Other times they get complications, yes even gender sick judgments of this tribal ritual.

And all this "show me whether it is harmful" advocacy is completely pseudo-like. In 1997, there is no scientific evidence to establish law against beating children. So we do not need a law that says that we must not cut them into pieces.

So do not come here with your "oh where am I just spacious" attitude.

The only party one should take into account the child. Not adults playing bloody religion.

When the boys were grown-ups, they can cut all of their body they want.

It's all about is that the individual must have the determination rights over their own bodies.
Recommend (2) Complain about post
Carsten Hansen

Sept. 29
There
are obviously some who think cutting the innocent and burn mark
children for life, should be allowed when it is minorities who are
behind the action; Everything else will be racism.

Impossible to relate seriously to such a view.
Mixing racism into the debate is irrational and demonstrates a lack of sense of reality.
Recommend (2) Complain about post
Niels Christian Sauer
Teacher's governing member.

Sept. 29
Jette Moller, you write: "... No one is trying to prove that there should be a harmful intervention."

Well, what are you thinking? Do not dramatically hurt the boys? Scream and shout not they? Haemophilia not it? Or grow foreskin then out again?

Why would grown men never dream of subjecting themselves to circumcision, unless it is strictly necessary?

You talk about 'raging men despicable comments.' The most raging in this context is without comparison the
incomprehensible defense of this indisputable violent and traumatizing
assault on newborn boys.
Recommend (4) Complain about post
John holm
rentier

Sept. 29
Could we not like getting a 3-year break at this hackneyed subject.

Recommend (1) Complain about post
per Hansen

Sept. 29
If we agree that there is a difference between cutting the small boys 'genitals and in the little girls' genitals?
-
The answer to your question is NO,
It's about the idea: To cut body parts from a tribal ritual.
Chopping
body parts of people in Denmark in the 17th century was a ritual that
occurred much earlier than Scandinavia's Viking Age. Having opponent's head in his hand confirms the victor's power and
therefore it is a ritual on equal terms with cutting off various body
parts of young children to accommodate a random god.
In many North African countries circumcise still women a greater or lesser degree, is it okay?
In China maimed for many years little girls' feet to make them fit for the future ideal (ban came about in 1912) - was it okay?

In an enlightened, democratic society must religion be sufficient excuse for mutilation.

Recommend (1) Complain about post
Otto Barreth

Sept. 29
The President of the strange association SOS, agrees that there is a
"significant difference between losing the foreskin and head".

Yes ... now women do not lose the foreskin dear President, but evidently some women may well lose your head!

On sos website one can read the following "there is no medical evidence to ban male circumcision".
Elsewhere recommend sos exactly halal slaughter of animals if therefore sorrows of the blade is sharp.
Hope that Dan Jorgensen's ban on this vile slaughter also soon indfores.

The association does not distinguish between racism and religion, one
can really be ethnic Dane and be a Muslim, so any criticism of Islam has
nothing to do with racism!

Unfortunately, my God commanded me that my children should have the ears cut off after the birth, but I refuse.
Recommend (0) Complain about post
Kristoffer Nørhave

Sept. 29
Jette Moller.
The custom and the surgery is completely unnecessary, and there is a risk associated with being circumcised, even death.
How about you walked in the children's level, instead of putting you at all four for one or the other religion. Children, as far as I am informed, not religious.
You wish to imply that there is racism behind the critical approach to circumcision. I will call you misanthropic not to take the child's party. The child is the primary underdog in this issue, not the poor religious minorities.
Why should religious vanity trump the child's right to decide over
their own bodies when complications could arise at this exclusively
NON-medical intervention, which is being carried out without the child's
consent.
Recommend (5) Complain about post
Jette Møller
chairman of the SOS Against Racism

Sept. 29
Per Hansen. If we agree that there is a significant difference between losing your head and foreskin?
Recommend (2) Complain about post
per Hansen

Sept. 29
My opinion:
Ritual cutting off body parts of people who can not defend themselves is in my world pervert.
The whole idea of cutting the defenseless people are created in the primitive tribal society.

Bodily injury as a tool for subjugation continued in many parts of Europe well into the time.
In 1772 Struensee had his right hand chopped off before he lost his head.
As the last lost murders burner Jens Nielsen his head in the 1892nd
Subsequently Denmark gradually a more civilized society - abuse of citizens were prohibited by law from any cause.
The only exception to this law is today:
It is legal for religious fanatics to cut small boys genitals.
On the other hand it is not allowed to cut in little girls genitals, - no matter what religion it is about -Thanks FOR IT!

