Quantcast

Public Opinion Says Circumcision Is Assault

Foxhound BN0 2012/06/29 13:12:43
54% of people who answered the poll agreed that circumcision is assault.

56% of women agreed, 51% of men did too.

People from 13-44 agreed, while older people disagreed.

Atheists were split 50/50, 33% of Christians agreed, agnostics agreed 100%, and Jews disagreed 100%, for obvious reasons.

Politically 62% of people who described themselves as "other" agreed, as well as 88% of liberals, and 57% of moderates. Libertarians were split 50/50 and 18% of conservatives agreed.

60% of people who are divorced agreed, as well as 57% of people in a relationship, 50% of married people, and 57% of singles.

Parents and people who want to have kids agreed 56% and 60% respectively. People undecided or don't want kids disagree.

56% of non-smokers agreed, while only 23% of smokers agreed. Perhaps smokers don't care any more about babies' bodies than they do their own.

54% of non drinkers agreed while only 41% of boozers agreed. Again it might be about respect for the human body.

57% of people with graduate and professional schooling agreed, while only 33% of high school graduates agreed.

73% of retirees agreed but only 28% of full time workers agreed.

83% of healthcare professionals agreed, along with 67% in I.T., and 50% of small business owners.

See the original poll and add your vote at
http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/german-court-rules-reli...
You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Robbb mk, Sma... 2012/07/04 09:12:47
    Robbb
    +2
    I don’t have a group. I am just an independent participant with an opinion on the subject. Never the less It will only be a matter of time until this becomes a human rights issue. Where it comes to human rights the US is notoriously slow but they eventually do come to the party.
  • mk, Sma... Robbb 2012/07/04 16:11:13
  • Robbb mk, Sma... 2012/07/05 10:18:12
    Robbb
    +2
    No it is not illegal in Australia As a mater of fact non religious circumcision started at the same time here as tit did in the US however it has been largely abandoned now as no medical authority here will recommend the procedure the stand taken by health authorities here is that it is harmful and that there is definitely no advantage to be had from it. Many Muslims and Jews however still inflict it on their kids. This also is starting to reduce as the harmful aspects of it come to the fore. As for anti-Semitism I suppose there has always been an element that is anti-Semitic in every country, however the average Australian could not care less what religion you are or are not. Our Prime Minister Julia Gillard is an atheist and lives in the priministerial residence with her partner to whom she is not married. Me personally, I have Jewish blood on both sides of my family but am agnostic. There is more and more talk these days however that circumcision should not be inflicted on children as a mater of human rights and that it should be handed in the same manner as female genital mutilation.
  • mk, Sma... Robbb 2012/07/05 14:07:40
  • Robbb mk, Sma... 2012/07/05 16:17:24
    Robbb
    +2
    Thank you for you replies. You sound like you would be a reasonable person. However I am willing to bet you can’t come up with a reason why female genital mutilation to unwilling children should be banned when you can’t say the same for unwilling boys. Reasons for having either done after all is a cultural or religious one after all and is made by the parents
  • mk, Sma... Robbb 2012/07/06 14:34:39
  • Robbb mk, Sma... 2012/07/06 22:18:19
    Robbb
    +2
    Female genital mutilation is a real thing and terrible. However it is still according to your reasoning a mother taking care of her daughter. (In societies where this is practiced it is in fact important to have it done as failure to do so will lead to exclusion from the tribe leading to a life of poverty or prostitution and eventually both.) Coincidentally to the very places where male circumcision is also most popular and from where the practice originates. However you keep in harping on circumcision as taking care of your children. Which flies against the face of all common sense and world medical practice? Just exactly why are you grateful that your parents removed one of your erogenous zones? In what way is circumcision however well intentioned "taking care of ones children".
  • mk, Sma... Robbb 2012/07/07 17:30:12
  • Robbb mk, Sma... 2012/07/07 23:38:37
    Robbb
    +2
    I have read the article and this is all old news to me. The whole thing makes claims that are preposterous, it sites nothing directly For example, it starts of with (Data from randomised clinical trials show that male circumcision can reduce men's risk of acquiring HIV from their female partners by about 60%) What data? I have heard this claim made before but the source of this myth is just never forth coming. I know the WHO was involved in a mass circumcision program in Africa where I think this claim originated; the result was however that the men that were coned into having their penis mutilated became the core of the highest increase in HIV infection among men. Ever since the pro circumcision people involved have been trying to bury these results in other factors such as reduced condom use and increased promiscuity. The fact however is that it made no difference. The men that felt a need to be HIV proofed through circumcision led a life style and made choices that included risk all along so nothing was gained one way or the other. The cost of having these silly buggers circumcised would have been better spent making them a bit less silly and educating them as to how to avoid HIV through the use of condoms and other preventative methods. However the WHO has the millstone of...

    I have read the article and this is all old news to me. The whole thing makes claims that are preposterous, it sites nothing directly For example, it starts of with (Data from randomised clinical trials show that male circumcision can reduce men's risk of acquiring HIV from their female partners by about 60%) What data? I have heard this claim made before but the source of this myth is just never forth coming. I know the WHO was involved in a mass circumcision program in Africa where I think this claim originated; the result was however that the men that were coned into having their penis mutilated became the core of the highest increase in HIV infection among men. Ever since the pro circumcision people involved have been trying to bury these results in other factors such as reduced condom use and increased promiscuity. The fact however is that it made no difference. The men that felt a need to be HIV proofed through circumcision led a life style and made choices that included risk all along so nothing was gained one way or the other. The cost of having these silly buggers circumcised would have been better spent making them a bit less silly and educating them as to how to avoid HIV through the use of condoms and other preventative methods. However the WHO has the millstone of the Catholic Church around its neck who will do what they can to prevent the use of condoms as it is against the popes idea of what is right. I went into the links from which they claim to get their information and found a huge amount of words but there was just no substance or worthwhile evidence. I read the whole page and went through some of the links at the side of the page because I feel you are a sincere person and believe in what you are saying, however this page is trying to befuddle with words and there is just no real substance in it. The only sensible thing about it is that it is very important to educate people in order for them to understand how to deal with an infectious disease through protection and behavioural strategies. Here in Australia there is a lot of emphasis on education where STD,s are concerned, the result is that by world standards we have a relatively low STD problem. Naturally our national health system also plays a big part in this as anyone that presents for medical attention is always helped regardless of their financial position.
    In any case I would like to harp back on what the original Question was “Public Opinion Says Circumcision Is Assault” and in my opinion it is.
    By the way you did not answer my question when I asked why are you grateful for having been circumcised
    (more)
  • mk, Sma... Robbb 2012/07/08 15:05:34
  • Robbb mk, Sma... 2012/07/08 19:22:23
    Robbb
    +2
    Much easier time cleaning? How can it be easier cleaning a circumcised penis then an intact penis, the difference totally eludes me. Have you ever washed an intact penis? If you have been told there is a difference or that there is some difficulty involved you were definitely misinformed or to be more precise lied to. What it looks like is just a mater of what you are used to
  • mk, Sma... Robbb 2012/07/09 15:51:05
  • jojac Robbb 2012/07/10 13:13:35
    jojac
    If you call that assault then you would have to say all
    surgery is assault. Pulling a tooth is assault. sometimes assault is necessary. God ordained circumcision for
    the Jews. It was a sign of the covenant. It is not necessary
    for Christians, but, it is the parents business, not anyone
    elses.
  • Robbb jojac 2012/07/11 09:18:38
    Robbb
    +2
    You don’t seem to understand that what happens to your body is only your own business Some one using their religion as an excuse for genitally mutilating me or mutilating any other part of my body , I can only see as assault. The case that is being referred to in this instance involve a Muslim child. In any case If a Jew wants to enter into a covenant with a mythological creature he is free to do so at any time during his life or even after death. Macabre but true. Some one holding my hand at eight to make a signature does not a covenant make. All surgery should not be seen as assault if it is carried out with the well being of the child involved. Society has to protect its children from mollestors regardles of how traditional the molestation is. evn Jews agree with that concept. http://www.jewishcircumcision...
  • jojac Robbb 2012/07/16 13:41:23 (edited)
    jojac
    You are your own god aren't you?
    You exalt your self above God.
    By denying that He exists you are
    claiming to be wiser than He is.

