Just exacly what is the difference between believing that thetans are locked in your body and that an invisible, all powerful, omnicient man who lives in the sky caused a virgin to give birth?
Not much, really.
Sure christians like to disregard any part of the bible they don't like (which IMHO also gives me the right to ignore any part of the bible I don't like BTW) but you can not deny that they are a part and parcel of your religion.
I already pointed out that it's not my religion. Some of us are actually willing to defend people's right to hold viewpoints that differ from our own.
More importantly, why do you assume faith is an "all or nothing" thing? Sure, the Roman Catholics might present it that way, but many other branches of Christianity require little or nothing beyond belief in the existence of God. To address your example, Unitarians in particular are famous for their acceptance of gay people. There's a pretty well established body of historical scholarship proving that much of what's in the Bible was politically rather than divinely inspired - particularly by Paul - leading to a natural questioning of how much credence it should really be given. Much of this knowledge and debate is filtering into the theological community, and is leading to a sort of "neo-Fundamentalism" that draws sharp distinctions between the words/teachings of Christ and other stuff that has been attached to those teachings by other people.
The point, at long last, is that religion is not an all-or-nothing thing. What objection do you have, for example, to someone who happens to believe in God and in salvation through Christ, but eschews sexist/xenophobic ranting by people like Paul or Augustine? What's your dispute with someone who, based on such a faith, exhibits forgiveness, charity, and other positive behaviors to a degree they otherwise might not? It is because the previous poster's broad brush would tar such people along with those who subscribe to the most twisted and harmful kinds of religious belief that I called his comments obnoxious.
If you want to criticize the behavior of religious people, that's fine. If you want to criticize specific religious beliefs as origins of those behaviors, that's fine too but I'd recommend a little caution. If you want to lambaste all religion everywhere, without regard for (or even familiarity with) how it actually affects people, I think you'll find many people like me leaving your side to stand shoulder to shoulder with people of faith.
 It's easier for me to limit my comments to Christianity due to familiarity, but that shouldn't be taken to imply that other religions don't have the same issues.