Jesus disagrees with that, as these people would learn if they ever actually read their holy text.
1) Have you read the Christian holy text? I don't expect you to have read everything, but if you're going to make the claim that you did, you should have at least read the New Testament and the Pentateuch.
2) Could you please explain, in your own words, what the New Testament says about the laws presented in the Old Testament? Specifically, I'd love to know how you interpret Mark 2, Acts 10, Acts 15, and the book of Galatians, especially Galatians 2. Considering that Jesus himself didn't obey all of the Jewish civil and ritual laws (see Mark 2) yet proclaimed himself to be sinless, on what basis do you claim that Jesus teaches that Christians should obey the civil and ritual laws?
3) Isn't it a little bit arrogant to make a specious claim, thus demonstrating that you don't understand the Christian bible, then immediately accuse Christians of not reading their own holy book?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch_trials_in_the_Early_Moder...
It is laid out in very expressive form, if a bit long, in the Humanae Vitae Encyclical Letter by Pope Paul VI. If you don't wish to read the whole text, lookup points 12 and 14.
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/docume...
"It does not, moreover, cease to be legitimate even when, for reasons independent of their will, it is foreseen to be infertile."
Insofar as your claim "can't be dissociated from breeding" can be constructed as a correct claim, it requires understanding that to mean it cannot generally be actively sought to be dissociated from breeding, but even that is incompletely accurate as (per paragraph 16) "If therefore there are well-grounded reasons for spacing births, arising from the physical or psychological condition of husband or wife, or from external circumstances, the Church teaches that married people may then take advantage of the natural cycles immanent in the reproductive system and engage in marital intercourse only during those times that are infertile, thus controlling birth in a way which does not in the least offend the moral principles which We have just explained."
(The position laid in Humanae Vitae has often been criticized for being somewhat incoherent, which isn't really all that surprising given its history. See, e.g., [1])
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontifical_Commission_on_Birth_...
LOL. Might want to give their religion's source material a read.
If you generalize a bit, you see that things went down hill since the protestants tried to reform Christianity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_Reformation , also, what I call "american brand C." is all a radicalized descendent of protestant reformation), had some mixed good and bad philosophical ideas mixed in with "faith", but mainly managed to take themselves waaaaaaay too seriously!
Mind it, I'm an atheist myself, but C. in not that harmful if not taken too far and it's sometimes good for humor ...now if only people could manage to also take Islam this lightly and look more at its funny sides :)
No; actually, it sounds like the sort of ignorance and stereotyping that people generally accuse religion of generating.