If evolution were correct, and humans evolved from monkeys, then why are monkeys still around today? There is really no explanation for this, yet this heathen ideal is still taught in our schools. No doubt thanks to the agenda's being pushed by gays and their liberal co-conspirators to destroy our youth and convert the nation to communism.
Only a REAL FOOL would claim there is no God! Man creates awesome skyscrapers, fake hearts, tunnels, vehicles etc.. If we are very imperfect then what more can God create THE UNIVERSE! You must accept Jesus Christ as your Savior to receive eternal rest in heaven! Simple! John 3:16 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him! Repent & accept Jesus Christ! Jesus Christ or HELL?!? Visit cbn. com
@theetrue Keeless? Hardly. Atheistic philosophy continues to grow along with science as religious philosophy continues to atrophy. As Hitchen's says it's either god's word or it isn't. The sadistic, stupid, hateful, superstitious, and primitive content of the "holy" books of the world's religions proves they are man made and could not possibly be the work of an omniscient god. The shortest path to atheism is to critically read the bible, qur'an, torah or any other "holy" book .
@theetrue Oh, so you think that nature, or "God's creation" as you might have it, is "nothingness". You've inverted reality. There is plenty of evidence that nature exists, none that God exists.
Hitchens and Harris are still loyal to the holly land....that's why they keep demonizing Muslims and wanna take us to wars against Iraq and Afganistan!
@metahipster92 It's usually good practice, when using big words, to know what they mean. But, I guess that's the price we pay for having freedom of speech - any asshole can get a say!
Waiting with bated breath for your next profound contribution! Don' let me down now, ok?
@Matthysable The very reason you fail to understand my last comment is the same reason why you will fail to understand the false claims that fall under religion.
"Would Iraqis still be demolishing their society if there was no religion?" But wait, what about the Bloods & Crips? As far as I know about them, their criminal activities, power & survival struggles have very little or nothing to do with religion.
@cleanhomer Are college educated Blood and Crips going to other countries and killing people? No, because that would be silly. Only religion could make somebody do that. There will always be violence and power struggles, but religion is the cause of a lot of it. Blood and Crips aren't killing people because of atheism, so the two examples you used are not related. The example also does not any way offer evidence of a god.
@Tomasi2661 "Only religion could make somebody do that." Unless the Bloods or Crips had some beef with someone outside America & the money to go over there (in which some likely could). And besides, wouldn't there be non-spiritual political extremists willing & able to kill for their cause- and not just Communists?
@Tomasi2661 What makes you think I'm offering evidence of a god? I'm only offering evidence that the idea that religion is the source of all violence is absurd. Don't animals get violent? Are you saying they get religious too? Wouldn't religion & violence both stem from the same source: emotion?
@cleanhomer That's a straw man. Nobody said religion was the source of "all" violence. And yes some atheist would be willing to kill for a cause, but the cause would not be atheism. As your in example, the cause would be an almost religious following of another institution, such Communism (ie: not atheism).
@cleanhomer Religion, however, can directly cause violence, such as college educated suicide bombers convinced they are getting 72 virgins. That's what they wrote about and said themselves was the reason for their violence, not political/economic reasons. Again the animal argument makes no sense, because obviously there are many reasons to be violent besides religion. But that doesn't mean religion cannot cause violence.
@cleanhomer Relgion is not an emotion and the have a source. The source of the religions we are talking about here are directly from a book writen by desert nomads 3,000 years ago. Chinese people 2,000 years ago had the same emotions as us, but not the same religion.
@Tomasi2661 What about the pagan religions of Native Americans, Africans, Europeans, CHINESE, etc.? Abrahamic religions aren't the only ones, you know. And I said religion's SOURCE is emotion. It can certainly be an emotional expression. But, then again, so is art.
@cleanhomer Religion's source is emotion? That's mumbor-jumbo, you could say that about anything. Religion is something drilled into your head by your parents, upbringing, fear, and threats. It's man-made, organized, ritualized, and based on faith, the suspension of reason.
@Tomasi2661 "Religion's source is emotion? That's mumbor-jumbo, you could say that about anything." So, mathmatics is based on emotion? Spirituality comes out of an emotional appreciation & celebration of things important to oneself; religion is simply an organized form of it, like in a compartmented box. Open-minded religious people will put take out something they don't agree with anymore & put something new in that they like. Closed-minded- dogmatic- religious people won't...
@Tomasi2661 ...everything has to stay in their compartments. And they can be the suspicious, dogmatic ones. "Religion is something drilled into your head..." What makes you think every religious person has it based on upbringing, fear, or threats? How do you some haven't freely & honestly chose that as their own? So, what exactly is religion's source then, if it isn't emotion?
@cleanhomer What about them? You mean there are other religions? Of people who are also convinced they were right because of how they were brought up? Shocking. But at least now I know to stay on the look out for Native American and European pagan terrorist.
@Tomasi2661 You probably would, if history turned out different. There probably still could be pagan terrorists sometime soon, tons of people have a grievance, and anybody can be violent. And besides, I also need to look out for nationalist, anarchist, separatist, supremacist, political extremists, and many other non-spiritual terrorists in the world.
It's not that we have to love those who hate us and rest on that ideal, it's that we must work towards a world in which we are *all* bound together in love. It's true that one's love for one's enemy doesn't matter as long as one's enemy still hates one, but that doesn't excuse assuming that just because we haven't reached a goal, there is no point in trying to reach it. Where would science be if we rested on such an assumption? Whether it is possible or not, it's a pretty world to think about.
Hitchens was such a simpleton. Good riddance. He would constantly blather about morality, as if a moral system of any kind is at all possible without religion. Take away religion and EVERYONE gets to decide for themselves what is and isn't moral.
@RealCrusadeHistory "as if a moral system of any kind is at all possible without religion."
Religion gives you, at best, an especially vile version of a fascist dictatorship. That's the consequence of people not being allowed to decide for themselves what they regard as good and bad, right and wrong. The subjective element is simply necessary for morality to be about us in the first place, not to mention being necessary for us to acknowledge that it's good.
@RealCrusadeHistory I mean, seriously, if God told you tomorrow that you should go to your neighbors house, kill everyone except their virgin daughter, then drag her over to your house and rape her, you'd call that good? If no, why? Is it because your subjective opinion matters? By the way, God did order that in the bible. Numbers 31.
@RealCrusadeHistory So, because most people aren't retarded, voluntary cooperation becomes possible through a common desire for mutual cooperation and similar concerns. Not all the time, but most of the time. What's entirely unproductive is to take your approach and assert that "I am right because it says so in this book. It would be CHAOS if I don't get to dictate the rules!". The rest of humanity can not help but give you the finger.
@Gnomefro "Not all the time, but most of the time"? Nonsense! The desire to exploit and plunder one's fellow man is just as much a part of our evolution as is the desire to cooperate with friends and family. Animals treat each other both well and badly, the same can be said of human beings. I'm just pointing out the obvious - that only in a monotheistic universe is there any strong impulse to view all of man as a larger family. Your simplistic views make it difficult for you to grasp history.
@Gnomefro You're right. We should rely on the bible instead of our own human moral instincts. That way we could still have slavery. We can look the other why in the face of rape and child molestation. We should kill as many innocent women and children as possible during times of war. We should stone adulterors or even people who think about it in their minds., etc. Or maybe we should just rely on are own human instinct like we already do inspite of religion.
@RealCrusadeHistory You are entitled to your opinion, but your opinion is not special. Not even when you bought your opinion in printed form without bothering to think about it at all. The mere fact that you need to convince me that you are correct before I can take you seriously should give you a pretty big clue that your view of "morality"(that is, Fascist dictatorship) is a contradiction.
@Gnomefro My perspective just happens to be right, and informed by a considerable education. Your childish reaction against my arguments only shows the weakness of your position. The sting in the rebuke is the truth. The idea that by ridding the world of religion and promoting the "golden rule" you're going to get all of humanity to cooperate and treat one another fairly is so naive and hilarious it's no surprise that only on youtube does anyone take such nonsense seriously.
@Gnomefro History shows us that morality is entirely elastic. One culture's moral good is another culture's evil. In fact, the very notion that because someone is a human being that in itself merits them a certain respect comes from monotheism. Before that there was no such concept of "universal" humanity. Remove monotheism and start telling everyone they're just clever apes and the maxim for universal benevolence erodes even further. Plenty of people will say "eh, I don't really care. I'd..
@Gnomefro ...rather exploit my fellow man than love him." And the thing is, of course, atheism has no response to that. You can't regard that as anything other than normal animal behavior. You've already admitted morality is totally subjective, that it's dependent on nothing but human impulse, so there you have it. Christianity rebukes such a thing strongly, demanding submission to God's commandment to be just to all men. Remove that and you will see that moral maxim erode as well.
