Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 48

Thread: Iceland male circumcision ban: MP behind plan 'didnt think it was necessary to consult' Jewish and Muslim groups, amid growing anger

  1. #1
    Hundhedensk "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Hersir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Hlyg
    Ancestry
    Norway
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Y-DNA
    I2b1
    mtDNA
    J2a1a1b
    Country
    Norway Norway
    State
    South Trondelag South Trondelag
    Location
    Norway
    Gender
    Age
    32
    Zodiac Sign
    Pisces
    Family
    Single adult
    Politics
    Nationalist
    Posts
    6,034
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    947
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    694
    Thanked in
    315 Posts

    Iceland male circumcision ban: MP behind plan 'didnt think it was necessary to consult' Jewish and Muslim groups, amid growing anger

    Iceland male circumcision ban: MP behind plan 'didnt think it was necessary to consult' Jewish and Muslim groups, amid growing anger

    'I dont see it as a religious matter,' insists Silja Dgg Gunnarsdttir





    Religious leaders have reacted with outrage to a bill proposed by MPs in Iceland that would criminalise male circumcision.


    The bill proposes a six-year prison term for anyone found guilty of removing sexual organs in whole or in part.


    Salmann Tamimi, president of the Muslim Association of Iceland, described the proposal as an attack on religion.


    Circumcising girls has been illegal in Iceland since 2005, but there are currently no laws to regulate the practice against boys.


    Describing circumcision as a violation of young boys rights, the bill states the only time it should be considered is for health reasons.


    Young men would be given the opportunity to decide for themselves once they reached the age of consent.


    Male circumcision is one of the most common surgical procedures in the world, with one recent study estimating that around 38 per cent of men globally have undergone the procedure.


    According to the same study, around half of circumcisions are carried out for religious or cultural reasons.


    While the importance of male circumcision in Islam is disputed some Muslim groups say it is obligatory, others only recommend it it remains a major and celebrated rite wherever Islam is practised.


    For Jews, circumcision carries profound religious significance and most baby boys born into Jewish families are circumcised within a week of birth.


    The Bishop of Iceland, Agnes M Sigurardttir, has criticised the bill for criminalising the religious beliefs of Jews and Muslims, recommending instead a ban on unsafe circumcision.


    In a statement to The Independent, Chief Rabbi Pinchas Goldschmidt, president of the Conference of European Rabbis, said he was extremely concerned about the proposed legislation.


    Whilst the Jewish population in Iceland is small, we cannot ignore the dangerous precedent this sets within Europe and the implications it has on Jews ability to carry out our religion in an open and free manner.


    A spokesperson for Milah UK, which campaigns to protect the right of the Jewish community to carry out male circumcision, described the practice as "a non-negotiable element of Jewish identity". A ban would make "sustainable Jewish life in the country impossible," he said.


    There are no official figures on the number of Jews living in Iceland but estimates in 2010 by the Pew Research Center suggest they make up less than 0.1 per cent of the population (fewer than 320 people).



    Mr Tamimi said he was particularly concerned about the potential impact of the bill on the small Jewish community.


    Even if there is just one Jew, it is very bad to criminalise him, he said. Its very bad for Iceland to get that name, that they dont want Jews. This is one way of saying they are not welcome.


    He warned the legislation was an attack on religion more broadly "they are interfering in religious freedom and said he was frustrated that religious groups were not consulted before the legislation was proposed. There was not a single word, he said. We read about it in the newspaper.


    Progressive Party MP Silja Dgg Gunnarsdttir is the driving force behind the legislation.


    I didnt think it was necessary to consult, she told The Independent. I dont see it as a religious matter.


    Jews are welcome in Iceland. But this is about child protection and childrens rights. That comes first, and before the religious rights of the adult.


    Every individual, it doesnt matter what sex or how old should be able to give informed consent for a procedure that is unnecessary, irreversible and can be harmful. His body, his choice.


    She said she was surprised when she learned that male circumcision was still legal, despite the ban on circumcising girls.


    The body parts are different, the procedures are different, but in both cases they can be lethal and harmful to the child, she said.


    Guidance issued in 2013 by the Nordic Ombudsmen for Children and paediatric experts concluded that there are no health-related grounds to circumcise young boys in the Nordic countries.


    According to the paper, the procedure violates fundamental medical-ethical principles, not least because the procedure is irreversible, painful and may cause serious complications".


    In the wake of that report, doctors working for Icelands national health system stopped carrying out the procedure.


    Ms Gunnarsdttir argued that if just one person has complications after circumcision, that is one too many.


    But there is significant disagreement in the global medical community regarding the potential harms or benefits of male circumcision.


