Changes

}}</ref>The circumcision would have a minimal reduction of the [[acroposthion]], in accordance with the former practice of the Jews.

|Text=Examining neonatal male [[circumcision]] in light of these moral directives, one can conclude that the amputation of normal, healthy [[foreskin ]] for nontherapeutic non-therapeutic purposes not only violates the child's bodily integrity but also is a medical procedure whose benefits do not clearly outweigh the risks. The ERDs state clearly that such procedures can be justified if there is a proportionate benefit to the patient. But neonatal male circumcision fails the test of proportionality because the questionable therapeutic benefit is overbalanced by the certainty of permanent injury to the [[penis]]; the loss of protective, immunological, mechanical, sensory, erogenous, and sexual functions; as well as the risk to health and life inherent in every circumcision.60 Neonatal male circumcision may be appropriate for religious reasons, but after one makes a thorough examination of the medical literature and a comprehensive ethical analysis, one sees quite clearly that it should not be a routine medical procedure.

The Catholic Church teaches that God created us in God;s image and likeness (Gn 1:27-28). It follows then that God created males with a normal, healthy foreskins foreskin for the purpose of protecting the [[glans]], providing natural lubrication to prevent dryness, and contributing significantly to the sexual response of the [[intact]] male. To surgically remove the [[foreskin]] for hygienic reasons, and/or to obtain other questionable benefits that absorb medical resources costing over $200 million a year is not only ethically unjustifiable but morally irresponsible, especially when such procedures can lead to serious injury and even death. Besides the possible harm the procedure can inflict on a child — which violates the basic tenet of Catholic health care of treating every person with dignity and respect — it also violates Catholic health care;s mandate to be responsible stewards of medical resources. When millions of people in the [[United States]] and around the world lack basic health care, the provision of a nontherapeutic non-therapeutic procedure — especially one that is unnecessary, costly, and in some cases fatal — is irresponsible and a violation of the moral law. Therefore, it is unethical and immoral for Catholic health care institutions to continue to allow neonatal male [[circumcisions]], except out of respect for religious practices of other faith traditions. Respecting the religious beliefs and practices of other faiths is confirmed in the ERDs.

* Central and South America from Mexico south to Chile are generally Catholic nations. Non-therapeutic [[circumcision ]] is not a usual practice in those nations, however it is not clear that the Catholic Church deserves the credit for his condition.

}}</ref> [[Paul Tinari]], who was Métis, was forcibly [[circumcised ]] at the age of eight by a Catholic priest and a Jewish [[mohel]] in Montreal, {{CAPTC|QC}}.<ref>{{REFweb

* The Federal Republic of Germany has been the site of a controversy over the non-therapeutic [[circumcision]] of boys. The [[Cologne circumcision court judgment]] was a ruling in 2012 that non-therapeutic circumcision of a boy violated the [[human rights]] of the boy , which are guaranteed by Germany's Basic Law(''Grundgesetz''). Thereafter a heated [[Circumcision Debate]] commenced. The Catholic Church (''Katholische Kirche'') in Germany took a position in favor of Jewish and Muslims having a right to circumcise as an exercise of a religious right.

* The Catholic Church in Germany operates 353 hospitals in Germany. None have a policy against non-therapeutic [[circumcision]]. The ''Catechism of the Catholic Church'' § 2273 teaching about amputations and mutilations has been totally ignored by the ''Katholische Kirche''.

The extraordinary horror of Adolf Hitler's pogrom against the Jews , called the Holocaust , has given the word ''[[antisemitism]]'' a special power.<ref>{{REFweb

}}</ref> [[German collective guilt| Even persons who had not even been born at the time of the Holocaust accept guilt for it]]. When anyone proposes action to protect boys from non-therapeutic [[circumcision]], the Jews cry antisemitism, even though the [[human rights]] and [[physical integrity]] of Jewish boys would be protected. The appellation is so offensive that people, institutions, and governments will go to exceptional lengths to avoid being so labeled.