I frequently hear people explaining their decision to circumcise their sons using the reason "to prevent infections". I find this perplexing because I can't imagine infections are a big enough problem to warrant surgery on a newborn baby's genitals. In my experience, foreskins do their job well - I have two sons, a dad, three brothers and a husband who are all intact. None of them have ever had an infection. Not one! So to me, it seems like the decision to circumcise ought to be considered only after a history of infections that were difficult to treat rather than as a preventative measure.
I am adding a poll (be patient! ). I have decided to make it public to try to encourage people to vote honestly.