We considered those issues before making the decision. That one study is...shall we say, not exactly from a neutral medical provider. There are counter studies that say there's no effect at all, and yet others that having a foreskin leads to increased infections. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle. In this case, we're playing the probabilities. There are well over a hundred million circumcised adult males in the US population. If any of these problems occurred in any statistically signficant percentage, I feel that the medical community would know that.
Hell, this gets at the mortal fear of every parent: That we're going to do something (through action or inaction) that permanently damages our child. This is why you have some parents who shelter their kids from *everything* (which is just as damaging, IMHO). My wife let our daugher pay in a mountain creek when she was maybe 6 months old, and she wound up with a short-term case of ringworm. No long-term harm, cleared up with some antifungals, but my wife was devastated. I was in China at the time, and she felt as if she'd just let her infant child crawl out onto a busy highway.
All a parent can do is look at the available literature, and make their own determinations as to what's risky and what's the best course of action. And what this bill would do is usurp that right and force all parents into making the same choice that somebody (in this case, not a medical professional but the author of a comic book called "Foreskin Man" with serious anti-Semitic overtones) made for them.
@freeformschooler: Yeah, I think this needs to end or be split into a seperate thread, before this becomes "the Wang Angst Thread"