Parents aren't performing male circumcisions and I didn't say they were. Though I agree with the sentiment about any procedure.

Again, this is a semantic argument over poor word choice and misuse of legal and legislative terms, not a moral one

Your argument about patents being able to strip males of autonomy but not females is also misplaced. It's true that they can't have FGM performed on their daughters, legally here in the US (it still happens, but it's rare) but having your daughter's ears pierced as an infant, or presumably anything else, has the same status as male circumcision.

It's unnecessary. There's no law requiring it and no law banning it. It's alters the body without consent. One could have their daughter's nose pierced and have that protected under the First Amendment because biblically, it was a sign of belonging. As far as the legal situstion goes, that's exactly the same as male circumcision, but without that out clause in Galacians.