I have no issue with consenting adults getting circumcised for what ever reason they want too. A baby, however, cannot possibly consent to such a thing.
Well, a baby cannot consent to anything. The parent's consent is the baby's consent.
Now I'm genuinely curious - I'm not affected, so I can't relate: Circumcision is genital mutilation, sure, but is it really "that" bad? Does it affect quality of life, from child to adult (excluding botched circumcisions)? Based on my understanding, I would rather focus on female genital mutilation in undeveloped parts of the world. In comparison, male circumcision seems to be ... ok. It's fine. Or is it? Please let me know.
(I'm not talking about the ignorance of infant's sense of pain here, that's clearly immoral).
The notion of consent is arbitrary. You could also regard religious cults as primary, then you would need their consent to imposing your personal aesthetics.