Some Honesty Please Religious Freedom vs Human Rights

Ok lets have some honesty here, and stop insulting everyone with half a brain.  When you object to a German Court Ruling that found "non-therapuetic circumcision of children is a violation of children's individual human rights", by calling it a ridiculous ruling, you insult me and everyone that believes and fights for individual human rights. 

The ruling is correct, it is intellectualy correct, it is correct in law, and because it is in accordance with the philosophy of individual human rights, it is therefore therefore morally correct from a human rights point of view.  You have a right not to like it because it interferes with your Religious freedom, but that does not make the ruling ridiculous.  Be honest, and show some guts and argue openly & publicly why you think religious freedom should take precedence over individual human rights.

Here's some clues for you = If you want to argue for religious freedom, then be intellectually honest about it.  Tell the truth!!  Say that you believe religious freedom is more important to you and your community than are individual human rights.  Be totally honest and admit that circumcision of children male or female is a violation of their bodily integrity and their individual human rights, but that you belive that religious freedom should take precendence over these individual human rights.  Be courageous, and ask for an exemption from law and human rights legislation, because your  practices of circumcision of children are more important within your religion, than are individual human rights.

Just dont insult me and the rest of the world, and argue that calling the circumcision of children a violation of individual human rights is ridiculous.  It is ridiculous that you expect to call such a ruling ridiculous and feel that it is somehow a valid statement and one that will go without challenge???