Barry Duke, the Angry Atheist

Search

Search

1. 

   As someone who produced dozens of nativity plays as a teacher and a Sunday School leader, that title ‘A Gay…

2. 

   The defence of a Christian view never seems to be settled by debate: exchange of facts, reference to historical events.…

3. 

   But …… Rwanda is a safe place: Parliament says so.https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2024/8/contentsSafety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024 S 2 Safety…

4. 

   Religion can survive only on the most unquestionable assumptions. The statements made on Sundays on the BBC as if they…

5. 

   Yes, if I’ve got anything remotely like a phobia, as an ex-fundy, its bibles, churches, tracts etc. I like to…

BACK in 2008, Andew Lye (inset) questioned why religious circumcision of children was necessary if God “made man in his own image”.

In a short piece he wrote he said:

For the record, I am uncut. I was born with it and cannot understand why any religion should require its removal (I can understand it if there is a medical need) because if God didn’t mean us to have one, he’d have created us without one.

Doesn’t the Bible say, in any case, that he made man in his own image, therefore we must assume God has a foreskin. So do we therefore say that those who have their boy’s foreskin removed are contravening God’s laws?

‘Anti-semitic and anti-Muslim’

Fifteen years on the obscure little blog post—”Uncut”— surfaced, and at a meeting of Neyland council in Pembrokeshire earlier this month, fellow councillor Brian Rothero said the remarks were:

Nothing short of antisemitic and anti-Muslim.

The council subsequently voted to remove Lye from the mayoralty and Lye has now resigned from the council.

His ousting outraged both the National Secular Society (NSS) and a charity called 15 Square that provides “information, education and advice for men with or without a foreskin.”

The two organisations sent a joint letter to Neyland town council in mid-June, in which they said:

There is nothing anti-Semitic or anti-Muslim in questioning the practice of non-therapeutic circumcision of children.

Indeed, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child has listed it as a ‘harmful practice’ and urged the UK government to ensure ‘no one is subjected to unnecessary medical or surgical treatment during infancy or childhood, guarantee bodily integrity, autonomy and self-determination to children concerned’.

Furthermore, a British judge has described circumcision as ‘more invasive’ than some forms of Female Genital Mutilation and held it met the legal definition of significant harm under the Children Act 1989.

By characterising Mr Lye’s legitimate criticism of religious genital cutting as “antisemitic and anti-Muslim”, Cllr Rothero has unfairly smeared a fellow councillor —and at the same time made it more difficult to speak up for the rights of children.

In a free and open society, religious beliefs and practices must remain open to scrutiny and debate. Individuals should be afforded respect and protection, but ideas should not. Freedom of expression and social cohesion are harmed if criticism of regressive religious doctrine and harmful practices are branded anti-Semitic or anti-Muslim and considered beyond the bounds of reasonable public debate.

Deaths caused by the practice in the UK

The letter also pointed out that circumcision has been listed as a “harmful” practice by the United Nations, and that three boys have bled to death in recent years post-circumcision in the UK (Celian Noumbiwe, Angelo Ofori-Mintah, and Goodluck Caubergs).

Eleven were admitted in just one year to just one hospital with life-threatening haemorrhage or sepsis.

An National Health Service whistleblower, himself a paediatric surgeon, said in 2016 circumcisions were leaving children “maimed for life”.

A Freedom of Information Request to the General Medical Council last year revealed complications of circumcision recorded between 2012 and 2022 included penile deformity, infection, urinary complications and inadequate anaesthesia. Babies required blood transfusions in some cases.

A 2018 YouGov poll showed 62 percent of the British public would support a law against non-medical circumcision of boys.

NSS campaigns officer Dr Alejandro Sanchez said:

In 2016, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child urged the government to ensure ‘no one is subjected to unnecessary medical or surgical treatment during infancy or childhood’.

Religious infant circumcision is exactly that: unnecessary, painful and risky surgery on non-consenting children to satisfy religious or cultural beliefs of their parents. Allegations of antisemitism or Islamophobia cannot be allowed to silence legitimate criticism of harmful religious practices.

Andrew Lye has been ousted from the mayoralty because he spoke up in defence of the bodily integrity and autonomy of children. This will now have a chilling effect on anyone in politics wanting to speak out for children’s fundamental rights.

A ‘toxic’ council

Speaking after his resignation, Lye said he had raised the issue of male circumcision as part of his blog against the practice of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM).

While the consequence of circumcision is considered less than Female Genital Mutilation, it is nonetheless still an often-unnecessary procedure on a boy’s body. A procedure that a boy cannot give consent to.

He added:

I am against all forms of abuse, whether it’s against girls or boys. I am not homophobic, racist, Islamophobic or antisemitic. I just believe in equality for all and that is why I am in politics.

He said he knew he was “taking on a poisoned chalice” when he became Mayor, adding:

I have found Neyland Town Council an extremely toxic environment and after serious consideration I have decided to resign.

Please help keep The Angry Atheist going with a donation.

You can also support my work via PayPal, Buy Me a Coffee or GofundMe.