The jesus guy said that it still applies, so....

The Old Testament, like all skydaddy canonical texts, was NEVER applicable. Therefore the question is invalid as it assumes a fact not in evidence.

I can't speak for the whole group (and I'm not trying to) but, I seriously doubt that anyone here thinks either testament is a serious contender for life and how we should live it.

I’ve had fairly short conversations with Christians where they will say that the Ten Commandments are the basis of our democracy and then when something else comes up they will argue that, (whatever) is in the Old Testament and Jesus fulfilled the old law so we’re not under its rules. Slippery little devils!

Neither should apply. Although there are some words of wisdom to be found, the Bible is replete with immoral behavior either performed, or sanctioned, by its god. As far as those who "follow" the Bible, they are very good at picking out what they like and ignoring that which makes them uncomfortable. And, the reason why you find conflicting verses is because the Bible does not have a single voice; but, rather, many competing ones--thus showing it cannot be "the word" of any god.

If you are a believer I think the new testament replaces the old, JC said something along those lines I think. Round haircuts and mixing cloth I don't get, the idea re seafood and other meats are probable like the health warnings on our food. Absolutely none of either testament is relevant to me.

I don't agree with either choice. Neither was ever really applicable. That should be the third choice.

Mathew 5:16-18 16In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven. 17Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them. 18For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.… their book not mine

I believe jeebus said he came to reinforce the old testament, not redefine it. [bethinking.org].

Need a 3rd choice.

And to be clear, I think it's all BS too. But if Christians argue that the Bible is fact, then it seems to me that the Old vs. New argument is a clear cut case of cherry picking.

it is skewed history... sometimes. But I may try to use in court to fight a traffic ticket... laying ground that I still drive according to the Old Testament.

Neither are applicable. It's all just fiction.