@RealCrusadeHistory "I'd rather exploit my fellow man than love him" ... you say that "Christianity rebukes such a thing strongly", but as a self-professed man of "considerable education" you must surely know that the Bible is full of verses condoning slavery.
@Mr512austintexas Absolutely, but the Bible also contains moral maxims from many generations of Jewish thought. Ultimately Christianity introduced to the world the notion that there was a moral problem with slavery. The first statement against slavery, as far as anyone can tell, was Pope Gregory the Great in the fifth century AD or so when he stood in a Roman slave market and insisted that English slaves be freed because they were God's children.
@RealCrusadeHistory@RealCrusadeHistory Too bad it took 1500 years for the message to get around, like, just for one example, the 154 Civil War era southern clergymen who signed a letter characterizing abolition as heresy and accusing the North of "interference with the plans of Divine Providence." (John Patrick Daly, "When Slavery Was Called Freedom: Evangelicalism, Proslavery, and the Causes of the Civil War". Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2002; pg. 145.)
@RealCrusadeHistory for all your claims of education you're quite a poor listener. hitchens never claimed to want to take religion away from EVERYONE.
@RealCrusadeHistory Considered one of the top 5 public intellectuals, the man who sparked a rage of debate and got people to think about there positions. Caused a tsunami of different thinking with such beautiful articulation and wit. And your last claim makes religion a utilertarian notion. It doesnt make it true. Are you saying the leaders of religion do not think for themselves and get their flock to do their will? Would you rather the world think as individuals or be slaves and ordered?
I'm sorry, what claim are you referencing? If you were impressed by Hitchens I'm afraid that just shows you to be deficient in your education. Hitchens was basically an entertainer. He would constantly present irrational nonsense and because he had an English accent audiences of American students were impressed. The fact is that the claim of pop culture atheists that religion is irrational doesn't hold water. Read Descartes' Meditation on First Philosophy and you'll see that...
@RealCrusadeHistory ...basically all human knowledge requires a leap of faith, including faith in our own senses. Then once you're read David Hume you'll see that in fact all experimental science is based on faith as well. It's like these guys like Hitchens and Dawkins never read their basic Western philosophy.
Without doubt, one of the factors in the emergence of anti-religious ideas and a phalanx of deniers of God, has been the false teachings, the inadequacies and the intellectual perversions of the followers of some religions. The peculiarities and separate characteristics of each religion must, therefore, be individually examined when studying the reasons that have led men to adhere to that religion.
Atheists and people of belief are both just as capable of being defensive and black and white in their thinking as the other (and are, on both sides, much more often than not). Core values are core values.
Many trees will not miss the passing of Christopher Hitchens..Does he know anything at all about *Asian* religion? Not much, if any..I can just see him sitting down reading the Mahabharata or the Puranas in Sanskrit or Bengali! Or, knowing something of substance about tantra, esoteric Buddhism, Neo-Platonism, Hermeticism, Sufism, Theosophy, spiritualism, spiritism, Voudon, Gnosticism, New Thought yada yada and etc...
One of the unfortunate things about Hitchens is his unfortunate and rather childish use of ad hominems. Is this a regrettable product of the English elite public school education and culture?
As to what happened to Hitchens I think he has a lot of Nieburhrian liberalism in him.
thing to feel remorse and sadness for you're enemy, and hence a sort of love, for you're love and faith in humanity is deminished when you recognize someone as your enemy, because the emotional force of love and the sadness and greif of having an enemy, can give you the power to make the world a better place so that those conditions which made your enemy your enemy may in the future make him your friend
id have to say right out that i disagree with hitchens that it is ridiculous to not love your enemy, the one who wants to kill you your family etc. and the reason why i think this is ridiculous is because you're enemy has far more in common with you than you think they do, in fact, i would say that mostly anything your enemy was subject to which made him to be such a way that he is you're enemy, could have easily made you an enemy of him if the conditions were reversed, and i think it's a good
yo, can't people fucking realize that the vidoes they upload don;t have sound audible enough for people to hear, like it seriously takes like maybe 5 minutes to adjudt the volume on windows media player
I am English and am no longer swayed by his erudite oratory and magniloquent tiresome declamations. Something happened during the Bush years. He still (so far) has retained his tools of engagement but his moral compass and discerning eye has been dunked in so many after dinner functions hosted by political lobbyists, he has become a persuasive tool for his puppeteers and a tragic parody of himself.
@charlesvan13 There's no reason to care about the truth when you're religious. Hitchens followers are like cultists, so I don't expect anything other than hate and nonsense when questioning his motives or honesty.
@morklind a brillaint summation, I salute you, I am also British and think that he has simply become too comfortable as an "American", instead hes become some sort of sad caricuture, its also amusing to see his fans here, young fools eagerly frothing over his "greatness".
@JagjeetMann There is no american, we are all different however, what is all the debate truly all about anyway if not within reasoning that we share no definition within what we are and what we are to do regarding any global concerns when it comes within what we are doing to this planet having to deal with population growth and any and all occupational subsistence while depleting and changing earths physical properties within any and all technological enticement.
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexuality and homosexuality. Even non-religious people know this.
The homosexual agenda is not good for anyone, including those who consider themselves "gay".
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have successfuly framed themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
Hitchens product is the rhetoric by which to replace democratic Republics w/Marxian collectives. Hitchens is indeed a religionist cut fr. the same bolt of whole cloth as Father Hitler, Vlad, Attila the Hun, Mao Zedong, Pinochet, the Sun King, Robespierre & Thomas Woodrow Wilson. These abominable men sought to create a world of privilege too.
Carl Sagan - "Our collective free time needs to shift as much as possible to education. Whether you're a young student or finished school long ago, get out to the library whenever you can and work hard to learn everything you can about this world. Each individual and society will benefit from being able to solve more problems and make better decisions. Education is an amazing discovery process that repays you endlessly."
@theant8899 yeah, it was the first thing I thought of though. I suppose the idea is comparing someone who created beautiful symphonies to someone who creates emotional reactions for ratings and money. Class vs. crass, at least in terms of delivery and tone.
@jvaish "The loss of faith can be compensated by the newer and finer wonders that we have before us, as well as by immersion in the near-miraculous work of Homer and Shakespeare and Milton and Tolstoy and Proust, all of which was also 'man-made' (though one sometimes wonders, as in the case of Mozart)." -God Is Not Great, ch. 10 (p. 151)
@jvaish A little unfair. Apart from his recycled stance on religions he has lost all integrity on the political front, where as Chris Hedges profundity needs no attestation.
@jvaish Why on Earth would you compare a transcendent classical composer from the 18th century to a host of lurid, sensational TV from the late 20th? They're incompatible. You should at least listen to what Hitchens' opponents said of him. They admired his honesty, wit, and courage. What are you doing with your life? Waging a battle in 500 characters or less! I have no delusions about your nonsense. You're just a troll. Getting kicks by picking fights on youtube? That's miserable.
@MinisterAilingTongue I have listened to what his opponents said, including his evangelical friends. I am not a troll, but I am expressing an opinion that differs from yours. I am sure his heart was in the right place, but his acerbic and demeaning delivery don't compare to Hedges placid, fair and reasonable presentations. I am guessing your reaction is an emotional outburst due to his recent death, which probably could have been prevented had he not poisoned his liver.
@charlesvan13 Yes, I wasn't very clear about that. I realize he died of esophogeal cancer, but I have no doubt that the drinking and poor health habits contributed to that. Sad, really, as he seemed like in his personal life he was a pretty nice guy.
@jvaish You're right, I should have exhaustively investigated the fact that you made an ill formed comment instead of letting it stand (or in this case, collapse) on its own.
@i3u7n5 Yes, you are obviously quite lazy, as you seem to lack the capacity to extrapolate on the fact that Mozart was a genius who composed music that was pleasant to the ears, while Jerry Springer pandered to the masses using emotional rhetoric. Pretty obvious to most intelligent people, at least those who aren't ruled by their emotions. Btw, it's "ill-formed comment," just so you know.
@jvaish Ohhhhhhhh. One was a classical composer and a musical genius while the other was a social demagogue and muckraker. I see the connection NOW. yeah, *perfect* analogy. They're like pb&j! Perfect!
As a big fan of both men, I have come to the conclusion that there really are more important topics we as human beings need to address rather than just pointing the finger at one specific topic such as religion. It is true that RADICAL religion finds every and any excuse to justify horrendous actions, i.e. Israel, but look at Christian anarchists such as Chris Hedges. His intellect is enviable and pragmatic in thought process. We need to accept each other for our differences, beliefs and all.
