Yes, they should be able to make decisions for their children.
I think that parents should be able to make decisions for their children, as long as those decisions don't involve things like branding them, killing them, blinding them, starving them, abusing them, cutting off parts of their genitals, etc. and it's not some radical leftism to think that these things should be illegal.
Is it "making decisions for their children" to tattoo them, bind their feet as the Chinese used to do, castrate them so they have a higher voice as has been done in the past, etc? Should all those things be perfectly legal decisions that parents should be able to make? If footbinding were still in practice, would you argue for its legality because "the parents have a right to make decisions for their children"?
I happen to feel that neonatal circumcision, which serves no purpose but to satisfy the primitive traditions of the parents, and permanently scars and hobbles the child, should be in the category of things that it's not acceptable to do to your children. As has been said before, there's plenty of places in the world where that kind of thing flys, but I'm not a moral relativist and I don't think we need to allow it here. I would oppose any such federal law, but CA's law is in the right direction. I can't believe I just said that, but I call them like I see them.