One can argue that it's cruel, painful, disfiguring and does not seek the wishes of the child. Others have (erroneously I suggest), compared the brit milah to Female Genital Mutilation, whichis of course much more traumatic.
Having been circumcised I can reasonably question the need and it being continued as a token of a covenant. I think not. Surely there are other choices such as perhaps a ritual with a substitute operation such as ...? I can think of a couple. You may too. Certainly at Passover there are substitutions now made for articles ordained in the Pesach seder.
Is a circumcision only to be done/justified for medical reason? Since the child can't be asked, why are there also piercings done on a young child without their permission? Apparently that's acceptable?
In my personal opinion a circumcision should not be performed on a child unless medically required, or, until they may legally make the choice as in tat's or piercing.
The irony is that by “protecting the freedom” of these children, German legislators has deprived parents of their freedom to choose what they think is best for their children.
The brit milah (Hebrew: בְּרִית מִילָה [b'rīt mī'lā], Ashkenazi pronunciation, bris milôh, "covenant of circumcision"; Yiddish pronunciation, bris) is a Jewish religious circumcision ceremony performed on 8-day-old male infants by a mohel. The brit milah is followed by a celebratory meal (seudat mitzvah).
"It’s not only the Jews who are ticked about this; Muslim leaders have been loudly opposed to this legislation. Considering that Muslims comprise one-third of the world’s population (not to mention most of our oil), it would be wise not to get on their bad side."