@danielcm81 I disagree. It is not only radical religion that poses a threat. It is all religion. Otherwise sane and reasonable people are just as wrong, and just as dangerous in different ways, as a result of their belief in fantasy. Even moderate practitioners of whatever religion continue to push their beliefs in law, politics, education, and even privatel ives. My parents have never bombed an abortion clinic, but they have voted to deny homosexuals the right to marry. It is dead wrong.
@bendon82 Are you implying that the eradication of religion would lead to a more venerable human race?Human interaction is too complex to even fathom the idea of progression in human beings. We're animals. Evolution doesn't equate to progression. Science can't even explain what we think we know is fact, i.e. the speed of light being absolute. If not religion, we find some other way to fuck things up. We're like that. Look up naive realism. I'm agnostic btw.
@danielcm81 If religion disappeared, I do believe we would be better off. I did not, however, insinuate that it would end all of our problems. War, violence, crime, would all continue. You said that it is RADICAL religion that finds excuses to justify horrendous actions. I replied with evidence that even moderate, and otherwise reasonable people of faith ALSO seek to justify the horrors of religion, and as another example, I present the people who try to downplay the rape of children by priests.
@danielcm81 If religion disappeared, I do believe we would be better off. I did not, however, insinuate that it would end all of our problems. War, violence, crime, would all continue. You said that it is RADICAL religion that finds excuses to justify horrendous actions. I replied with evidence that even moderate, and otherwise reasonable people of faith ALSO seek to justify the horrors of religion, and as another example, I present the people who try to downplay the rape of children by priests.
@danielcm81 If religion disappeared, I do believe we would be better off. I did not, however, insinuate that it would end all of our problems. War, violence, crime, would all continue. You said that it is RADICAL religion that finds excuses to justify horrendous actions. I replied with evidence that even moderate, and otherwise reasonable people of faith ALSO seek to justify the horrors of religion, and as another example, I present the people who try to downplay the rape of children by priests.
@danielcm81 Religion is nothing but willful delusion. If we are to solve the problems in *this* world, we cannot afford to waste time on some unproven *next* one.
@TomFynn I'm not making any excuses for religion. I take an agnostic viewpoint on everything whether it's religion, conspiracies, you name it. Atheism is the new craze. I don't get people's beef with the silliness of religion. That's all I'm saying. Hitchens spends so much time talking about it. It's like when you break up with a girl, and you go around talking shit about her when deep down inside you know you'd be down for a grudge fuck.
@danielcm81 Religion makes a virtue out of not wanting to know. It is like Dubya who simply did not bother anymore with what is commonly known as reality.
As long as there are crazy people people like Michele Bachmann who ride for US presidency the silliness of religion needs to be pointed out. Otherwise people might start to believe this shit.
@TomFynn Bachmann is a corporate whore who masks her evil, regressive political ideologies behind religion. She's a puppet. The religion she claims to be a part of has nothing to do with what she wants to seen done in American politics. She would just be there to say "yes, master".
@danielcm81 While I fully agree with your view on Bachmann, there is an important point: All religions are completely made up. With that kind of magical thinking one can justify *anything*. Even Bachmann's policies. Especially Bachmann policies, actually. Since they are as completely divorced from reality as religion.
@TomFynn Every type of racism, sexism, dogmatic ideology, bigotry every stupid cult, are all results from not realizing that our perceptions are gambles. We believe what we see and then we believe our interpretation of it. Most of the time we don't even know we're making an interpretation. Naive Realism. Refuted by philosophers for centuries. We still act on this perception. Quantum Mechanics proves its falsehood. No vantage point from which real reality can be seen. Points of view only.
@danielcm81 The reasons we have a beef with the silliness of religion are varied. The subjugation of women, human sacrifice, anti-science sentiments, meddling with the school system, the genital mutilation of infants (to quote hitchens), I could go on.
As a big fan of both men, I have come to the conclusion that there really are more important topics we as human beings need to address rather than just pointing the finger at one specific topic such as religion. It is true that RADICAL religion finds every and any excuse to justify horrendous actions, i.e. Israel, but look at Christian anarchists such as Chris Hedges. His intellect is enviable and pragmatic in thought process. We need to accept each other for our differences, beliefs and all.
Well these wars are fought mainly over power and the greed and of some few. ‘Resources’ is a vain word; refers to some primarily sense of survival and may be misleading in this context. Wars are actually caused by greed. But it depends if you are greed on your own merit and you have to use your own merit to conquer and succeed or if you are being greed on the account of a god.
@LazaaMMA May I? Subject 1 Science rejects naturalism- ignored, subject 2 Does the universe have purpose? "WHat about black holes, eyes,",, red herring. Subject 3 Questions regarding fine-tuning - ignored Change of subject to: "I'm here about bronze age myths" I wouldnt reply to closemined bigots who cant or wont address the points I raise, either.
As for ur bronze age myth: "a fool in his heart says there is no God." written by the Psalmist 3000yrs ago!!Atheism has a history, doesnt it?
@fiesta181 A person may be briefly swayed by a theist but his point is soon lost when the hardened skeptic is plunged back into an all physical world of material indulgence. What’s needed is to undermine atheism’s faith in naturalism & all its materialistic assumptions showing they are not supported by modern science An atheist wont be swayed by books on theology but the BEST scientists who draws theistic conclusions, will trouble him DEEPLY. (C.S Lewis)
I have listed below just a few of these eminent scientists who do not draw atheistic conclusions, if u like I have hundreds of Nobel laureates as well to refute "naturalism." My challenge to any YT sceptic, lets discuss a scientist who supports purely naturalistic explanations based on his science. Good luck on finding one! It is one thing to say I do science without invoking God but few have a verifiable hypothesis to explain our finite rationally intelligible, life-permitting universe.!!
Anyone want to discuss the fanciful theory of multiverses or oscillating universes with variable physical constants. Perhaps an eternal past of finite physical events might excite you? What about the absurdly complex math on which all the immaterial laws of science are defined. And one I is "all reality is ultimately just mindless matter and energy.' From which we infer that we're just cosmic accidents and survival machines and morality is just an illusion, right?
@Gericho49 "naturalism & all its materialistic assumptions showing they are not supported by modern science" What kind of bullshit reasoning is that? It is precisely the fanciful, narcissistic and bombastic claims of the theists that got the rug pulled out from under them by science again and again.
@LazaaMMA Change of subject noted. You addressed only one point I raised in rejecting your materialistic reductionist worldview. If u have no purpose why are u here- to defend your non belief & meaninglessness?
Our failure to fully understand God's mind & purpose is to be expected but why should the universe be fine-tuned, life-permitting & obey abstract laws if mindless matter & energy are the only game in your all physical world. Would u like me to cite 100s Nobelists who reject "Naturalism?"
@LazaaMMA If atheism is true u have no hope, no meaning, no destiny & no escape. In the blink of a cosmic nanosecond it will be like u never existed. If atheists argue that our finite, deathbound universe has no purpose, how can the mindless matter or the survival machines like us claim that we have purpose? The only fairytale is that science supports an atheist's worldview. “The deeper one penetrates into nature’s secrets, the greater one’s respect for God.” (Einstein, as cited in Brian 1996).
Paul Davies (British astrophysicist): "There is for me powerful evidence that there is something going on behind it all....It seems as though somebody has fine-tuned nature’s numbers to make the Universe....The impression of design is overwhelming". (4)
Paul Davies: "The laws of physics seem to be the product of exceedingly ingenious design... The universe must have a purpose". (5) Roger Penrose (math physicist): "I would say the universe has a purpose. It's not there just somehow by chance."
The morality and mortality of Hitchens is very soon about to justify his beliefs to a higher authority. Finding fault in man's fallibility real or imagery I dont think (and its just my opinion) will not cut it. And neither will his feeble attempts to conceptualize the mind of a God "beyond our understanding" the god he hates and no one but him believes is possible.
@fiesta181 Did I imply the problem was with God? Those who have perverted religion for their own gain & glorification deserve all the criticism Hitichens hurls at them. But the judeochristian God has survived for 4000yrs in spite of its failings. Should we blame all atheists for the godless ideologies of the 20th century that killed 100million? no, no!!
Lenin said "atheism is a necessary component of our program." He & Stalin then proceeded to raze churches & slaughter anyone who didnt agree.
@fiesta181 "*Should we blame all atheists for the godless ideologies of the 20th century (...) no, no!!* Great!"
So then we shouldnt blame all religion for the terrorists who pervert their own ideology out of hatred? Hitchens circular logic is well defined. God doesnt exist so all religious are deluded. Hey they even believe in miracles & life after death. I rest my case" eh, what case would that be, Chris?
BTW we're all praying that Chris will have a road to Damascus revelation and RIP.
