Angela Merkel intervenes over court ban on circumcision of young boys (in Germany)

[riderinthestorm]

103. Nope, we've already (jointly) decided, as a society, that's not going to happen (FGM, tattoos etc)

We've already decided (and you've agreed) that SOME bodily modifications are too extreme to inflict on infants and must be banned by law regardless of parental desire. Did you know the Maori of New Zealand consider a child without facial tattoos and scarificatiom (moko) to be "incomplete" and "naked". Yet outlaw that practice we do since we understand that elaborate facial tattoos pretty much mean that person isn't going to be getting a job as a lawyer/president/teacher etc even as the Maori grieve since that person can never be "complete" without it in their religion and culture.

You still haven't answered the question of WHY this religious ritual that serves only to identify someone as a member of a religious tribe, can't be decided to be done when said person is an adult and can decide for themselves. Why MUST it be performed on an unconsenting infant? Without anesthesia? Do you think infant religious scarification is okay too?

Of course you've declined to answer most of the rest of my post. Noted.