Nope.

The only reason I would cut it would be for medical reasons. Just the thought of losing sensitivity... Uggh! >_

This question is not applicable to me but...
I would not have my kids cut.

All religions put aside. Science says It's a good breeding spot for micro life forms.(diseases)

It is not common practice here in Holland or Western Europe in general I believe (unless you're Muslim or Jewish), so no.

And regarding hygiene: you gotta wash it just like the rest of your body.

Female 'circumcision' is forbidden of course (as it should be).

(BTW I wonder which questions will come after this one...)

Nope, i have everything intact.

Circumcision in the United States isn't particularly viewed as a religious practice. In fact I was rather amazed to find out how many view the practice through that lens. In the United States it is mainly performed as a part of preventative medicine. Circumcision prevents infection, impotence, and also reduces the chance of contracting venereal disease. Further more it seems to be the preference of women.

Americans just want their children to be healthy, and the fact that it makes their child more potent to the opposite sex is a added benefit. Usually its just part of the neonatal care. The doctor usually explains the health benefits, and for most parents that is enough reason to do it, and parents have a right to practice preventive care. Besides it prevents the possible need for surgery later in life.

For Americans it is just a matter of practicality, and frankly I find it a oddity to actually talk to someone that isn't circumcised. Out of the three people I know that had it later in life all have cursed their parents. One had to have the procedure, because the foreskin prevented erection, and the other two had it due to their wives harping about it. I asked no further, but it is quite funny to see them walking around after the procedure.

I would never do that to any son I had. Better to chop it off in the infirmary. No fuss, No muss, No long term regrets. Never met anyone that was circumcised as a child pining over a foreskin. Just a part that causes more problems then it is worth.

dodece, surely if it wasnt ok to be there it wouldnt be there, naturally?
i dont really know what its purpose is or anything but. i dunno..

so far as im aware, they can only prove it helps a small percentege of people who get it, atleast from what i read on wikipedia (so i may be wrong, i make sure to note that, unlike others who state things as fact with 0 evidence or sources...)

Well, its just like the appendix. Monkeys have an appendix and its job is to help them brake down and dijest leaves. We dont need it, its just still with us after we evolved. The skin might be the same thing, we have it from our distance ancestory and its not needed.

Thats assuming you believe evolution, if you believe creation then well, we have been given it for a purpose and we shouldnt get rid of what God has given us.

Jews were the first to be circumsized.

From Genesis 17.

"⁹ Then God said to Abraham, "As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come. ¹⁰ This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised. ¹¹ You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you."

This is the NIV version.