@Gericho49 *So then we shouldnt blame all religion for the terrorists*
So then you fell of the cliff. So then you thought there was a bridge over there and you missed the gap. Give me one example of one form of atheism fighting and killing followers of another form of atheism and maybe you can make the sequitur you are looking for.
@fiesta181an example? Lenin: "atheism is a necessary component of our program," He& Stalin then razed churches & slaughtered millions who disagreed with his ideology. Mao Poll Pot, Edi Amin, Gadaffi, Saddam did much the same. Unlike u I will debunk all ur points time permitting. So called religious wars are not fought over whose prophets or dogma are right, theyre all fought over land and man's lust for power& postion. God wont be swayed by a terrorist saying "Allah be praised" I maybe be wrong?
Yeah, give me one example of one form of atheism fighting and killing followers of another form of atheism, not dictators killing poor uneducated people. Find me two forms of atheism and then give me examples of wars caused by their divergences. Or - if you prefer, make the case that these dictators are trying to convert their people to atheism and that they are killing those who refuse to convert. I’m still working on that gap you left behind.
*So called religious wars are not fought over whose prophets or dogma are right*
Well the folks who fight these wars say precisely the opposite based on their own faith. I don’t have to go any further to dismiss your personal opinion as irrelevant for this point.
*God wont be swayed by a terrorist saying "Allah be praised" I maybe be wrong?*
Again your opinion is absolutely irrelevant for this matter. It is somewhat amusing to see you speak in the name of Islam as the subject of our discussion is (still) organized religion.
@fiesta181 "Well the folks who fight these wars say precisely the opposite based on their own faith" Care to cite a reference for such a claim? So u want atheists fighting atheists, what would that prove? Japan invaded China didnt it . I suppose u'll say that they were all peace loving Buddists or their ideologies were based on theocracies. So its ok for Stalin to commit mass genocide on orthodox Christians (poor {uneducated?} people). I cant follow ur logic. Perhaps none was implied!
Not quite. I want you to give examples of followers of one form of atheism fighting against followers of another form of atheism. Or - if you prefer, make the case that dictators are trying to convert their people to atheism and that they are killing those who refuse to convert. I need you to put atheism at the center of a dispute. We are still working on that gap you (welcome back) left behind.
@fiesta181 "Not quite. I want you to give examples of followers of one form of atheism fighting against followers of another..." What's ur Q supposed to prove if e.g. one communist country fought another? There have numerous examples of non-religious wars and some within the same ideology. MY point is they all fight over land, its wealth & man's greed& lust for power & postion which has dotted all of human history. But claiming "God/ devil/ ego made me do it, is both dumb & insulting.
Relax, you won't be able to find me that example. That's because there isn't one. All these dictators you mentioned, that launched these wars and chaos WERE NOT doing so under the premise: HEY LET'S CONVERT THESE PEOPLE TO ATHEISM and kill those who refuse.
NO!
You simply won't be able to establish that connection... but good luck then...
Irrelevant. That's not what they LITERALLY told the populations they later on enslavered. The people they converted were actually convinced that those same men who enslavered them were actually messengers of good himself. Such messengers don't exist and you are still trying to convince me that you can carry the message of god.
This has been flagged as spam show
If evolution were correct, and humans evolved from monkeys, then why are monkeys still around today? There is really no explanation for this, yet this heathen ideal is still taught in our schools. No doubt thanks to the agenda's being pushed by gays and their liberal co-conspirators to destroy our youth and convert the nation to communism.
samaroo96 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Only a REAL FOOL would claim there is no God! Man creates awesome skyscrapers, fake hearts, tunnels, vehicles etc.. If we are very imperfect then what more can God create THE UNIVERSE! You must accept Jesus Christ as your Savior to receive eternal rest in heaven! Simple! John 3:16 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him! Repent & accept Jesus Christ! Jesus Christ or HELL?!? Visit cbn. com
tigersforchrist 4 days ago
Hitchens the anti-Noah of our time, floating nothing but a huge
keelless barge with all the world's atheistic arguments loaded on
board aimlessly over humanity; of course he died, and soon
will all his notions; they will nowhere be found in the new world.
theetrue 1 month ago
@theetrue Keeless? Hardly. Atheistic philosophy continues to grow along with science as religious philosophy continues to atrophy. As Hitchen's says it's either god's word or it isn't. The sadistic, stupid, hateful, superstitious, and primitive content of the "holy" books of the world's religions proves they are man made and could not possibly be the work of an omniscient god. The shortest path to atheism is to critically read the bible, qur'an, torah or any other "holy" book .
emaildoctor 1 month ago
@emaildoctor
That sounds like a lot of fun: a philosophy of increasing nothingness; sort
of like: hey, I think I'll add a big no sandwich to my no lunch tomorrow
and really party. There are only two kinds of people on this planet, those
who are of God, and those who are not. Not one word of what has been
written will fail to take place, and those not trusting God and serving
Him at the time of Judgment will not enter His eternal Kingdom.
theetrue 1 month ago
@theetrue So which religion is correct to enter his eternal kingdom?
Sconezeta 1 month ago
@Sconezeta
This is a trick question, right? OK, I give up,
which religion is correct to enter His eternal kingdom?
theetrue 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Sconezeta
This is a trick question, right? OK, I give up,
which religion is correct to enter His eternal kingdom?
theetrue 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Sconezeta
This is a trick question, right? Ok, I give up,
which religion is correct to enter His eternal kingdom?
theetrue 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Sconezeta
This is a trick question, right? Ok, I give up,
which religion is correct to enter His eternal kingdom?
theetrue 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Sconezeta
This is a trick question, right? Ok, I give up,
which religion is correct to enter His eternal kingdom?
theetrue 1 month ago
@Sconezeta ... Shintoism. Didn't you get the memo?..
Sagr1987 1 month ago
@theetrue Oh, so you think that nature, or "God's creation" as you might have it, is "nothingness". You've inverted reality. There is plenty of evidence that nature exists, none that God exists.
SBCBears 1 month ago
@SBCBears
Which statement you are referring to? The position you
are representing is not remotely similar to anything I said.
theetrue 1 month ago
@theetrue What a load of crap!
Jofishy66 4 days ago
@theetrue Yeah reality is kinda bleak when you get off the hallucinations.
Sagr1987 1 month ago
@Sagr1987
It's sad, but a lot of people tend to agree with you; none the
less, a sincere effort should be made at all cost; God will help.
theetrue 1 month ago
@theetrue Sad in what way? Are those followers going to his eternal kingdom?
Sconezeta 1 month ago
Comment removed
Tomasi2661 1 month ago
Hitchens and Harris are still loyal to the holly land....that's why they keep demonizing Muslims and wanna take us to wars against Iraq and Afganistan!
OrganicKing 1 month ago
@OrganicKing 100 out of 100 for missing the point!
RonnieJamesable 1 month ago
HITCHENS IS A PYGMY COMPARED TO HEDGES.
glower125 1 month ago 2
Hitchens - what a wonderful example of the jewish revolutionary spirit! Destroy! Destroy! Destroy! Even if that means destroying oneself!
Matthysable 1 month ago 2
@Matthysable Nice ad hominem there. At least Hitch doesn't have to deal with that kind of incompetence anymore.
metahipster92 1 month ago
@metahipster92 It's usually good practice, when using big words, to know what they mean. But, I guess that's the price we pay for having freedom of speech - any asshole can get a say!
Waiting with bated breath for your next profound contribution! Don' let me down now, ok?
Matthysable 1 month ago
@Matthysable The very reason you fail to understand my last comment is the same reason why you will fail to understand the false claims that fall under religion.
metahipster92 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
Matthysable 2 weeks ago
"Would Iraqis still be demolishing their society if there was no religion?" But wait, what about the Bloods & Crips? As far as I know about them, their criminal activities, power & survival struggles have very little or nothing to do with religion.
cleanhomer 1 month ago in playlist More videos from TheStevenBlue
@cleanhomer Are college educated Blood and Crips going to other countries and killing people? No, because that would be silly. Only religion could make somebody do that. There will always be violence and power struggles, but religion is the cause of a lot of it. Blood and Crips aren't killing people because of atheism, so the two examples you used are not related. The example also does not any way offer evidence of a god.
Tomasi2661 1 month ago
@Tomasi2661 "Only religion could make somebody do that." Unless the Bloods or Crips had some beef with someone outside America & the money to go over there (in which some likely could). And besides, wouldn't there be non-spiritual political extremists willing & able to kill for their cause- and not just Communists?
cleanhomer 1 month ago
@Tomasi2661 What makes you think I'm offering evidence of a god? I'm only offering evidence that the idea that religion is the source of all violence is absurd. Don't animals get violent? Are you saying they get religious too? Wouldn't religion & violence both stem from the same source: emotion?
cleanhomer 1 month ago
@cleanhomer That's a straw man. Nobody said religion was the source of "all" violence. And yes some atheist would be willing to kill for a cause, but the cause would not be atheism. As your in example, the cause would be an almost religious following of another institution, such Communism (ie: not atheism).