To all those who want to cut small boys' genitals:
Getting into the 21st dying century together with us or be boxed in
with the Neolithic society that cuts in little girls' genitals.
Recommend (4) Complain about post
Jette Møller
chairman of the SOS Against Racism

Sept. 29
It's scary reading all these raging men despicable comments.
No one is trying to prove that there should be a harmful intervention. It is enough to note that it is healthy meat, it cuts away. SENTENCE DONE! (To quote John Christensen).
No, considering what a ban would mean for them, there chooses to leave their homeland.
No one who shows the slightest interest in trying to dialogue and information.

Where is it discouraging.

Alles anzeigen

Zitat

Kristoffer Nørhave

Sept. 29
Herbener writes: "Although the ban does not intend to cause harm to this minority, it may well be the consequence of it."

On the contrary; the main minority who protected did not suffer injury. They get the gift to choose whether they want cutaway functional and healthy tissue from their penis.

For Herbeners anti-parallel, so one can wonder who's the real anti-; the one who wants to protect Jewish and Muslim children from
mutilation, or who will maintain the barbaric custom is to cut in
healthy children?
Recommend (7) Complain about post
Rasmus Normand
Primat

Sept. 29
@ Peter Munk

"GODS (if any) created us as we are"

That's because at any rate the believers think. The Jewish and Christian God now expects therefore a victim. Genesis 17:10 to 17:14, here it appears that the god demands for hides. These must come from children who are not more than 8 days of age. God wants them absolutely fresh.

It's
so ludicrous and bordering on insanity to cut his child to pieces,
because some people even fabricated a book in which this is. I wonder what more they believe in, as long as it exists in writing?
Recommend (5) Complain about post
Ib Jørgensen
retired MA. cultural sociology

Sept. 29
Each whole person, which is facing a toddler will think: I must not harm this child! It is a sacred encouragement. And it hurts it and those who still damage. Because the holy incentive violated. Supporters
of the three monotheistic religions that practice circumcision (a
minority in Christianity), violates this sacred, to maintain discipline.
Belief in "god" who is believed to have dictated the requirement of circumcision. Such forms of belief can not continue to be maintained in a society that tries to practice human rights and respect for life. I write about the sacred in my blogs http://www.dethellige.blogspot.dk and http://www.bricklayeribj.blogspot.dk
Recommend (2) Complain about post
Peter Munk

Sept. 29
Circumcision.
Whence this vile act?
When it was introduced?
Who introduced it?

As I see it, and with the general knowledge I have about human
physique and sexual life, this action is clearly an assault, stupid,
malicious and totally irrelevant to how a human being is a human being.

All
stupid claims about why this action is performed (except medical)
misses completely substantiation and sense of reason world, but of
course it is also the most irrational part of human life many possible
ways of thinking (world of religion) this misery (circumcision) is
perceived as a absolute "necessity".
GODS (if any) created us as we are, but when fanatical belief
successor facts, knowledge and recognition that MAN is created as we
have come this kind of "flagrant" stupidities.

Recommend (3) Complain about post
Per Christoffersen
Craftsman

Sept. 29
If Judaism in Denmark can not afford to do without cutting the boy children's penis to remain in DK, move to Israel. DK is still a country that fights follies and I'm proud of.
Recommend (6) Complain about post
Rasmus Normand
Primat

Sept. 29
@ Jens Kjærbøl

Male circumcision is not allowed. Do not cut people without medical reason, or the individual's consent when it has come of age. It stands in the Penal Code §244 and 245th

§ 244. Any person who violates the or otherwise attacking someone else's body, punishable by fine or imprisonment up to 3 years.

§
245. The exercising a legemsangreb of particularly raw, brutal or
dangerous nature or guilty of maltreatment, punishable by imprisonment
for up to 6 years. Have such legemsangreb had significant damage to body or health effect, this should be considered an aggravating circumstance.
PCS. 2. An outside in paragraph. 1 second case adds another person injury to body or health, is punishable by imprisonment for up to 6 years.

That one then has added §245 A, which specifically mentions girls, makes no sense, since they are covered by the above.
Recommend (3) Complain about post
Jens Kjærbøl

Sept. 29

Circumcision of girls is prohibited.
Male circumcision is permitted.
Out of 48 comments is only one written by a woman.

Where are the comments from all feminists, who with reference to equality regularly requires special benefits for women?
Recommend (2) Complain about post
Carsten Hansen

Sept. 29
The thing is that there is not a single argument for circumcision of
boys from religious fanatics than just the religious aspect.

Therefore,
it is no rationale when others argue that it is probably not harmful to
health or the sexual experience probably does not deteriorate. Fact is they who defend circumcision merely defending an anachronistic, unnecessary religious act to please religious fanatics.
Recommend (6) Complain about post
Jens Kjærbøl

Sept. 29
Arvid Holm: "Perhaps it is wisest to refrain from laws that can not be
enforced if one wants to keep a little respect for Danish law?"

Legislation grossly discrimination-treat men and women put up to disrespect for the law.
The consequence of Arvid Holm's wisdom will be to the ban on female circumcision repealed.
Recommend (2) Complain about post
Niels Rolskov

Sept. 29
You
can not relativize maiming of children and that applies whether it is
girls who have to suffer due. An ancient culture from eastern Africa or
boys ditto because another ancient culture from the Middle East - longer
is it not so much. We have also a lot of Jews in dangens Denmark backs full support that
it is time to drop the kind of rituals that belongs to a distant time.
Recommend (5) Complain about post

Alles anzeigen

Zitat

Arne Hornborg

Sept. 29
If Judaism in Denmark, which usually have MY full respect, can only survive by circumcise children, deserve only to die out.
It IS a heinous act
Recommend (3) Complain about post
Arne Nielsen

Sept. 29
We should not forget what the Jewish religion is of a size. Like other religions has its origins in a deeply superstitious worldview. When
orthodox Jews kneel at the Western Wall with phylacteries and there
dims with encapsulated biblical saying on the forehead and skull cap on
his head, is the question in a completely different world, where evil
spirits and whatever. Inasmuch,
it is interesting to note that no other ethnic group is run in the
world has contributed so competently to hunt the old world view of the
port as Jews. One
thing is that both Niels Bohr and Albert Einstein were Jews, but then
there is the long list of Nobel Prize winners, each of which has
contributed significantly to our modern world. This is obviously irrelevant to the Jewish Orthodox. This stubbornness deserves to put the chair on the doorstep. Moreover, the Jewish family unity a double-edged sword; externally it is a strength, but woe to the one who expelled.
Recommend (1) Complain about post
Arvid Holm

Sept. 29
Mon Jens-André Herbener take for granted that the Jews in Denmark are more law-abiding than the Muslims?
Then the Jews will experience a ban on circumcision as a serious
hindrig for the exercise of their religion, while Muslims will simply
ignore a ban, which can hardly be enforced?

The operation is performed the largely of lay people in gatherings of
lay people who all just can deny knowledge of the case, if they can be
identified by the authorities.
If the crime is discovered, the victim can not testify, since he was an infant or very young during the procedure.
Parents can claim that it happened without their knowledge by a visit to family abroad.
The explanation is already used, so far as I know, when the circumcision of girls is discovered.
Then the authorities poke the pipe into.

You simply can not prove that satisfies a Danish court's requirements for evidence.
Perhaps it is wisest to refrain from laws that can not be enforced if one wants to keep a little respect for Danish legislation?
Recommend (1) Complain about post
Otto Barreth

Sept. 29
An unfortunate God, which should have commanded that his skabervaerk required a fix .... circumcision of male children!

I really love many joder, but here I must stand and repeat what one commentator as surely writes:

Born are not born as joder, and I adds, even as Christians, Muslims etc.

Unbelievable that we in 2015 have not been liberated from the strange
deeds, wars and atrocities that almost all religions are causing.
Recommend (6) Complain about post
Bo Christensen
Sir

Sept. 28
Debate War banning ritual boy circumcision is an excellent example of a culture clash. For many of those who fight for a ban, is a healthy male child only intact if it is not circumcised. For many of the Jews and Muslims who want to continue the ritual boy circumcision is a boy only intact,

A CULTURAL IMPACT? It can not be discussion about a child is intact before or after it
has been deprived of the greatest enjoyment body on the whole body ?????

I have both Jews and Muslims as friends, but I'm cool about sticking
to my belief that one should not saw, cut, tattooed or otherwise of
other people against their will.

If the consequence is that my Jewish and Muslim friends move, I live with it and look for new friends. There simply can be no compromise here. Well, there's not for girls. It is illegal to cut girls' genitals. Everything else is also perverse and tasteless regardless of gender.
Recommend (4) Complain about post
Rasmus Normand
Primat

Sept. 28
@ Steffen Gliese

Your little elegant attempt to get the subject to appear matter is mildly embarrassing.

There is one single question you have to consider:

Do parents, at their discretion, have their children's genitals cut into pieces? Yes or no. If so, then children may indeed be the parents' estate (what more can you cut off?). If no, then recognizes the individual's inalienable right to an intact and functioning body.

A culture that claim from a victim in the form of cut drengeforhuder gotta currently well stopped. We can not have people running around and cut others to pieces. It is illegal for hell.

Why is just forhudsamputation so important for the faithful? Why, they complained not that they can not keep slaves?
Recommend (4) Complain about post
Else Marie Arevad (debater no longer active)

Sept. 28
As far as I know, all Muslim boys circumcised. Why do Herbener that ritual plays a more central role in Jews than among Muslims? Abraham, God acc. tradition commanded to circumcise all descendants, is a central figure for both Jews and Muslims. One must therefore assume that a ban on all circumcision will have the same consequences for Jews and Muslims.
Recommend (3) Complain about post
Donald H. Jorgensen

Sept. 28
One thing is certain.
A ban on forhudsfjernelse will have a greater effect on migration than any campaign Støjberg could find or reducing any cash.

It will stop the flow immediately.

It is an argument from my side - just a comment about that we will not be hired as a country to flee to.

Lucky for Muslims to Søren Espersen, especially, are very concerned
about the status of Jews and for this reason and probably this alone
does not advocate a ban.
Recommend (0) Complain about post
Erik Fleischer
wage slave

Sept. 28
If I am anti-Semite or willing follower of having a ban on ritual genital mutilation, -so be it.

If this is how it is set up, so I let me not be cowed.

And I have nothing else against Jews and Muslims and circumcision of both sexes.
What I do mind, it is the abuse that children are exposed to.

Once they are 18, they can do whatever the hell they want.
I mean, of course, 24 years old, we have already once been established
that it is only at 24 years of age that the young man is sufficiently
free from family and ambient pressure.

Is there any religion technically prevent that first being circumcised when one is an adult?

Recommend (3) Complain about post
Steffen Gliese

Sept. 28
I
wonder if there are more children in the US die of the evangelical
practice of knocking her children as part of religious practice? Or how many children die of unintended side effects of vaccinations? Given the negligible number who actually are at risk of dying from
common childhood diseases, it is perhaps worse than the social stigma of
not being incorporated into its culture.
Moreover, the group of circumcised children in the United States after
all quite large, since it is also a widespread hygienic practice in
much of the United States.
How many kids we lose a year in Denmark due. Circumcision, it was probably more relevant question.

Alles anzeigen

Zitat

Rasmus Normand
Primat

Sept. 28
@ Harald Johansen

If you want to discuss animal welfare, then you are as welcome to write an opinion piece.
Here, the subject forhudsamputation. To list other areas where efforts should be made, the derivation of the debate.

Has it gone through your hands that little boys die from this completely unnecessary interference? In the United States die nearly 100 children annually, as a result of this atrocity.

Even if it was one child who was involved, then it is still unacceptable to cut another human in pieces without medical reason.

It is an assault against the individual integrity.
It is an assault against the Constitution, UN Children's Convention,
the Bioethics Convention and the §244 and 245 of the Danish Criminal
Code.

That one in 2015 at all to spend time on that argues against children from being cut into pieces. It is raving mad.
Recommend (7) Complain about post
Asger Jon Vistisen

Sept. 28
Moral issues not determined by their consequences, but of principles. Jewish children does not exist. Muslim and Christian children are not found only in human children. When the nerve endings at the end in the male penis cut off, missing
part of the child's body that evolution over thousands of generations
have found a need to create.

"Foreskin is not sitting on a real jew", it is claimed. Therefore, there is a much more significant assaults a purely
biological: "We cut these nerves by, so you can never get rid of us."

The bone of contention is deeper. The
implication of the Jews 'claim for nerveamputering of their male
children lies in the fact that children exist for their parents' sake. In a free world exists only for your own sake. The goal of your life is up to you and only you!

Stop FGM are! Find another ritual, dear jew and rejoice that you Danes are the safest place on earth.
Recommend (12) Complain about post
Jens Kjærbøl

Sept. 28
Erik Voldby writes that the German legislature overturned the court's
order prohibiting circumcision because Jews and Muslims in Germany
protested.

I am sure that also Israel and the United States have been very active in the wings to put pressure on the German government.

Something similar must Denmark count on when we forbid circumcision.
But we could certainly get Norway and Sweden and the Netherlands to simultaneously prepare a ban.
In that case, we could better withstand the international Jewish pressure.
Recommend (3) Complain about post
Niels Christian Sauer
Teacher's governing member.

Sept. 28
Herbeners
courtesy to the ritual, irreversible amputation of boy babies are in
stark contrast to his always relentless denigration of Christian
ortdoksi in areas where in his view seems anachronistic. Unbelievable that he can not see how deeply embarrassing this exhibition of double standards are.

Herbeners
claim that when Jews and Muslims do not even go in front with a
showdown against this barbarism, then there is obviously no problem,
directly ridiculous. secondly,
it is untrue, secondly, any jew or Muslim who openly declare its
opposition, expect some degree of exclusion of their own families, and
partly to the circumcision of good reasons not know what they're
missing. They have to reconcile themselves to learn to live with the condition,
and it is obviously easiest if you do not relate to the matter at all.
Recommend (7) Complain about post
Rasmus Normand
Primat

Sept. 28
Poul Christian Tulinius (and others) in all seriousness, trying to
weigh tissemandsamputations against vagina amputation, is on the verge
of being perverse.

All versions of amputation carried out on an innocent waif, without medical reason is simply daft.

It is therefore harmful, all the while you cut away the healthy parts of the shapely genitals and thus destroying them.

If
formed an association where you went with her newborn baby to its tiny
toes cut off, then there would immediately be put into (rightly). But if you can refer to the Bronze Age myths, which stated that a
being in high demand parts of the child's genitals, then you have carte
blanche to exercise this madness.

It is appalling.
Recommend (10) Complain about post
Lars B

Sept. 28
It must be a paltry religion if it can not survive not having to mutilate his own children!
Recommend (12) Complain about post
Erik Sørensen Voldby
senior citizen

Sept. 28
For nearly two years ago forbade a court in Germany to circumcise male children.
Jews balked and threatened to leave the country and they joined forces with the Muslims.
The threat led the German government to quickly create a law that allowed it if it happened under medical supervision.
So I do not think it can be banned here.
DF would vote for it, but only if it applies to Muslims but are not,
it would bring Denmark even more on the black list, "Ausser Spesen nicht
gewesen!
Recommend (1) Complain about post
Rune Amorsen

Sept. 28
Poul Christian Tulinius writes:
"It can not under any circumstances be compared to female genital mutilation."

- But why not? There are several types of female genital mutilation, some of which
would be less restrictive than the male - nevertheless, they are all
quite forbidden ... probably because they are made in Africa, whose
traditions no one will defend.
Recommend (5) Complain about post
Harald Johansen

Sept. 28
Maybe cut foreskin a currency that is too big to fail.

Or, too, it is a bubble that bursts.

Bombommelum on stortrummen and Fireworks in Moses burning bush.
Recommend (2) Complain about post
Jens Kjærbøl

Sept. 28
J-A Herbener:
"Factual criticism, evidence-based debate, dialogue and sustained
information? Not hysteria? However, should be the way forward."

It is hysteria threatening emigration if child lemlæstese will be banned.
Negroes from Africa has shown not threatened by emigration or practiced emigration because female circumcision has been banned.
But Jews are accustomed to special treatment.

Jakob Skovgaard-Petersen:
"If Jews emigrate because they are udgrænset for omskærelses- and
eating rules they have practiced in this country for 350 years, ---."

Hysterical involving ban on Jewish food laws.

Alles anzeigen

Zitat

Has the following, probably circumcised, Jewish philosophers reported
injuries:....
Not to mention conductors such as:... Billy Joel

Fällt mir nur gerade so ein, dass Billy Joel anscheinend nicht so glücklich darüber war, dass er über seine VA nicht gefragt wurde,

Zitat

Regarding his circumcision he said, "I had the snip and I had nothing to say about it. I'm still a little pissed off about that."

https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4111115,00.html