Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Arguments pro circumcision

661 bytes added, 21:57, 20 January 2020
m
no edit summary
* '''"Male circumcision is legal, it has been done for many, many years."'''
*: Many parents argue that foreskin amputation in young boys is legal because it has been done for many years, centuries, or even millennia. Modern case law makes it clear that tradition does not create a legal claim. Other violations of human rights such as rape, stoning, slavery, etc. have also been done for a long time - which does not legalize them.
* '''"Circumcision of boys is legal because it isn't punished."'''
*: With the exception of Germany, we do not know of any other country worldwide that would explicitly allow genital mutilation of children without medical indication. On the contrary, bodily harm is punishable in all countries unless it is medically indicated. The [[German Circumcision Act]] is seen very controversial and ineffective for several reasons: on the one hand it is obviously unconstitutional, on the other hand, it leads itself to absurdity in its own legal text. The assumption that genital mutilation is legal in boys because it has been legally tolerated many times, is wrong.
== Pseudo-parental rights arguments ==
administrator, administrators, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators
22,335
edits

Navigation menu