God would never have insisted on it in the Old Testament.
That only applies if you believe in god. However, that statement leads me to ask you this: Why would God™ Create™ man Perfectly™ In His Image™, and then expect them to remove part of the human form that was Perfectly™ Created™?
circumcised men are less likely to contract STDs, less likely to develop a urinary tract infection, and nearly zero risk of penile cancer. Circumcised men are less likely to give their female partners the human papilloma virus
Well if they behaved themselves - circumcised or not - the way the God™ of the Old Testament wanted them to behave - celibate until marriage and monogamous until they die - then STDs, HPV, penile cancer and UTIs would not be an issue, now would they??
better sexual stimulation.
Horse feathers. The glans penis, under the protection of the foreskin, does not develop a thicker keratinized layer of skin and is much more sensitive due to the proximity of nerve endings to the skin's surface. Remove the foreskin and sensitivity decreases, the same way the eyeball would lose its sensitivity and harden if the eyelids were removed. Not that a gentleman would know the difference if he had been circumcised as an infant, nor would he have a measure of the degree of "fun" he is lacking during sexual activity, having been circumcised as an infant....
FYI: