Opinion with Michael Coren A strange phenomenon is developing in Europe and North America, one that until fairly recently would have been considered unapproachable in polite society. Male circumcision, so important to Jewish people and to Muslims, is being challenged and condemned and there is even a growing movement to ban it. Icelandic MP Silja Dögg Gunnarsdóttir of that country’s governing Progressive Party told the BBC earlier this year, “We are talking about children’s rights, not about freedom of belief. Everyone has the right to believe in what they want, but the rights of children come above the right to believe.” Even The Council of Europe became involved, and passed a resolution recently condemning the practice as a “violation of the physical integrity of children.” In Germany in 2012, where the governing class is obviously sensitive to minority religious rights, a judge ruled that circumcision constituted harm against a child. In that case, the boy was four years old and there were complications after the procedure. The child’s right to physical integrity, stated the court, outweighed the desire of his parents to have him circumcised for religious reasons. Here is the essence of the division: the rights of the child verses religious freedom and tradition. But if ever the procedure were made illegal, of course, Jews andMuslims would either choose to disobey it, have the procedure performed abroad, or simply emigrate. I suppose that a columnist should take an obvious side on an issue, but I have to say that here I can see both points of view. The medical context is ambiguous, and subject to changes in informed opinion. There was a time when the accepted view was that male circumcision was medically beneficial and, while that assumption has somewhat changed, there’s still a strong argument that the procedure prevents the acquiring of various sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and lowers the risk of urinary infection. Other medical experts say that if there are benefits, they are minimal, and that there is also a medical risk involved. But to a large extent, it’s irrelevant. This is not about what doctors say, but about what people believe their God commanded. On the one hand is the entirely reasonable desire to protect a powerless baby – a child who obviously cannot give consent – from an unnecessary, intrusive and potentially harmful event. On the other is the equally understandable desire for people to continue a tradition they consider holy and essential, based not in abuse and cruelty but in concern and love for their child. Especially as many in these religious groups have faced terrible persecution over the course of their history. The European Jewish Congress spoke for most Jewish organizations when it said that any ban would “attack Judaism in a way that concerns Jews all over the world.” Numerous Muslim leaders agree. Others go further, and have suggested that the campaign against circumcision is part of some greater culture of anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. That, however, seems to be a dangerous overstatement and misunderstanding of what is going on. Some opponents of religious circumcision might display a lack of empathy towards Jewish andMuslim sensibilities, and even hostility towards religion in general, but this is usually not about race or hatred; there are even Jews and Muslims among some of the organizations calling for a ban. Allegations of racism and anti-Semitism, or accusations of child abuse and “organized mutilation” are irresponsible and do nothing to inform and civilize the debate. The fact is that in practical terms, bans are impractical and unenforceable. Around a third of all men are circumcised and in the Muslim world that figure is, naturally, far higher. It would be impossible for Canada, the United States or any European nation to prevent its Jewish andMuslim population, often numbering millions, to stop circumcising their sons. Laws require majority consent, or at least an implicit acceptance, and must be based on notions of harm and effect. Perhaps in a perfect world, a faith in God would not require a medical procedure on a baby, and I say this as the son of a Jewish father. But those perfect worlds aren’t very common. We are still working out the relationship between religion and state – and between majority and minority – and subtlety and compromise matter far more than we might think. But be warned, this argument is not going away, and it will only become more intense and loud in the years to come. 14 | www.snowbirds.org
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MzMzNzMx