Was reading the Old Testament in the doc's office this a.m. Leviticus has very specific and extensive instructions about the right ways to offer animal sacrifices unto me (the lord).

As far as I know, Christians have not been doing this for a long time. Jews and Muslims neither.

What would be the theological justification for dropping this practice?

What's written on this page accurately represents the Christian view on why animal sacrifices are no longer preformed or needed.

Here's some of what that page has to say:

So basically by believing in and accepting Christ your sins are forgiven in totality, thus no longer needing the continual sacrifice of animals to be forgiven.

Doesnt jesus christ also say something about not one jot or tittle of the law being removed until something something something? How convenient that you can pick and choose which bits of the bible you follow

This is a great explanation: https://www.gotquestions.org/abolish-fulfill-law.html

The Scriptures you are referring to are at Matthew 5:17-20

Christ fulfilled the Law.

(I don't argue back and forth, and especially concerning religion. Read the info at the link)

Discernment should be encouraged rather than mocked.

Jordan Peterson has an insightful explanation on the evolution of sacrifice. He explains that values and principles often are acted out over time (sometimes counterproductively) before they are abstracted out and understood completely. Further, sacrificing something tangible of value is a kind of practice for later being able to undertake the more painful process of sacrificing a psychological structure (self sacrifice).

The explanation linked to in MadTiger's post is pretty good.

You might also want to read this answer from gotquestions.org:

Do Christians have to obey the Old Testament law?

If the Temple Mount is rebuilt some Jews believe animal sacrifice should resume.

Qorbanot: Sacrifices and Offerings

Does the New Testament specifically say animal sacrifice is moot after Jesus, or is that an interpretation?

There were people who followed Jesus like his brother who kept the Law after his death. There are also Messianic Jews who follow the Law. So interpretation seems a part of it.

Well, the general understanding of the New Testament is that Jesus has become the atoning sacrifice that covers our sin. There's really no more need to sacrifice animals in order to be forgiven, it's accomplished in Christ.

Hebrews 10:1-18 says:

The Sacrifice Feast is on of the most important holidays Muslims have.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eid_al-Adha

If the New Testament so thoroughly overrules the Old, what is the basis for stigmatizing gays?

But why were they ever needed? What was it about stabbing a living creature in the heart on an alter than made this god of yours feel so good?

I don't think it was the stabbing that was pleasing. It was the smell of burning flesh that was pleasing to the lord; the bible mentions this many times.

Hebrews 9:22 says that without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. Leviticus 17:11 says that the life of a creature is in its blood, and since the punishment for sin is death offering another creature as a blood sacrifice substitutes that creatures life for your own (with regards to the punishment you deserve).

Animal sacrifice, burnt offerings , even human sacrifice, depending upon the particular culture was in some manner a way to "read" the secrets of the cosmos or in a higher sense to enter into the world of the spirit, before the "fall".

In some manner the "offering" as that of Cain and Abel was the attempt to "return", via inner experience of the outer sacrifice, to their or in reality our original home .

The idea of "sacrifice" is that one gives one's self up to the object of the sacrifice and consequently the receiver , or in case of Abel and Cain, becomes responsible for the "sacrificer" or Abel is pleasing to Jahveh. Cain is denied, or not pleasing, and within the soul of Cain arises a "longing" to which he in some manner suffers and also becomes incitement to creating activity.

This creating activity can be seen in the masonic conception as to being the "Sons of Cain". Abel takes the food of the earth, the berries on the trees, or whatever is given to him and offers a sacrifice of that to which he is born, so to speak.

Cain , who killed Abel physiologically, then can be seen as responsible in the arts, sciences, education, all that Man creates as culture through human evolution. And yes the connection of masons or actual builders of cathedrals, or pyramids, or other structures through the masonic art is directly related to this conception of esoteric comprehension.

The two streams of Cain and Abel , of course, continue on to this day .

There are "sacrifices" of other cultures to which the same or similar ideas are present but it can and has not infrequently fallen into a decadence of the bloodthirsty.

From what I understand the ancient Egyptian practices under this guise had in some circles become abominations which in effect, through this activity of experiencing the torture and death of the sacrifice gave the hierophant a power of knowledge to which he (they) were able to control the people through this perverse comprehension, buoyed by earthly immorality.

In a particular Mexican mystery center, the god "Taotl" called for the murdering of human beings in which the hierophant with the "man sacrifice" being bent over backwards on the alter, would remove the stomach of the man while alive ; all in the search for earthly power. I believe some Europeans suffered this ignominious indignity.

The story goes that Vitzliputzli, a man , succeeded in causing the evil "Taotl"(a spirit being occupying a physical body) to be crucified on a wooden cross and thereby putting an end to this devilish force(s).

This is reported to have happened at the time when the event of Golgotha occurred, offering another polarity in the moral attainment of man.

Things have changed and any return to animal or sacrifice of this nature is at minimal a road block to the ennoblement of Man whose moral tone rebels against this ancient activity, or that was the good( speaking here of Abel) becomes the evil for it is out of time. Good "out of time", becomes the evil.

Homosexual relationships are still considered a sin. Basically any sexual relationship outside of marriage is considered a sin, and since marriage is between a man and a woman there is no way for a sexual relationship between two men or two women to be pleasing or acceptable to God. This is my understanding of it.

Stigmatizing gays doesn't make a lot of sense to me though. Sin is sin, we're all guilty of it. It's something we all have to address.

Maybe because the New Testament has plenty to say about the sinfulness
of homosexuality, as well as the old.

Id guess most gay people dont think there is anything to address and think calling them sinful is stigmatizing them. Just saying.

Yeah, considering it involves a person's sexual preferences I wouldn't be surprised if a gay person thought I was stigmatizing them. I'm not stigmatizing anyone though, I'm saying certain behaviors are sinful and further emphasizing that we all have a sin problem. Homosexuality is no doubt a touchy subject, but an individual who identifies as a homosexual is facing the same problem anyone else is, which is sin, so it makes no sense to demonize them as individuals.

What is it about stabbing a living creature in the heart on an alter that makes this god of yours feel forgiving of your sins?

Um... ok. I guess that makes it all better.

I disagree. You are stigmatizing homosexuals and homosexuality just by saying it is sinful.

If it is actually sinful behavior, shouldn't it be stigmatized and discouraged? Telling people that their beliefs stigmatize sinners is like telling someone intervening with an alcoholic that the intervention is stigmatizing drinking. No ****. If you truly believe it's sinful though, and makes one lose touch with God, stigmatizing it is a great good.

Why stigmatize the person trying to make a world a better place and save someone's soul?

Lol like im going to converse with someone who turns every discussion about homosexuals into an attack on them and show about bestiality. ****ing bigot.