    While some studies say non-therapeutic circumcision can cause pain and serious long-term consequences including infections, haemorrhages, sexual problems and psychological trauma others suggest the health benefits outweigh the risks.


    Mr Tamimi is keen to support any legislation that would make male circumcision safer. But he rejects a complete ban.


    This bill is built just on feelings without any thinking about what it means to criminalise circumcision, he said. We dont accept it.


    The legislation has been debated once in the Icelandic parliament and will go through several stages of discussion and consultation before it could become law.


    This is a complicated and difficult matter, said Ms Gunnarsdttir. This is a healthy, democratic way to come to a conclusion.



    Source

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Hersir For This Useful Post:


  3. #2
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    oreiar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Online
    9 Minutes Ago @ 02:28 PM
    Ethnicity
    Scandinavian
    Ancestry
    East Norwegian + distant Finnish
    Subrace
    Nordid + reduced CM
    Y-DNA
    I1a1
    Country
    Norway Norway
    Location
    Sweden
    Gender
    Age
    29
    Occupation
    Traditional Craftsman
    Politics
    Family, Nation & Nature
    Religion
    Heathen Worldview
    Posts
    2,300
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,151
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,301
    Thanked in
    636 Posts
    He warned the legislation was an attack on religion more broadly "they are interfering in religious freedom and said he was frustrated that religious groups were not consulted before the legislation was proposed. There was not a single word, he said. We read about it in the newspaper.
    LOL. I wonder if the Icelanders were ever consulted before the government decided to import these cretins.
    A nation is an organic thing, historically defined.
    A wave of passionate energy which unites past, present and future generations

  4. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to oreiar For This Useful Post:


  5. #3
    Senior Member Skrmtrl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Last Online
    4 Weeks Ago @ 12:59 AM
    Ethnicity
    Swedish
    Gender
    Posts
    141
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    128
    Thanked in
    80 Posts
    Iceland is interesting as case study owing to its small size--that usually makes things less complicated. But even there the "classic" confrontation of the freedom of small groups (Middle-East) versus the freedom of individuals (West) seems the same.

    I've read the works of a researcher writing about this dilemma in Sweden, and although the individualist cause has temporarily had to give in to some collectivist pleas in the name of religious freedom, it seems the former will find its way back again and be more consistent in future.

  6. #4
    Anachronism "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Huginn ok Muninn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Ancestry
    Germany, Norway, England
    Subrace
    Nordeby
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Texas Texas
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Leo
    Family
    Single adult
    Politics
    Farther right than you.
    Posts
    3,047
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    623
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    753
    Thanked in
    359 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Skrmtrl View Post
    Iceland is interesting as case study owing to its small size--that usually makes things less complicated. But even there the "classic" confrontation of the freedom of small groups (Middle-East) versus the freedom of individuals (West) seems the same.

    I've read the works of a researcher writing about this dilemma in Sweden, and although the individualist cause has temporarily had to give in to some collectivist pleas in the name of religious freedom, it seems the former will find its way back again and be more consistent in future.
    I'll make it very plain. This is not about "isms." This was NEVER about "isms." This is about PEOPLES. Our nations only thrive when they are homogeneous. There should be no "small groups" whose "rights" are to be debated in OUR lands. When that happens, "equality" (another "ism") is discussed, and alien peoples are given what amounts to special protected status within lands that should be reserved for OUR people. That means they get preference in everything. The goddamned Jews imposing this agenda realize this fully.
    Most people think as they are trained to think, and most people make a majority.

  7. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Huginn ok Muninn For This Useful Post:


  8. #5
    Senior Member Rodulf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Last Online
    1 Week Ago @ 11:32 AM
    Ethnicity
    North American
    Ancestry
    Norse, Celt, Saxon, Native American
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Idaho Idaho
    Location
    Pacific Northwest
    Gender
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Criminal Justice
    Politics
    National Socialist
    Religion
    Heathen
    Posts
    211
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    252
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    311
    Thanked in
    128 Posts
    I consider the circumcision done to me as an infant to be a sexual mutilation and if I could go back in time I would take a bloody revenge on those that did it to me.
    "This World We Cannot Tolerate,
    It's Time To Seal All Preachers Fate,
    And Hang Them All,
    From Odin's Tree!"
    Amon Amarth

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Rodulf For This Useful Post:


  10. #6
    Senior Member Skrmtrl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Last Online
    4 Weeks Ago @ 12:59 AM
    Ethnicity
    Swedish
    Gender
    Posts
    141
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    34
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    128
    Thanked in
    80 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Huginn ok Muninn View Post
    I'll make it very plain. This is not about "isms." This was NEVER about "isms." This is about PEOPLES. Our nations only thrive when they are homogeneous. There should be no "small groups" whose "rights" are to be debated in OUR lands. When that happens, "equality" (another "ism") is discussed, and alien peoples are given what amounts to special protected status within lands that should be reserved for OUR people. That means they get preference in everything. The goddamned Jews imposing this agenda realize this fully.
    Isms are simply a useful way to describe ideas, they don't side with anyone as such (although they can of course be used in rhetorical strategies). The nativist stance you seem to advocate, for example, is in itself a collectivist stance. Most moderns, such as the Icelandic MP, however, seem to believe in the rights of the individual and seem to be less interested in collectivist issues such as peoples. I don't think we would be able to understand many peoples' (such as MPs') motivations if we didn't consider these isms.

