The Death of Christopher Hitchens (2 Viewers)

[Blastus]

Theology hasn't had a response to epicurus yet so I think that it's almost certainly on the losing side.

 

[Chemical Ali]

lol @ anyone replying to this thread as if God is Not Great was the only book the guy ever wrote

 

[Garygaz]

lol @ anyone replying to this thread as if God is Not Great was the only book the guy ever wrote

yep. i'm currently going to buy hitch 22, but his views on politics, iraq and the rights of free speech are inspiring and thought provoking.

 

[Chemical Ali]

I can't agree with him on Iraq but some of his essays on subjects like the Kurds are really fascinating

 

[Blastus]

lol @ anyone replying to this thread as if God is Not Great was the only book the guy ever wrote

Trial of Henry Kissinger still best

 

[Garygaz]

oh and mother teresa was eye opening too

 

[Lentern]

okay sure i'll take your word for it over an entire audience vote and comprehensive analysis from critics

Mate its like taking a survey at the audience of a Qanda episode and therefore concluding that left wing thing tank dude was better than the right wing news ltd journo.

 

[Garygaz]

actually for your benefit i watched the entire debate last night.

it essentially came down to blair saying

'oh look, christians, muslims and jews donate all this money to africa, aren't we great'

countered by the fact you had christians refusing to hand out condoms and perpetuating the worst pandemics in human history.

'people who are violent and fascist are practicing a perverse version of their true religions'

countered by the fact that religious texts actually have militaristic/violent undertones and statements. also, the statement that religion can make a good man do bad things is true (circumcision on a basic level).

and then Blair tried to argue that that religion was a force for good, illustrating various examples, to which Hitchens proposed had little to do with religion and more to do with human nature. i mostly agree, if you look at some of the top donaters in the states, the Gates, the Buffets - atheists. Also the top charity in the states is owned by a woman atheist who is the CEO of her company (can't be bothered to google at the moment).

essentially it came down to the net negative you get from religion can't really be forgiven by the positives which i believe would be prevalent even without religion.

also, the poll was a before and after - hence polling the sway that each debater had on the members of the audience who said they were willing to change their position.

 

[Lentern]

Hitchen's argument, as often they are, was underlined by a horrible double standard that is, where an influential Christian does something selfless, noble or generous they do so because it is in their nature to do so, they are not acting out of Christian values but out of their own inherent goodness. Which is fine but then when he talks about embezzlement, covering up sex scandals, denying contraception etc that they no this not of their own volition but because they are christian. Yes well may you say there is support for denying contraception or what not in the bible but you know something? There is just as compelling support of charity, generosity, selflessness, forgiveness etc. It was a weak, double standard argument which took in a pack of condescending atheists so swept up by their fangirl fervour that they would have applauded David Irving if he'd been introduced as Hitchens.

 

[Blastus]

Hitchen's argument, as often they are, was underlined by a horrible double standard that is, where an influential Christian does something selfless, noble or generous they do so because it is in their nature to do so, they are not acting out of Christian values but out of their own inherent goodness. Which is fine but then when he talks about embezzlement, covering up sex scandals, denying contraception etc that they no this not of their own volition but because they are christian. Yes well may you say there is support for denying contraception or what not in the bible but you know something? There is just as compelling support of charity, generosity, selflessness, forgiveness etc. It was a weak, double standard argument which took in a pack of condescending atheists so swept up by their fangirl fervour that they would have applauded David Irving if he'd been introduced as Hitchens.

This is one of the weakest arguments I've seen from you.

 

[Blastus]

Even from a utilitarian standpoint the catholic church is guilty of untold horrors in Africa alone.

 

[Lentern]

Even from a utilitarian standpoint the catholic church is guilty of untold horrors in Africa alone.

I'm not in the business of defending those who purposefully interpret Christs teachings to justify their violence, greed, hatred, conservatism etc. If you accept the premise that the church is essentially embodied by views of the Pontiff and the conclave of cardinals then absolutely it is currently a bad organisation. But I don't accept that, to paraphrase Michael Kirby, it's my faith and my beliefs and I'm not letting a bunch of old men in dresses steal it from me.

 

[Blastus]

I'm not in the business of defending those who purposefully interpret Christs teachings to justify their violence, greed, hatred, conservatism etc. If you accept the premise that the church is essentially embodied by views of the Pontiff and the conclave of cardinals then absolutely it is currently a bad organisation. But I don't accept that, to paraphrase Michael Kirby, it's my faith and my beliefs and I'm not letting a bunch of old men in dresses steal it from me.

Look I fully understand that, and I'm glad you have your own benign version of religion that you cling to. That's all well and good.

Softer, gentler politik aside, you can see the quite valid point which is that if a person believes in the supernatural for whatever reasons, and you believe in the bodily resurrection of christ and I assume, partially, a portion of the ethics he stood for, correct? The argument is quite simple, if you can believe such a story and believe it justifies actions in this current existence, then that can be warped and used to justify great horror.

You're a vague deist so there's really no discussion to have with you here. Your description of religion is as far from the religion experienced by those in south america or africa as atheism from whatever mild deism you engage in.

 

[Chemical Ali]

I'm not in the business of defending those who purposefully interpret Christs teachings to justify their violence, greed, hatred, conservatism etc. If you accept the premise that the church is essentially embodied by views of the Pontiff and the conclave of cardinals then absolutely it is currently a bad organisation. But I don't accept that, to paraphrase Michael Kirby, it's my faith and my beliefs and I'm not letting a bunch of old men in dresses steal it from me.

What possible grounds do you have to know that YOU know the mind of the creator of the universe, or at least that your version is right and theirs is wrong (especially when theirs follows the revelations closer)?

 

[Blastus]

What possible grounds do you have to know that YOU know the mind of the creator of the universe, or at least that your version is right and theirs is wrong (especially when theirs follows the revelations closer)?

He's a deist the argument is irrelevant.

 

[Chemical Ali]

How can you be a deist and still call yourself a christian? As soon as you say christ was more than an ordinary guy with some nice (and some very nasty) things to say then it sets up all the implications hitchens outlined elsewhere...

 

[Blastus]

How can you be a deist and still call yourself a christian? As soon as you say christ was more than an ordinary guy with some nice (and some very nasty) things to say then it sets up all the implications hitchens outlined elsewhere...

Welcome to his bullshit argument.