Tomasi2661 1 month ago
@cleanhomer Religion, however, can directly cause violence, such as college educated suicide bombers convinced they are getting 72 virgins. That's what they wrote about and said themselves was the reason for their violence, not political/economic reasons. Again the animal argument makes no sense, because obviously there are many reasons to be violent besides religion. But that doesn't mean religion cannot cause violence.
Tomasi2661 1 month ago
@Tomasi2661 I never said religion doesn't cause violence. Where did you get that?
cleanhomer 1 month ago
@cleanhomer Relgion is not an emotion and the have a source. The source of the religions we are talking about here are directly from a book writen by desert nomads 3,000 years ago. Chinese people 2,000 years ago had the same emotions as us, but not the same religion.
Tomasi2661 1 month ago
@Tomasi2661 What about the pagan religions of Native Americans, Africans, Europeans, CHINESE, etc.? Abrahamic religions aren't the only ones, you know. And I said religion's SOURCE is emotion. It can certainly be an emotional expression. But, then again, so is art.
cleanhomer 1 month ago
@cleanhomer Religion's source is emotion? That's mumbor-jumbo, you could say that about anything. Religion is something drilled into your head by your parents, upbringing, fear, and threats. It's man-made, organized, ritualized, and based on faith, the suspension of reason.
Tomasi2661 1 month ago
@Tomasi2661 "Religion's source is emotion? That's mumbor-jumbo, you could say that about anything." So, mathmatics is based on emotion? Spirituality comes out of an emotional appreciation & celebration of things important to oneself; religion is simply an organized form of it, like in a compartmented box. Open-minded religious people will put take out something they don't agree with anymore & put something new in that they like. Closed-minded- dogmatic- religious people won't...
cleanhomer 1 month ago
@Tomasi2661 ...everything has to stay in their compartments. And they can be the suspicious, dogmatic ones. "Religion is something drilled into your head..." What makes you think every religious person has it based on upbringing, fear, or threats? How do you some haven't freely & honestly chose that as their own? So, what exactly is religion's source then, if it isn't emotion?
cleanhomer 1 month ago
@cleanhomer What about them? You mean there are other religions? Of people who are also convinced they were right because of how they were brought up? Shocking. But at least now I know to stay on the look out for Native American and European pagan terrorist.
Tomasi2661 1 month ago
@Tomasi2661 You probably would, if history turned out different. There probably still could be pagan terrorists sometime soon, tons of people have a grievance, and anybody can be violent. And besides, I also need to look out for nationalist, anarchist, separatist, supremacist, political extremists, and many other non-spiritual terrorists in the world.
cleanhomer 1 month ago
It's not that we have to love those who hate us and rest on that ideal, it's that we must work towards a world in which we are *all* bound together in love. It's true that one's love for one's enemy doesn't matter as long as one's enemy still hates one, but that doesn't excuse assuming that just because we haven't reached a goal, there is no point in trying to reach it. Where would science be if we rested on such an assumption? Whether it is possible or not, it's a pretty world to think about.
sageSPH 1 month ago
Hitchens was such a simpleton. Good riddance. He would constantly blather about morality, as if a moral system of any kind is at all possible without religion. Take away religion and EVERYONE gets to decide for themselves what is and isn't moral.
RealCrusadeHistory 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@RealCrusadeHistory "as if a moral system of any kind is at all possible without religion."
Religion gives you, at best, an especially vile version of a fascist dictatorship. That's the consequence of people not being allowed to decide for themselves what they regard as good and bad, right and wrong. The subjective element is simply necessary for morality to be about us in the first place, not to mention being necessary for us to acknowledge that it's good.
Gnomefro 1 month ago
@RealCrusadeHistory I mean, seriously, if God told you tomorrow that you should go to your neighbors house, kill everyone except their virgin daughter, then drag her over to your house and rape her, you'd call that good? If no, why? Is it because your subjective opinion matters? By the way, God did order that in the bible. Numbers 31.
Gnomefro 1 month ago
@RealCrusadeHistory So, because most people aren't retarded, voluntary cooperation becomes possible through a common desire for mutual cooperation and similar concerns. Not all the time, but most of the time. What's entirely unproductive is to take your approach and assert that "I am right because it says so in this book. It would be CHAOS if I don't get to dictate the rules!". The rest of humanity can not help but give you the finger.
Gnomefro 1 month ago
@Gnomefro "Not all the time, but most of the time"? Nonsense! The desire to exploit and plunder one's fellow man is just as much a part of our evolution as is the desire to cooperate with friends and family. Animals treat each other both well and badly, the same can be said of human beings. I'm just pointing out the obvious - that only in a monotheistic universe is there any strong impulse to view all of man as a larger family. Your simplistic views make it difficult for you to grasp history.
RealCrusadeHistory 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Gnomefro You're right. We should rely on the bible instead of our own human moral instincts. That way we could still have slavery. We can look the other why in the face of rape and child molestation. We should kill as many innocent women and children as possible during times of war. We should stone adulterors or even people who think about it in their minds., etc. Or maybe we should just rely on are own human instinct like we already do inspite of religion.
Tomasi2661 1 month ago
@RealCrusadeHistory You are entitled to your opinion, but your opinion is not special. Not even when you bought your opinion in printed form without bothering to think about it at all. The mere fact that you need to convince me that you are correct before I can take you seriously should give you a pretty big clue that your view of "morality"(that is, Fascist dictatorship) is a contradiction.
Gnomefro 1 month ago
@Gnomefro My perspective just happens to be right, and informed by a considerable education. Your childish reaction against my arguments only shows the weakness of your position. The sting in the rebuke is the truth. The idea that by ridding the world of religion and promoting the "golden rule" you're going to get all of humanity to cooperate and treat one another fairly is so naive and hilarious it's no surprise that only on youtube does anyone take such nonsense seriously.
RealCrusadeHistory 1 month ago
@Gnomefro History shows us that morality is entirely elastic. One culture's moral good is another culture's evil. In fact, the very notion that because someone is a human being that in itself merits them a certain respect comes from monotheism. Before that there was no such concept of "universal" humanity. Remove monotheism and start telling everyone they're just clever apes and the maxim for universal benevolence erodes even further. Plenty of people will say "eh, I don't really care. I'd..
RealCrusadeHistory 1 month ago
@Gnomefro ...rather exploit my fellow man than love him." And the thing is, of course, atheism has no response to that. You can't regard that as anything other than normal animal behavior. You've already admitted morality is totally subjective, that it's dependent on nothing but human impulse, so there you have it. Christianity rebukes such a thing strongly, demanding submission to God's commandment to be just to all men. Remove that and you will see that moral maxim erode as well.
RealCrusadeHistory 1 month ago
@RealCrusadeHistory "I'd rather exploit my fellow man than love him" ... you say that "Christianity rebukes such a thing strongly", but as a self-professed man of "considerable education" you must surely know that the Bible is full of verses condoning slavery.
Mr512austintexas 1 month ago
@Mr512austintexas Absolutely, but the Bible also contains moral maxims from many generations of Jewish thought. Ultimately Christianity introduced to the world the notion that there was a moral problem with slavery. The first statement against slavery, as far as anyone can tell, was Pope Gregory the Great in the fifth century AD or so when he stood in a Roman slave market and insisted that English slaves be freed because they were God's children.
RealCrusadeHistory 1 month ago
@RealCrusadeHistory @RealCrusadeHistory Too bad it took 1500 years for the message to get around, like, just for one example, the 154 Civil War era southern clergymen who signed a letter characterizing abolition as heresy and accusing the North of "interference with the plans of Divine Providence." (John Patrick Daly, "When Slavery Was Called Freedom: Evangelicalism, Proslavery, and the Causes of the Civil War". Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2002; pg. 145.)
Mr512austintexas 1 month ago
@RealCrusadeHistory for all your claims of education you're quite a poor listener. hitchens never claimed to want to take religion away from EVERYONE.
bethnor 1 month ago
@RealCrusadeHistory Considered one of the top 5 public intellectuals, the man who sparked a rage of debate and got people to think about there positions. Caused a tsunami of different thinking with such beautiful articulation and wit. And your last claim makes religion a utilertarian notion. It doesnt make it true. Are you saying the leaders of religion do not think for themselves and get their flock to do their will? Would you rather the world think as individuals or be slaves and ordered?
dawtchins 1 month ago
@dawtchins
I'm sorry, what claim are you referencing? If you were impressed by Hitchens I'm afraid that just shows you to be deficient in your education. Hitchens was basically an entertainer. He would constantly present irrational nonsense and because he had an English accent audiences of American students were impressed. The fact is that the claim of pop culture atheists that religion is irrational doesn't hold water. Read Descartes' Meditation on First Philosophy and you'll see that...
