I think the idea that Christianity abolished human sacrifice is wrong:
Human sacrifice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"According to Pliny the Elder, human sacrifice was formally banned during the consulship of Publius Licinius Crassus and Gnaeus Cornelius Lentulus in 97 BCE, although by this time it was so rare that the decree was largely symbolic."
So that's WAY before Constantine.
Here's the quote from Pliny, Natural History 30.3:
"CHAP. 3.—WHETHER MAGIC WAS EVER PRACTISED IN ITALY. AT WHAT PERIOD THE SENATE FIRST FORBADE HUMAN SACRIFICES.
It is clear that there are early traces still existing of the introduction of magic into Italy; in our laws of the Twelve Tables for instance; besides other convincing proofs, which I have already noticed in a preceding Book. At last, in the year of the City 657, Cneius Cornelius Lentulus and P. Licinius Crassus being consuls, a decree forbidding human sacrifices was passed by the senate; from which period the celebration of these horrid rites ceased in public, and, for some time, altogether."
This begs the question - What were the mass `SPECTACLES'/Gladiatorial `Games' at which thousands were cruelly killed to satisfy the blood lust of the crowd? It is well established that the gladiatorial games began with the ritual of forcing slaves to fight to the death over the grave of their master. This ritual was vastly expanded into the mass `Spectacles' also including the enjoyment of seeing men and women torn to pieces and eaten by lions, tigers, bears, etc.
The Christians banned BLOOD SACRIFICE - that is sacrifices of all types both human and animal. They also BANNED the mass `Spectacles' - Gladiatorial Games.
Furthermore your quote is less than convincing - `these horrid rites ceased in public, and, for some time, altogether'. IOW human sacrifice was banned `IN PUBLIC', (intimating human sacrifice was still done in private homes, temples, groves, caves, etc.where animal blood sacrifice often took place), and even then human sacrifice was stopped only `for some time' - Not permanently?
What I see in this attempt at a response is the employment of two contradicting "fallacies".
First, this person is clearly fudging
"human sacrifice"/"blood sacrifice" into something very generic and not reflective of the connotations it invoked when used previously in that thread, expanding it so broad that it will include something that was still around after 97 BCE.
No, the fact recorded by Pliny about HUMAN SACRIFICE begs no questions at all about gladitorial games.
I also notice the author did not come right out and explicitly call the gladitorial games "human/blood sacrifice" and conspicuously did so to leave himself wiggle room for whenever someone inevitably points out the fact that they are not the same. He can then say he never said the games were human sacrifice. His problem, however, is that the intent, structure, and wording of his post betray such a notion since they are transparent in their aim to give the impression upon the reader's mind that there is some sort of connection or that gladiator games can somehow fall under the category of human or blood sacrifice.
After having attempted an expansion of meaning, the author next tries just the opposite and goes for a narrowing of meaning, trying to pigeon hole "human sacrifice" into something so narrow that it would exclude his side of the hair he just split, i.e. "blood sacrifice".
Yet, earlier in that thread he married those two concepts when he wrote:
Where Blood Sacrifice is an accepted form of worship, inevitably you will find human sacrifice as well.
And finally, his last point fails as the same could be said of any Christian abolitions, and paganism, and its rituals, survived well into the medieval period, inspite of being officially and "publicly" outlawed, you know- intimating human and/or other blood sacrifice was still done in private homes, temples, groves, caves, etc.
Thus it would have only 'stopped only for some of the time - not permanently'.
But regardless, the point is, when he stated:
It was the Christians who put a stop to blood sacrifice, be it MAN or animal, in the regions and countries where Christianity became the dominant religion.
while the latter(animal) might be true, the former(man) has been proven to be false, by Pliny the Elder.