On a circumcised penis, it becomes dry an rougher, like the skin on your knuckle. It absolutely does reduce sensitivity.

Anecdotal evidence, I know, but I didn't notice loss in sensitivity since my circumcision. Healing was a bit of a pain, but other than that I experience just as much pleasure as before.

How is that even an argument? "Oh, those nerve endings don't matter cause it's just like losing a leg, nbd." What the fuck?

The point is: it's a bit facetious to call nerve loss from removing a part of a body a loss of sensitivity. You got a piece of skin removed, of course it's not sensitive, it's gone. As for the skin under the foreskin, it didn't got removed, why would it lose nerve endings?

From what I experienced, again anecdotal so not a study, I highly doubt loss of sensitivity argument. Just to be clear, I don't think babies should get circumcised, but I wouldn't use an argument I feel is weak to argue against it.