...criminal charges have been filed against a rabbi in Northern Bavaria for performing circumcisions. According to the Juedische Allgemeine, a Jewish weekly, the state prosecutor of Hof confirmed that charges had been filed against Rabbi David Goldberg, who serves the community of Upper Franconia for “harming” infants by performing the rite of brit milah, the covenantal ritual at the heart of Judaism.The full story is here. Last year, the City of San Fransisco put a similar ban on circumsision on a public ballot, before a judge removed it, saying that regulating medical procedures is a matter for state law, not city law.
This raises some issues we'll talk about later, like the question of how the parents' freedom of religion relates to their children's' rights, or distinguishing between freedom of religious belief and freedom of religious practice.
Your thoughts are invited.
The charges filed agains Rabbi Goldberg appear to be a blatant act of religious discrimination. Not only is the rite of brit milah a common and sacred Jewish ritual, it is something that is a common practice for male babies internationally, regardless of religion. If anything, circumcision has minor health benefits but is essentially a "family choice". There is not much support for an argument claiming that the practice of such a medial procedure is "harming infants". I do not see any grounds for making a claim against a common ad harmless religious practice in a country that supposedly promotes religious freedom. My one question - was Rabbi Goldberg performing the circumcisions himself with no medical credentials? That would be the only way my mind could conceive any grounds for charges. (Madisson Barnett)
ReplyDeleteDaniel D said...
ReplyDeleteMadisson provides a valid point that the only reason Rabbi Goldberg should be charged is if he lacked the medical credentials to personally perform such an action as circumcision. Because this act, brit milah, is at the heart of Judaism, and has occurred throughout history, it is easy to see how this is viewed as religious discrimination. Circumcised or not, it does not have any real medical reason. The claim that this procedure is "harming" the infants is a bit of a stretch. Throughout history this has been performed on new-born children and infants all over the world. I find Germany's attempts of banning this to be absurd and nonsensical. What is worse is even San Francisco tried to ban circumcision by placing it on a ballot, until a judge took it off. This religious act should not be regulated by any state or country, could you imagine if this was a ban on a different religion. Take the Muslim religion for instance, if San Francisco or Germany were to place a ban on some form of Muslim acts, there would be an uproar. We would see headlines all over the news like, "Religious Intolerance in San Francisco!!", or "Germany Declares War on Muslim Faith". I digress, but the point stands, Rabbi Goldberg has only performed a sacred ritual within his faith. He should not be persecuted and criminally charged for his actions, especially today in the twenty-first century where religious toleration is supposedly at the forefront.
I have to agree with both of the previous posters on their stance. This act in my opinion is just complete religious discrimination. I found it absolutely absurd that they would attempt to conclude that circumcision "damaged" the infant, but in the story linked within the this article it would go on to say that there was not any rational reason for someone to make such a case. The only thing I could possibly see going against the Rabbi is the fact that he did not have the medical credentials to do such a procedure. The whole thing with saying that a Jew should not be allowed to take part in one of their own religious activities oppresses them. It's like saying oh you can be a Jew, but you can't be a full Jew cause we don't like what you're doing. To characterize this an absolute necessity of covenant faith for Jews, as illegal or abusive is ridiculous. It's similar to the Holocaust, as it stated within the article due to Jews practicing their own Jewish beliefs. Hopefully this will soon be overturned.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with Ethan, George, and Madisson. This is religious discrimination. Circumcisions, or brit milah, has been performed on infants as far back as 2345 BC and has not been an issue until recently. I find it obtuse that a prosecutor would single out a rabbi and file charges against him for doing what has been done for centuries. It is part of their religion, and even more, most males, regardless of religion, are circumcised at birth. Furthermore, I can't fathom how this could have possibly "damaged" an infant. If anything it helps an infant. It's known that circumcision can prevent urinary tract infections and decreases chances of sexually transmitted diseases. How could this damage someone? I'd like to conclude that even if the rabbi lacked "medical credentials" this is a procedure has been performed by rabbis for centuries, how hard can it be? Does one really require medical credentials to perform a circumcision? My bet is no. Banning circumcision would not solve any problems but rather cause them.
ReplyDelete