RealCrusadeHistory 1 month ago
@RealCrusadeHistory ...basically all human knowledge requires a leap of faith, including faith in our own senses. Then once you're read David Hume you'll see that in fact all experimental science is based on faith as well. It's like these guys like Hitchens and Dawkins never read their basic Western philosophy.
RealCrusadeHistory 1 month ago
I recommend watching Hedges' Rockford 2003 commencement speech.
The entire speech was a diatribe about the invasion of Iraq, absolutely no acknowledgement that he was at a commencement.
charlesvan13 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Without doubt, one of the factors in the emergence of anti-religious ideas and a phalanx of deniers of God, has been the false teachings, the inadequacies and the intellectual perversions of the followers of some religions. The peculiarities and separate characteristics of each religion must, therefore, be individually examined when studying the reasons that have led men to adhere to that religion.
1tabligh 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Atheists and people of belief are both just as capable of being defensive and black and white in their thinking as the other (and are, on both sides, much more often than not). Core values are core values.
Let's grow up a little.
thezimmione 2 months ago
Comment removed
thezimmione 2 months ago
Many trees will not miss the passing of Christopher Hitchens..Does he know anything at all about *Asian* religion? Not much, if any..I can just see him sitting down reading the Mahabharata or the Puranas in Sanskrit or Bengali! Or, knowing something of substance about tantra, esoteric Buddhism, Neo-Platonism, Hermeticism, Sufism, Theosophy, spiritualism, spiritism, Voudon, Gnosticism, New Thought yada yada and etc...
TwoPointsUp 2 months ago
One of the unfortunate things about Hitchens is his unfortunate and rather childish use of ad hominems. Is this a regrettable product of the English elite public school education and culture?
As to what happened to Hitchens I think he has a lot of Nieburhrian liberalism in him.
ronhelf 2 months ago
thing to feel remorse and sadness for you're enemy, and hence a sort of love, for you're love and faith in humanity is deminished when you recognize someone as your enemy, because the emotional force of love and the sadness and greif of having an enemy, can give you the power to make the world a better place so that those conditions which made your enemy your enemy may in the future make him your friend
dvzqz87 2 months ago
id have to say right out that i disagree with hitchens that it is ridiculous to not love your enemy, the one who wants to kill you your family etc. and the reason why i think this is ridiculous is because you're enemy has far more in common with you than you think they do, in fact, i would say that mostly anything your enemy was subject to which made him to be such a way that he is you're enemy, could have easily made you an enemy of him if the conditions were reversed, and i think it's a good
dvzqz87 2 months ago
yo, can't people fucking realize that the vidoes they upload don;t have sound audible enough for people to hear, like it seriously takes like maybe 5 minutes to adjudt the volume on windows media player
dvzqz87 2 months ago
@dvzqz87 windows movie maker*
dvzqz87 2 months ago
I am English and am no longer swayed by his erudite oratory and magniloquent tiresome declamations. Something happened during the Bush years. He still (so far) has retained his tools of engagement but his moral compass and discerning eye has been dunked in so many after dinner functions hosted by political lobbyists, he has become a persuasive tool for his puppeteers and a tragic parody of himself.
morklind 3 months ago
@morklind True, true...I don't know what happened to him. Chomsky called him a "sad case"; I agree with that.
tstruss912 2 months ago 2
@tstruss912
And there is some reason one should care what a space cadet like Chomsky thinks?
charlesvan13 2 months ago
@charlesvan13 There's no reason to care about the truth when you're religious. Hitchens followers are like cultists, so I don't expect anything other than hate and nonsense when questioning his motives or honesty.
tstruss912 2 months ago
@charlesvan13 Chomsky is no wise a space cadet that you say so shows there is empty space between your ears.
What do you call a dead Chris Hitchens? One less war monger.
RPenta 1 month ago
Comment removed
JagjeetMann 2 months ago
@morklind a brillaint summation, I salute you, I am also British and think that he has simply become too comfortable as an "American", instead hes become some sort of sad caricuture, its also amusing to see his fans here, young fools eagerly frothing over his "greatness".
JagjeetMann 2 months ago
@JagjeetMann There is no american, we are all different however, what is all the debate truly all about anyway if not within reasoning that we share no definition within what we are and what we are to do regarding any global concerns when it comes within what we are doing to this planet having to deal with population growth and any and all occupational subsistence while depleting and changing earths physical properties within any and all technological enticement.
DrFruedienslip 2 months ago
Wow. Hitchens is, by any definition, a genius. We are lucky to have him.
shadow8pro 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexuality and homosexuality. Even non-religious people know this.
The homosexual agenda is not good for anyone, including those who consider themselves "gay".
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have successfuly framed themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
lightandbeautiful 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hitchens product is the rhetoric by which to replace democratic Republics w/Marxian collectives. Hitchens is indeed a religionist cut fr. the same bolt of whole cloth as Father Hitler, Vlad, Attila the Hun, Mao Zedong, Pinochet, the Sun King, Robespierre & Thomas Woodrow Wilson. These abominable men sought to create a world of privilege too.
CelestialEmbodiment 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Carl Sagan - "Our collective free time needs to shift as much as possible to education. Whether you're a young student or finished school long ago, get out to the library whenever you can and work hard to learn everything you can about this world. Each individual and society will benefit from being able to solve more problems and make better decisions. Education is an amazing discovery process that repays you endlessly."
TheLogicalBrain 4 months ago
This is the clash of the titans. I respect both of these men tremendously.
matcotech 4 months ago
Comparing Chris Hedges to someone like Christopher Hitchens is comparing Mozart to Jerry Springer.
jvaish 4 months ago 13
@jvaish strange compare.
theant8899 4 months ago
@theant8899 yeah, it was the first thing I thought of though. I suppose the idea is comparing someone who created beautiful symphonies to someone who creates emotional reactions for ratings and money. Class vs. crass, at least in terms of delivery and tone.
jvaish 4 months ago
@jvaish which one are you saying is springer?
raizin8 3 months ago
@jvaish I'll take Hitchens on religion and Hedges on politics.
ABevs1 3 months ago 2
Comment removed
acehole7 3 months ago
@jvaish Stupid Statement whether you support Hedges or not he is a worthy adversary and a forefront intellectual.
acehole7 3 months ago
@acehole7 I thought it was pretty clear I was supporting Hedges.
jvaish 3 months ago
@jvaish Sorry stupid statement
acehole7 3 months ago
@jvaish "The loss of faith can be compensated by the newer and finer wonders that we have before us, as well as by immersion in the near-miraculous work of Homer and Shakespeare and Milton and Tolstoy and Proust, all of which was also 'man-made' (though one sometimes wonders, as in the case of Mozart)." -God Is Not Great, ch. 10 (p. 151)
Aeschylus 3 months ago
@jvaish A little unfair. Apart from his recycled stance on religions he has lost all integrity on the political front, where as Chris Hedges profundity needs no attestation.
morklind 3 months ago
@jvaish Why on Earth would you compare a transcendent classical composer from the 18th century to a host of lurid, sensational TV from the late 20th? They're incompatible. You should at least listen to what Hitchens' opponents said of him. They admired his honesty, wit, and courage. What are you doing with your life? Waging a battle in 500 characters or less! I have no delusions about your nonsense. You're just a troll. Getting kicks by picking fights on youtube? That's miserable.