  11. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Last Online
    1 Week Ago @ 12:49 AM
    Status
    Prolonged Absence
    Ethnicity
    Alsatian/Suevi
    Ancestry
    germanic/alsatian/Elsaesser
    Subrace
    Child of Creator God
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Oregon Oregon
    Gender
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    retired - Aerospace Quality Engi
    Politics
    independent
    Religion
    Born again Christian,
    Posts
    839
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    768
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,003
    Thanked in
    491 Posts
    Be thankful they "mutilated" you. Circumcision is a hygiene issue. If the foreskin cannot be pulled back anymore, your penis is in danger to harbor germs and whatever could cause severe inflammations. Some men are circumcised in later years because sex can be difficult and painful to both male and female.
    It is not a Jewish issue but a health issue.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to schwab For This Useful Post:


  13. #8
    Moderator "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    GroeneWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Dutch
    Subrace
    Don't know
    Country
    Netherlands Netherlands
    State
    Utrecht Utrecht
    Gender
    Age
    37
    Family
    Single adult
    Religion
    Germanic Heathendom
    Posts
    3,059
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    304
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    410
    Thanked in
    222 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by schwab View Post
    Be thankful they "mutilated" you.
    From a more native European perspective, it is indeed a form of mutilation. We know that the ancient Greeks and Romans viewed it as such. And we also know that among Germanics it has never been a custom. Until very recently and then mostly in English speaking protestant countries (mainly the USA) where it began to become more widespread during the Victorian Era. So I hypothesise from this that our pre-Christian ancestors also viewed it in a similar light as the ancient Greeks and Romans.

    This also explains why the council of Jerusalem had declared that circumcision was not a requirement for Gentiles who wanted to follow the teaching of Christ.

    Circumcision is a hygiene issue.
    For many Europeans it is not.

    If the foreskin cannot be pulled back anymore, your penis is in danger to harbor germs and whatever could cause severe inflammations.
    There is indeed some evidence that the procedure might prevent inflammation, however it seems that a lot of those studies had serious flaws. And there are also studies that have shown that foreskin removal actually increases the risk of UTI.

    Nonetheless, UTIs have been touted as a “compelling” reason for circumcision largely due to the efforts of Thomas Wiswell who, beginning in 1982, searched U.S. Army hospital databases to compare UTI rates in circumcised and intact infant males.[38, and others] The American Academy of Pediatrics itself critiqued the spate of studies produced by Wiswell and other investigators around the same time, stating,

    It should be noted that these studies were retrospective in design and may have methodological flaws. For example, they do not include all boys born in any single cohort or those treated as outpatients, so the study population may have been influenced by selection bias.[39]
    In addition, these studies failed to control for potentially confounding factors, such as being born prematurely. Prematurity puts babies at higher risk of infections of all kinds due to their immature immune systems, and such infants are more likely to undergo catheterization for various reasons, in itself increasing the infection risk. However, premature babies are also typically not circumcised because of their fragile medical condition, thus prematurity itself (rather than the presence of a foreskin) could explain the higher rate of UTIs found in intact infants.

    (...)

    In particular, no study has ever adjusted for the effect of forcible foreskin retraction, a common injury that was once standard medical ‘care’ based on North American clinicians’ lack of understanding of normal foreskin development.[41,42] Although the American Academy of Pediatrics has recommended against the practice of forced foreskin retraction for decades, it persists both in clinical settings and at home by parents, due to erroneous and aggressive hygiene advice. Traumatic retraction is invariably performed without any antisepsis, putting intact boys at risk of iatrogenic (doctor-caused) UTI, and potentially biasing studies of UTI incidence.

    On the other hand, a number of other studies have failed to find a UTI risk-reduction effect from circumcision.

    For example, eight studies from Israel demonstrated, in fact, the opposite: a positive association between ritual circumcision on the eighth day and immediate post-circumcision UTI.[43-50]
    Some men are circumcised in later years because sex can be difficult and painful to both male and female.
    If there are indeed men who do that, it is highly unlikely it would help and would most likely increase the problems (at least for the female).

