The Right to Religious Belief

Has Germany brought itself to a point of moral crisis on fundamental religious issues this Month?

The Regional Court in Cologne controversially ruled earlier this month that circumcision of young boys who cannot legally give consent to the action amounts to grievous bodily harm. The consequence being that practitioners could be held criminally responsible.

However, in post-holocaust Germany the right to religious conviction is a sensitive issue. Jewish and Muslim societies immediately bandied together to protest, resulting in the ruling being suspended by a higher national judiciary.

Does un-consented circusion amount to grievous bodily harm? If, then should it be exempted on religious grounds? How far down the path of tolerating religious practices should one go? Would a religion requiring the sacrifice of white rabbits at midnight be tolerated with Germanys strict animal rights laws? Religions supporting multiple marriages (typically 4 wives) are not condoned. So does approving of religious circumcision amount to a double standard?

If bodily integrity is a fundamental human right, should un-consented circumcision be regarded as grievous bodily harm anyway? Should this matter be referred above the German National Judiciary to the European Courts?

Germany has a moral dilemma, and thus a tug of war between regional and national judiciaries. The legacy of post war policies has somehow to be overcome. Those policies were formulated at a time when the country needed to recover dignity. The world has moved on nearly 70 years since the War; and what was appropriate then may not apply now. Hard decisions are needed, and it may be increasingly uncomfortable to hide behind out of date policies.