MinisterAilingTongue 2 months ago
@MinisterAilingTongue I have listened to what his opponents said, including his evangelical friends. I am not a troll, but I am expressing an opinion that differs from yours. I am sure his heart was in the right place, but his acerbic and demeaning delivery don't compare to Hedges placid, fair and reasonable presentations. I am guessing your reaction is an emotional outburst due to his recent death, which probably could have been prevented had he not poisoned his liver.
jvaish 2 months ago
@jvaish
He didn't die of liver failure. Though drinking could have contributed to his cancer.
charlesvan13 2 months ago
@charlesvan13 Yes, I wasn't very clear about that. I realize he died of esophogeal cancer, but I have no doubt that the drinking and poor health habits contributed to that. Sad, really, as he seemed like in his personal life he was a pretty nice guy.
jvaish 2 months ago
@jvaish I presume that you are saying that Hedges is Mozart and Hitchens is Singer? If not you need to work on your sentence structuring.
sageSPH 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jvaish I presume that you are saying that Hedges is Mozart and Hitchens is Singer? If not you need to work on your sentence structuring.
sageSPH 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jvaish I presume that you are saying that Hedges is Mozart and Hitchens is Singer? If not you need to work on your sentence structuring.
sageSPH 1 month ago
@jvaish Comparing Mozart to Jerry Springer is a total non sequitur and makes no sense in the analogy. Think about it before posting and try again.
i3u7n5 1 month ago
@i3u7n5 This has already been explained in previous posts. Next time, do more research before posting a comment ;)
jvaish 1 month ago
@jvaish You're right, I should have exhaustively investigated the fact that you made an ill formed comment instead of letting it stand (or in this case, collapse) on its own.
i3u7n5 1 month ago
@i3u7n5 Yes, you are obviously quite lazy, as you seem to lack the capacity to extrapolate on the fact that Mozart was a genius who composed music that was pleasant to the ears, while Jerry Springer pandered to the masses using emotional rhetoric. Pretty obvious to most intelligent people, at least those who aren't ruled by their emotions. Btw, it's "ill-formed comment," just so you know.
jvaish 1 month ago
@jvaish Ohhhhhhhh. One was a classical composer and a musical genius while the other was a social demagogue and muckraker. I see the connection NOW. yeah, *perfect* analogy. They're like pb&j! Perfect!
i3u7n5 1 month ago
@i3u7n5 Yep, glad you can make the connection. Now, please, continue with your self-loathing and deep-seated sadness hidden behind sarcasm.
jvaish 1 month ago
As a big fan of both men, I have come to the conclusion that there really are more important topics we as human beings need to address rather than just pointing the finger at one specific topic such as religion. It is true that RADICAL religion finds every and any excuse to justify horrendous actions, i.e. Israel, but look at Christian anarchists such as Chris Hedges. His intellect is enviable and pragmatic in thought process. We need to accept each other for our differences, beliefs and all.
danielcm81 4 months ago
@danielcm81 I disagree. It is not only radical religion that poses a threat. It is all religion. Otherwise sane and reasonable people are just as wrong, and just as dangerous in different ways, as a result of their belief in fantasy. Even moderate practitioners of whatever religion continue to push their beliefs in law, politics, education, and even privatel ives. My parents have never bombed an abortion clinic, but they have voted to deny homosexuals the right to marry. It is dead wrong.
bendon82 4 months ago
@bendon82 Are you implying that the eradication of religion would lead to a more venerable human race?Human interaction is too complex to even fathom the idea of progression in human beings. We're animals. Evolution doesn't equate to progression. Science can't even explain what we think we know is fact, i.e. the speed of light being absolute. If not religion, we find some other way to fuck things up. We're like that. Look up naive realism. I'm agnostic btw.
danielcm81 4 months ago
@danielcm81 If religion disappeared, I do believe we would be better off. I did not, however, insinuate that it would end all of our problems. War, violence, crime, would all continue. You said that it is RADICAL religion that finds excuses to justify horrendous actions. I replied with evidence that even moderate, and otherwise reasonable people of faith ALSO seek to justify the horrors of religion, and as another example, I present the people who try to downplay the rape of children by priests.
bendon82 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@danielcm81 If religion disappeared, I do believe we would be better off. I did not, however, insinuate that it would end all of our problems. War, violence, crime, would all continue. You said that it is RADICAL religion that finds excuses to justify horrendous actions. I replied with evidence that even moderate, and otherwise reasonable people of faith ALSO seek to justify the horrors of religion, and as another example, I present the people who try to downplay the rape of children by priests.
bendon82 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@danielcm81 If religion disappeared, I do believe we would be better off. I did not, however, insinuate that it would end all of our problems. War, violence, crime, would all continue. You said that it is RADICAL religion that finds excuses to justify horrendous actions. I replied with evidence that even moderate, and otherwise reasonable people of faith ALSO seek to justify the horrors of religion, and as another example, I present the people who try to downplay the rape of children by priests.
bendon82 4 months ago
@danielcm81 Religion is nothing but willful delusion. If we are to solve the problems in *this* world, we cannot afford to waste time on some unproven *next* one.
TomFynn 4 months ago
@TomFynn I'm not making any excuses for religion. I take an agnostic viewpoint on everything whether it's religion, conspiracies, you name it. Atheism is the new craze. I don't get people's beef with the silliness of religion. That's all I'm saying. Hitchens spends so much time talking about it. It's like when you break up with a girl, and you go around talking shit about her when deep down inside you know you'd be down for a grudge fuck.
danielcm81 4 months ago
@danielcm81 Religion makes a virtue out of not wanting to know. It is like Dubya who simply did not bother anymore with what is commonly known as reality.
As long as there are crazy people people like Michele Bachmann who ride for US presidency the silliness of religion needs to be pointed out. Otherwise people might start to believe this shit.
TomFynn 4 months ago
@TomFynn Bachmann is a corporate whore who masks her evil, regressive political ideologies behind religion. She's a puppet. The religion she claims to be a part of has nothing to do with what she wants to seen done in American politics. She would just be there to say "yes, master".
danielcm81 4 months ago
@danielcm81 While I fully agree with your view on Bachmann, there is an important point: All religions are completely made up. With that kind of magical thinking one can justify *anything*. Even Bachmann's policies. Especially Bachmann policies, actually. Since they are as completely divorced from reality as religion.
TomFynn 4 months ago 2
@TomFynn Every type of racism, sexism, dogmatic ideology, bigotry every stupid cult, are all results from not realizing that our perceptions are gambles. We believe what we see and then we believe our interpretation of it. Most of the time we don't even know we're making an interpretation. Naive Realism. Refuted by philosophers for centuries. We still act on this perception. Quantum Mechanics proves its falsehood. No vantage point from which real reality can be seen. Points of view only.
danielcm81 4 months ago
@danielcm81 You are waffling. Stop it.
TomFynn 4 months ago 3
@TomFynn Agree to disagree. Take care.
danielcm81 4 months ago
@danielcm81 In that we agree. You too.
TomFynn 4 months ago
@danielcm81 You Sir are soo right.
Munnchbunnch 4 months ago
@danielcm81 The reasons we have a beef with the silliness of religion are varied. The subjugation of women, human sacrifice, anti-science sentiments, meddling with the school system, the genital mutilation of infants (to quote hitchens), I could go on.
iowntwocats 3 months ago
@iowntwocats Cool man, keep looking up to misogynistic alcoholics.
danielcm81 3 months ago
@danielcm81 Is that the best defense of religion that you have?
iowntwocats 3 months ago
As a big fan of both men, I have come to the conclusion that there really are more important topics we as human beings need to address rather than just pointing the finger at one specific topic such as religion. It is true that RADICAL religion finds every and any excuse to justify horrendous actions, i.e. Israel, but look at Christian anarchists such as Chris Hedges. His intellect is enviable and pragmatic in thought process. We need to accept each other for our differences, beliefs and all.
danielcm81 4 months ago
@TZMRevolution I shot the sheriff but I didn't shoot no deputy.
LOl
fiesta181 4 months ago
Comment removed
fiesta181 4 months ago
@DublyTrue *Some leaders use religion as an excuse to start wars, while others exploit noble ideals.*
And I ask you, is there anything nobler then to serve God?
Seems like we are back at the beginning.
fiesta181 5 months ago
*All wars are fought over resources*
Well these wars are fought mainly over power and the greed and of some few. ‘Resources’ is a vain word; refers to some primarily sense of survival and may be misleading in this context. Wars are actually caused by greed. But it depends if you are greed on your own merit and you have to use your own merit to conquer and succeed or if you are being greed on the account of a god.
fiesta181 5 months ago
*Based on lies*
I submit that religion is the ultimate lie that cannot be exposed by any means. That’s what’s so wicked (and strong and destructive) about it.
fiesta181 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@LazaaMMA May I? Subject 1 Science rejects naturalism- ignored, subject 2 Does the universe have purpose? "WHat about black holes, eyes,",, red herring. Subject 3 Questions regarding fine-tuning - ignored Change of subject to: "I'm here about bronze age myths" I wouldnt reply to closemined bigots who cant or wont address the points I raise, either.
As for ur bronze age myth: "a fool in his heart says there is no God." written by the Psalmist 3000yrs ago!!Atheism has a history, doesnt it?
Prodigalfather1 5 months ago
Comment removed
Prodigalfather1 5 months ago
Ok, where's the beginning of the debate? Hitch is obviously already replying to something.
twooffour 5 months ago
Yaaaaaay
iowntwocats 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Religions share a common foundation: LOVE. Why must religions clash over their differences instead of uniting over their common foundation?
My religion is love. Join my religion! You can add it to yours.
eastariel 5 months ago
Friends just look up Philosopedia * Steven Weinberg * nobel winner 1979, he sums it up perfectly.
Jatz071 5 months ago
@fiesta181 A person may be briefly swayed by a theist but his point is soon lost when the hardened skeptic is plunged back into an all physical world of material indulgence. What’s needed is to undermine atheism’s faith in naturalism & all its materialistic assumptions showing they are not supported by modern science An atheist wont be swayed by books on theology but the BEST scientists who draws theistic conclusions, will trouble him DEEPLY. (C.S Lewis)
Gericho49 5 months ago
I have listed below just a few of these eminent scientists who do not draw atheistic conclusions, if u like I have hundreds of Nobel laureates as well to refute "naturalism." My challenge to any YT sceptic, lets discuss a scientist who supports purely naturalistic explanations based on his science. Good luck on finding one! It is one thing to say I do science without invoking God but few have a verifiable hypothesis to explain our finite rationally intelligible, life-permitting universe.!!
Gericho49 5 months ago
Anyone want to discuss the fanciful theory of multiverses or oscillating universes with variable physical constants. Perhaps an eternal past of finite physical events might excite you? What about the absurdly complex math on which all the immaterial laws of science are defined. And one I is "all reality is ultimately just mindless matter and energy.' From which we infer that we're just cosmic accidents and survival machines and morality is just an illusion, right?
Gericho49 5 months ago
@Gericho49 *Unlike u I will debunk all ur points*
Dude, are you alright? I think I thought I saw you trying...lol
fiesta181 5 months ago
@Gericho49 "naturalism & all its materialistic assumptions showing they are not supported by modern science" What kind of bullshit reasoning is that? It is precisely the fanciful, narcissistic and bombastic claims of the theists that got the rug pulled out from under them by science again and again.
TomFynn 5 months ago
@LazaaMMA Change of subject noted. You addressed only one point I raised in rejecting your materialistic reductionist worldview. If u have no purpose why are u here- to defend your non belief & meaninglessness?
Our failure to fully understand God's mind & purpose is to be expected but why should the universe be fine-tuned, life-permitting & obey abstract laws if mindless matter & energy are the only game in your all physical world. Would u like me to cite 100s Nobelists who reject "Naturalism?"
Gericho49 5 months ago
@LazaaMMA If atheism is true u have no hope, no meaning, no destiny & no escape. In the blink of a cosmic nanosecond it will be like u never existed. If atheists argue that our finite, deathbound universe has no purpose, how can the mindless matter or the survival machines like us claim that we have purpose? The only fairytale is that science supports an atheist's worldview. “The deeper one penetrates into nature’s secrets, the greater one’s respect for God.” (Einstein, as cited in Brian 1996).
Gericho49 5 months ago
Paul Davies (British astrophysicist): "There is for me powerful evidence that there is something going on behind it all....It seems as though somebody has fine-tuned nature’s numbers to make the Universe....The impression of design is overwhelming". (4)
Paul Davies: "The laws of physics seem to be the product of exceedingly ingenious design... The universe must have a purpose". (5) Roger Penrose (math physicist): "I would say the universe has a purpose. It's not there just somehow by chance."
Gericho49 5 months ago
The morality and mortality of Hitchens is very soon about to justify his beliefs to a higher authority. Finding fault in man's fallibility real or imagery I dont think (and its just my opinion) will not cut it. And neither will his feeble attempts to conceptualize the mind of a God "beyond our understanding" the god he hates and no one but him believes is possible.
pax vobiscum.
Prodigalfather1 5 months ago
@Prodigalfather1 The problem is not God ( i.e. deity); the problem is organized religion.
fiesta181 5 months ago
@fiesta181 Did I imply the problem was with God? Those who have perverted religion for their own gain & glorification deserve all the criticism Hitichens hurls at them. But the judeochristian God has survived for 4000yrs in spite of its failings. Should we blame all atheists for the godless ideologies of the 20th century that killed 100million? no, no!!
Lenin said "atheism is a necessary component of our program." He & Stalin then proceeded to raze churches & slaughter anyone who didnt agree.
Prodigalfather1 5 months ago
@Prodigalfather1 *the god he hates*
Well, the idea was definitely there; one could say that's it was implied. But the terms are well defined: Christopher Hitchens's enemies are men.
*Should we blame all atheists for the godless ideologies of the 20th century (...) no, no!!*
Great!
fiesta181 5 months ago
@fiesta181 "*Should we blame all atheists for the godless ideologies of the 20th century (...) no, no!!* Great!"
So then we shouldnt blame all religion for the terrorists who pervert their own ideology out of hatred? Hitchens circular logic is well defined. God doesnt exist so all religious are deluded. Hey they even believe in miracles & life after death. I rest my case" eh, what case would that be, Chris?
BTW we're all praying that Chris will have a road to Damascus revelation and RIP.
Gericho49 5 months ago
@Gericho49 *So then we shouldnt blame all religion for the terrorists*
So then you fell of the cliff. So then you thought there was a bridge over there and you missed the gap. Give me one example of one form of atheism fighting and killing followers of another form of atheism and maybe you can make the sequitur you are looking for.
How many forms of atheism you know?
fiesta181 5 months ago
@fiesta181an example? Lenin: "atheism is a necessary component of our program," He& Stalin then razed churches & slaughtered millions who disagreed with his ideology. Mao Poll Pot, Edi Amin, Gadaffi, Saddam did much the same. Unlike u I will debunk all ur points time permitting. So called religious wars are not fought over whose prophets or dogma are right, theyre all fought over land and man's lust for power& postion. God wont be swayed by a terrorist saying "Allah be praised" I maybe be wrong?
Gericho49 5 months ago
@Gericho49 *example?*
Yeah, give me one example of one form of atheism fighting and killing followers of another form of atheism, not dictators killing poor uneducated people. Find me two forms of atheism and then give me examples of wars caused by their divergences. Or - if you prefer, make the case that these dictators are trying to convert their people to atheism and that they are killing those who refuse to convert. I’m still working on that gap you left behind.
fiesta181 5 months ago
*So called religious wars are not fought over whose prophets or dogma are right*
Well the folks who fight these wars say precisely the opposite based on their own faith. I don’t have to go any further to dismiss your personal opinion as irrelevant for this point.
fiesta181 5 months ago
*God wont be swayed by a terrorist saying "Allah be praised" I maybe be wrong?*
Again your opinion is absolutely irrelevant for this matter. It is somewhat amusing to see you speak in the name of Islam as the subject of our discussion is (still) organized religion.
fiesta181 5 months ago
@fiesta181 "Well the folks who fight these wars say precisely the opposite based on their own faith" Care to cite a reference for such a claim? So u want atheists fighting atheists, what would that prove? Japan invaded China didnt it . I suppose u'll say that they were all peace loving Buddists or their ideologies were based on theocracies. So its ok for Stalin to commit mass genocide on orthodox Christians (poor {uneducated?} people). I cant follow ur logic. Perhaps none was implied!
Prodigalfather1 5 months ago
@Prodigalfather1 *So u want atheists fighting atheists*
Not quite. I want you to give examples of followers of one form of atheism fighting against followers of another form of atheism. Or - if you prefer, make the case that dictators are trying to convert their people to atheism and that they are killing those who refuse to convert. I need you to put atheism at the center of a dispute. We are still working on that gap you (welcome back) left behind.
fiesta181 5 months ago
*what would that prove?*
First thing’s first.
fiesta181 5 months ago
@fiesta181 "Not quite. I want you to give examples of followers of one form of atheism fighting against followers of another..." What's ur Q supposed to prove if e.g. one communist country fought another? There have numerous examples of non-religious wars and some within the same ideology. MY point is they all fight over land, its wealth & man's greed& lust for power & postion which has dotted all of human history. But claiming "God/ devil/ ego made me do it, is both dumb & insulting.
Prodigalfather1 5 months ago
@Prodigalfather1 *What's ur Q supposed to prove*
Relax, you won't be able to find me that example. That's because there isn't one. All these dictators you mentioned, that launched these wars and chaos WERE NOT doing so under the premise: HEY LET'S CONVERT THESE PEOPLE TO ATHEISM and kill those who refuse.
NO!
You simply won't be able to establish that connection... but good luck then...
fiesta181 5 months ago
*MY point is they all fight over land*
Irrelevant. That's not what they LITERALLY told the populations they later on enslavered. The people they converted were actually convinced that those same men who enslavered them were actually messengers of good himself. Such messengers don't exist and you are still trying to convince me that you can carry the message of god.
Have some respect!
fiesta181 5 months ago
Ugh. Buddha didn't come from a virgin... (rolls eyes) It makes me kind of question the rest of his facts.
SylG73 5 months ago