Anorak

Anorak | Germany’s purge on circumcision enshrines its anti-Semitism in law

Germany’s purge on circumcision enshrines its anti-Semitism in law

by | 14th, July 2012

IS Germany’s looming ban on child circumcision anti-Semitic? A German court has ruled that circumcision constitutes bodily harm. Those parents who allow it are child abusers. It follows that Jews are child abusers. Their parents are liable to prosecution. And not just in GErmany.

In Norway, Centre Party spokesperson Jenny Klinge, said: “Circumcision on religious grounds should be a criminal offence.” In San Francisco, Foreskin Man is a superhero fighting evildoers (Jews and Muslims).

To be accepted among the decent peoples, Jews should wait until there children hit 16 or 18 before asking them if they want to be circumcised. The child can only then know what is best for them. The non-Jews know how to make the Jews good. Listen to the non-Jew and become a better kind of Jew. Sod the fact that for Jews the circumcision is entwined with their very being and religion. Jewish boys get the snip on the eighth day of their lives. If you grow up with a foreskin you can’t be a proper Jew. The State is effectively outlawing your beliefs until you opt in. But you’ve already been ordered on pain of law to opt out.

The German court does it all under the pretence of protecting the child’s Human Rights, tapping into the model concerns.

Writing in the Jerusalem Post, British Chief Rabbi Lord Sacks, senses danger for Europe’s Jews.

It is hard to think of a more appalling decision. Did the court know that circumcision is the most ancient ritual in the history of Judaism, dating back almost 4,000 years to the days of Abraham? Did it know that Spinoza, not religious but together with John Locke the father of European liberalism, wrote that brit milah in and of itself had the power to sustain Jewish identity through the centuries?

The German court’s ruling is unequivocally racist:

Did it know that banning milah was the route chosen by two of the worst enemies the Jewish people ever had, the Seleucid ruler Antiochus IV and the Roman emperor Hadrian, both of whom set out to extinguish not only Jews but also Judaism? Either the court knew these things or it did not. If it did not, then how was it competent to assess the claim of religious liberty? If it did, then there are judges in Germany quite willing to say to religious Jews, in effect, “If you don’t like it, leave.” Do judges in Cologne today really not know what happened the last time Germany went down that road?…

In historical context, however, it is far worse. By ruling that religious Jews performing their most ancient sacred ritual are abusing the rights of the child, a German court has just invented a new form of Blood Libel perfectly designed for the 21st century.

It’s all about Human Right, dammit.



Posted: 14th, July 2012 | In: Key Posts, Reviews Comments (68) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink