I think this perfectly illustrates the disconnect between the two "sides". For those who believe this is a human rights issue, this idea simply doesn't resonate. First, leaving a boy intact is a reversible position, whereas circumcising at birth is not.
Second (and perhaps more important), the human penis is designed to include a foreskin, and refusing non-therapeutic surgery for a normal, healthy newborn is actually the standard for proxy consent. There would only be parental choice involved if baby boys were made to order.
I can see both sides of the privacy issue, but ultimately I don't think it's any different than any of the myriad behavioral and medical issues we post about here (some of which can be very detailed/personal). Posting photos could definitely cross a line, but simply stating that a boy is intact or circumcised doesn't exactly paint a detailed picture.
Good post. I agree. Leaving your son intact is not a choice. Its natural and a non choice. Just like I would remove any other body part voluntarily.