Circumcision should only be doing for genuine medical reasons. Doing for religious reasons is abuse, unless it is done on a fully consenting adult male. I don't know about nowadays but at one time the foreskin was taken off without pain relief in the Jewish ritual, which is TERRIBLE, poor baby boy! What sort of sick perverted god would demand that of its acolytes? 
It hasn't only been for religious reasons.
It is not so long ago that circumcision was a routine "service" offered by midwives following home births. Childbirth mainly took place at home and was attended only by a midwife. circumcision was performed on baby boys two or three days old. Most of the boys that I was at school with did not have foreskins (myself included).
It was a habit which had crossed the Atlantic - being American, it was a practice which simple English women clearly thought was somehow beneficial. Little did they know that it was the originator of their breakfast cereal who encouraged circumcision (for exactly the same reason that he had invented corn flakes - he wanted to suppress the evil activity of sexual intercourse).
In the 1940s and 1950s circumcision was a female conspiracy practised by women on their sons. It is hard to imagine the thought processes involved in giving birth to a beautiful baby boy and then, awash with love, mutilating him without even the benefit of pain relief.
