The Progress Party in Norway voted on Saturday in favor of a law banning ritual circumcision of children under the age of 16, a day after the environment committee of Belgium’s Parliament of Wallonia voted in favor of banning ritual slaughter, posing a threat to both shechita (kosher slaughter) and brit mila (circumcision) in Europe.
Proponents of the Norwegian bill, which was discussed during the party’s national gathering over the weekend, claim that circumcision constitutes mental and physical harm to children and constitutes a serious violation of children’s rights. The Progress Party is the third-largest party – with 29 of 169 seats in parliament it serves as the junior partner in Prime Minister Erna Solberg’s cabinet.
Relevant to your professional network? Please share on Linkedin
Reacting to the news, Rabbi Menachem Margolin, general director of the European Jewish Association, wrote a letter to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Diaspora Affairs Minister Naftali Bennett calling on them to urgently establish a joint working team for both government offices and Jewish organizations in Europe, in order to prevent the spread of anti-Jewish legislation.“I have no doubt that the State of Israel – the state of the Jewish people – cannot remain indifferent to it, and I call on you to exert all your political influence in order to prevent the exclusion of Jews from life in various European countries.”Regarding the Norwegian bill, Margolin said: “We will act in every way we can to fight this disgraceful bill... There is no doubt that this is an anti-Jewish decision that is blatantly antisemitic, because the bill does not harm Muslims who are not obligated to circumcise their children as infants and can perform the procedure even at an older ages as the bill allows.”
Falkner09 on May 8th, 2017 at 10:39 UTC »
The vast majority of medical organizations in the world with a policy on circumcision are outright against it. Including:
Swedish Pediatric Society (they outright call for a ban)
Royal Dutch Medical Association calls it a violation of human rights, and calls for a "strong policy of deterrence." this policy has been endorsed by several other organizations:
The Netherlands Society of General Practitioners,
The Netherlands Society of Youth Healthcare Physicians,
The Netherlands Association of Paediatric Surgeons,
The Netherlands Association of Plastic Surgeons,
The Netherlands Association for Paediatric Medicine,
The Netherlands Urology Association, and
The Netherlands Surgeons’ Association.
College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia
Australian Federation of Aids organizations They state that circumcision has "no role" in the HIV epidemic. The German Association of Pediatricians called for a ban recently.
The German Association of Child and Youth Doctors recently Attacked the AAP's claims, saying the benefits they claim, including HIV reduction, are "questionable," and that "Seen from the outside, cultural bias reflecting the normality of non-therapeutic male circumcision in the US seems obvious, and the report’s conclusions are different from those reached by doctors in other parts of the Western world, including Europe, Canada, and Australia." (scroll to page 7 for the English translation.)
The AAP was recently attacked by the President of the British Association of Paediatric Urologists because the evidence of benefit is weak, and they are promoting "Irreversible mutilating surgery."
The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Saskatchewan has taken a position against it, saying it is harmful and will likely be considered illegal in the future, given the number of men who are angry that it was done to them and are becoming activists against it.
The President of the Saskatchewan Medical Association has said the same (link above).
The Central Union for Child Welfare “considers that circumcision of boys that violates the personal integrity of the boys is not acceptable unless it is done for medical reasons to treat an illness. The basis for the measures of a society must be an unconditional respect for the bodily integrity of an under-aged person… Circumcision can only be allowed to independent major persons, both women and men, after it has been ascertained that the person in question wants it of his or her own free will and he or she has not been subjected to pressure.”
Royal College of Surgeons of England
British Medical Association
Australian Medical Association Has a policy of discouraging it, ad says "The Australian College of Paediatrics should continue to discourage the practice of circumcision in newborns."
Australian College of Paediatrics:
Royal Australasian College of Physicians
ON that note, 74% of Australian doctors overall believe circumcision should not be offered, and 51% consider it abuse. Circumcision used to be common in Australia, but the movement against it spread faster there than America, where rates continue to drop.
A letter by the South African Medical Association said this:
Royal Australasian College of Surgeons This one is a detailed evaluation of the arguments in favor of circumcision, They note that during one of the recent trials in Africa, the researchers claimed there was no loss of sexual satisfaction, when in fact there was. But the RACS called them out:
The Norwegian Council of Medical Ethics states that ritual circumcision of boys is not consistent with important principles of medical ethics, that it is without medical value, and should not be paid for with public funds.
The Norwegian Children’s Ombudsman is opposed as well.
The Denmark National Council for Children is also opposed.
And recently, the politically appointed Health minister of Norway opposed a ban on circumcision, yet the ban was supported by the Norwegian Medical Association, the Norwegian Nurses Organization, the Norwegian Ombudsman for Children, and the University of Oslo.
The Danish Society of Medical Practitioners Recently said the practice is “an assault and should be banned.”
The Danish Medical Association is “fundamentally opposed to male circumcision unless there is a medical reason such as phimosis for carrying out the operation. ‘It's very intrusive that adults may decide that newborn to undergo a surgical procedure that is not medically justified and if power is lifelong. When a boy when the age of majority, he may even decide, but until then the requirements of the individual's right to self-determination prevail.’"
filipinotruther on May 8th, 2017 at 08:17 UTC »
95DarkFire on May 8th, 2017 at 08:15 UTC »
Seriously?