    In the case of heterosexual intercourse, once the intact penis is inserted, the vaginal walls hold the skin of the penis relatively stable, allowing the shaft of the penis to glide in and out of its own skin sheath. In contrast, the taut, immobile skin of the erect circumcised penis lacks this natural gliding action with the motions of intercourse, creating an excess of friction directly on the vaginal walls, and potentially causing increased discomfort for both partners.[10]
    Now why might it not increase the pain experienced by males. It is simple, circumsision removes a lot of nerve-endings in the penis.

    Loss of nerve endings – In the 1950s, Winkelman noted the dense innervation of the prepuce, and classified the prepuce as a “specific erogenous zone,” along with other mucocutaneous regions (such as the lips, nipples, and vulva), areas in which the anatomy is specifically organized to “favor acute sensation.”[15,16] In the 1980s, Moldwin and Valderrama documented “an extensive neuronal network within prepucial tissue.”[17] Taylor et al. (1996) documented dense concentrations of fine-touch-sensing Meissner’s corpuscles in a band of ridged mucosa encircling the preputial outlet, and identified the prepuce as a “a large and important platform” for input into the nervous system.[3] Sorrells et al. (2007), using micro-filament touch-testing on 19 points on the penises of intact versus circumcised men, found that the most fine-touch-sensitive regions of the penis are those removed by circumcision.[18]

    (...)

    Perhaps surprisingly then, the authors of one of these studies, Bossio et al., still found that the foreskin of intact men was more sensitive to tactile stimulation than any other part of the penis (circumcised or not), and also that it was more sensitive to warmth than the glans (both results statistically significant).[24] However, ignoring their own findings, these authors reported the contradictory conclusion that neonatal circumcision has “minimal long-term implications for penile sensitivity.”[24] This pronouncement further ignores the fact that static, single-point testing in a laboratory may be very different from real-life sexual stimulation, in which all parts of the foreskin are likely to be stimulated via moving, rather than static, gestures. Bossio et al.’s study has been critiqued in detail elsewhere.[25,26]
    It is not a Jewish issue but a health issue.
    That it is an health issue is questionable, except in certain cases (which does apply to the majority of males). Also when it comes to European countries, it is indeed mostly a Jewish and Islamic issue.
    The sense of honor is of so fine and delicate a nature that
    it is only to be met with in minds which are naturally noble or
    cultivated by good examples and a refined education.
    - Sir Richard Steele

  14. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to GroeneWolf For This Useful Post:


  15. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Last Online
    Thursday, August 29th, 2019 @ 06:31 AM
    Ethnicity
    english/northern irish
    Ancestry
    england/northern ireland
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Texas Texas
    Location
    West Texas
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    bookkeeper
    Politics
    libertarian
    Religion
    christian
    Posts
    88
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    23
    Thanked in
    15 Posts
    Circumcision is just plain common sense. All civilized countries do it. Here in America it is an automatic no-brainer. The foreskin is filthy and should be removed. The penis should be clean and free of germs. Nothing to do with religion. It is simply to maintain good health and purity. The area should be shaved as well. Sorry for sounding too 'Victorian' but that is my take on the matter.

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to saxonbrit For This Useful Post:


  17. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Last Online
    1 Week Ago @ 12:49 AM
    Status
    Prolonged Absence
    Ethnicity
    Alsatian/Suevi
    Ancestry
    germanic/alsatian/Elsaesser
    Subrace
    Child of Creator God
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Oregon Oregon
    Gender
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    retired - Aerospace Quality Engi
    Politics
    independent
    Religion
    Born again Christian,
    Posts
    839
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    768
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,003
    Thanked in
    491 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by saxonbrit View Post
    Circumcision is just plain common sense. All civilized countries do it. Here in America it is an automatic no-brainer. The foreskin is filthy and should be removed. The penis should be clean and free of germs. Nothing to do with religion. It is simply to maintain good health and purity. The area should be shaved as well. Sorry for sounding too 'Victorian' but that is my take on the matter.
    You got it right, 100%.
    Thanks

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: Monday, March 12th, 2018, 11:29 PM
  2. The Case Against Male Circumcision and Child Mutilation.
    By Gaiseric in forum Parenthood & Family
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Monday, March 20th, 2017, 02:07 AM
  3. Iceland: Stolen lava stones cause anger of gods
    By Blutwlfin in forum Iceland
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Saturday, December 30th, 2006, 06:12 PM
  4. Russia's Nationalists Call for Ban on Jewish Groups
    By Patria in forum Parties, Organizations, & Activism
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Wednesday, January 26th, 2005, 09:19 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •