Could the world’s most pro-life court be in Germany?
Circumcising young boys on religious grounds amounts to grievous bodily harm, a German court ruled Tuesday in a landmark decision that the Jewish community said trampled on parents’ religious rights.
The regional court in Cologne, western Germany, ruled that the “fundamental right of the child to bodily integrity outweighed the fundamental rights of the parents”, a judgement [sic] that is expected to set a legal precedent.
Reaction has been mainly in the “government intrusion on parental and religious rights” variety. But maybe we should take a slightly different view. Maybe we should hope this court uses the same logic on other controversial “procedures.”
Maybe we should start referring to abortion as “full fetal circumcision.”
“The religious freedom of the parents and their right to educate their child would not be unacceptably compromised, if they were obliged to wait until the child could himself decide to be circumcised,” the court added.
Indeed, and perhaps we should also wait until “the child could himself decide to be aborted.” Seems only fair, doesn’t it? He’s the one most affected. If the simple act of having a foreskin removed is such an affront to the baby’s personal rights – his right to personhood – surely a court would extend that to the baby’s life.
(Posted by The TrogloPundit.)
Here’s a fascinating nugget from Robert Novak: “According to Senate sources, Democratic Leader Harry Reid has informed Majority Leader Bill
Americans are vastly more generous with their time and money than Europeans. According to social demographer Arthur C. Brooks, in
Nothing says “rebel with a cause” like a hate scarf. Barack Obama’s best man brother, who was the best man