    You obviously reject the fact that there is a God
    who gave man a standard to live by for his own
    present and future good. You believe that everyone
    should do whatever is right in his own eyes.

    God fearing (you will misunderstand that)
    people are the ones that DO understand.
  • Robbb jojac 2012/07/16 19:02:52
    Robbb
    +1
    Are you referring to forcibly circumcising a child here? There is no reason that any one Especially the Muslims can’t undergo this mutilation of their own free will as informed adults. Fact is that the same applies to the Jews. You are a savage that has little or no understanding or sympathy for the harm that is done to a child through this brutal ritual. You are also looking at this from the perspective of the US where the public is being generally led up the garden path regarding circumcision as it and its aftermath is big business there. In Germany where this case is being heard about 35% of jews circumcise and In the case of the Muslims there is no religious requirement at all to be circumcised other then a cultural pressure to do so. these are the same savages that mutilate their women for other reasons. The inclination for men to interfere with the sexuality of children and women has always run deep. This is a standard of man and a perversity that sickens the minds of those subjected to it.
  • jojac Robbb 2012/07/17 00:50:29
    jojac
    What "harm" is done to a child who is circumsized?

    And what are you rambling on about?
  • Robbb jojac 2012/07/17 10:31:39
  • Robbb mk, Sma... 2012/06/30 23:42:28
  • mk, Sma... Robbb 2012/07/01 15:57:34
  • Robbb mk, Sma... 2012/07/01 20:26:11
    Robbb
    +3
    What is she comparing with?
  • mk, Sma... Robbb 2012/07/02 17:30:16
  • Robbb mk, Sma... 2012/07/03 10:39:58
    Robbb
    +1
    If you were under the impassion that I implied that your good wife slept around please put that idea out of your mind, I did not. However If your wife has not experienced both she can not know the difference. My wife did and says there is a definite difference.
  • jojac Robbb 2012/07/17 00:56:32
  • Robbb jojac 2012/07/17 11:04:18
  • jojac Foxhoun... 2012/07/02 20:28:09 (edited)
    jojac
    That picture appears to be ball bearings.
  • Robbb mk, Sma... 2012/06/30 23:38:23
    Robbb
    +4
    Circumcision/HIV Claims are Based on Insufficient Evidence

    An article endorsed by thirty-two professionals questions the results of three highly publicized African circumcision studies. The studies claim that circumcision reduces HIV transmission, and they are being used to promote circumcisions. Substantial evidence in this article refutes the claim of the studies.

    Examples in the article include the following:

    Circumcision is associated with increased transmission of HIV to women.
    Conditions for the studies were unlike conditions found in real-world settings.
    Other studies show that male circumcision is not associated with reduced HIV transmission.
    The U.S. has a high rate of HIV infection and a high rate of circumcision. Other countries have low rates of circumcision and low rates of HIV infection.
    Condoms are 95 times more cost effective in preventing HIV transmission.
    Circumcision removes healthy, functioning, unique tissue, raising ethical considerations.

    Green, L. et al., "Male Circumcision and HIV Prevention: Insufficient Evidence and Neglected External Validity," American Journal of Preventive Medicine 39 (2010): 479-82.
    In National Survey Circumcision Had No Protective Effect

    A survey of South African men showed that circumcision had no protective effec...
    Circumcision/HIV Claims are Based on Insufficient Evidence

    An article endorsed by thirty-two professionals questions the results of three highly publicized African circumcision studies. The studies claim that circumcision reduces HIV transmission, and they are being used to promote circumcisions. Substantial evidence in this article refutes the claim of the studies.

    Examples in the article include the following:

    Circumcision is associated with increased transmission of HIV to women.
    Conditions for the studies were unlike conditions found in real-world settings.
    Other studies show that male circumcision is not associated with reduced HIV transmission.
    The U.S. has a high rate of HIV infection and a high rate of circumcision. Other countries have low rates of circumcision and low rates of HIV infection.
    Condoms are 95 times more cost effective in preventing HIV transmission.
    Circumcision removes healthy, functioning, unique tissue, raising ethical considerations.

    Green, L. et al., "Male Circumcision and HIV Prevention: Insufficient Evidence and Neglected External Validity," American Journal of Preventive Medicine 39 (2010): 479-82.
    In National Survey Circumcision Had No Protective Effect

    A survey of South African men showed that circumcision had no protective effect in the prevention of HIV transmission. This is a concern, and has implications for the possible adoption of mass male circumcision strategy both as a public health policy and an HIV prevention strategy.
    Connolly, C. et al., South African Medical Journal 98(2008): 789-794.
    (more)
  • mk, Sma... Robbb 2012/07/01 15:59:01
  • jojac mk, Sma... 2012/07/02 20:26:26
    jojac
    +3
    Infection would have been no problem had the test subjects kept the
    penis clean.
  • mk, Sma... jojac 2012/07/02 21:36:40
  • Anonymouse ~superdoge~ 2012/06/29 13:59:15
    Anonymouse ~superdoge~
    +2
    So medical prefessionals say it's assault. What does that tell you?
  • Foxhoun... Anonymo... 2012/06/29 14:22:03
    Foxhound BN0
    +3
    That tells me it's assault.
  • Philo-Publius 2012/06/29 13:58:13
    Philo-Publius
    +4
    retro
    I disagreed on this issue with 100% of Jews, 67% of Christians, 50% of atheists, 44% of women, and 49% of men. I did, however, agree with 88% of liberals, 57% of moderates, half of libertarians, 18% of conservatives (somehow), and 62% of political 'others'.

    I disagreed with 40% of divorcees, 43% of people who are in a relationship as well as 43% of singles, and half of married people. I agreed with 56% of parents and 60% of those who want kids, with 56% of non-smokers, 23% of smokers, yet disagreed with 46% of non-drinkers and 60% of boozers (who may, nonetheless, have bumped the wrong answer while intoxicated, or else their inhibitions to the practice were sufficiently lowered during the selection of their answer).

    Finally, I agreed with 57% of professionals and a scant 33% and 28% of high school graduates and full-time workers respectively, but a more robust 73% with retirees, 83% of health care professionals and half of small business owners.

    Based on these very scientific results, I intend to look askance today upon the conservatives, smokers, full-time workers, high school graduates and Jews I encounter on here, or to at least be wary of the likelihood they'll express intolerable views.
  • Foxhoun... Philo-P... 2012/06/29 14:24:11
    Foxhound BN0
    +4
    AND they may try to cut your thingy! Awesome as usual Philo!
  • Robbb Philo-P... 2012/07/07 23:41:15
    Robbb
    Perhaps you should have another look at your Jewish numbers as there are differing opinions among them on this as well.
  • Tink123 2012/06/29 13:54:54
    Tink123
    +2
    Not sure I can jump headfirst into calling it assault. My son was circumcised. Although, his was done during an operation he had to have and he was asleep through it all. So maybe I'm not the best person to ask. If circumcising him was assault though - then how would we describe the surgery he had to have? That was much more invasive - was that also assault?
  • Foxhoun... Tink123 2012/06/29 14:25:31
    Foxhound BN0
    +3
    did he need the surgery? did he need the circumcision?
  • Tink123 Foxhoun... 2012/06/29 14:37:54 (edited)
    Tink123
    +1
    I thought he needed the surgery, but it wasn't necessary. Certainly wasn't a life or death situation. He had two small hernias in his lower abdominal area. He probably could have gone the rest of his life with them and been healthy. But he may have also had a lot of pain with as well. Turned out to be the second most common *procedure performed on boys, with the first being circumcision.

    I'll admit - I was shocked to find out that circumcisions are performed without any sedation or form of pain reliever. That was startling to me. It just so happened that in his case, he was asleep through it all.
  • Foxhoun... Tink123 2012/06/29 20:12:42
    Foxhound BN0
    +3
    do you think girls should have their labia removed?
  • Tink123 Foxhoun... 2012/06/29 20:29:46
    Tink123
    If it's painful for them, sure why not.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

Living

2014/09/30 18:26:58

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals