If i had been asked that question, I might say that I spend my time trying to convince people there is no god, or that man's reasoning for god isn't reasonable because the belief in god leads to self-indulgence in ignorance, violence, hatred, homophobia, sexism, unjust condemnation of others, war, brain washing, and poor decision making. I think the reason why he tries his hand like so is a very clear one.
@theeventhetoon No one says we are all "bad people" show me in the bible where it says that. But we ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of GOD though. Therefore the only thing we have comming to us is DEATH. We are not bad people, WE ARE DEAD PEOPLE!!!! ETHICAL TECHERS TRY TO MAKE BAD PEOPLE GOOD! JESUS CAME TO MAKE DEAD PEOPLE LIVE! +++
People have been forced to misunderstand some statements of Karl Marx. Actually Marx didn't compere religion to opium, but painkiller (analgesic). That's very useful to remember coz Marx mentioned that people turn to religion because nobody here has replied their cry . That's the main critic people can ever give. Religion is the consequence of bad society organized by establishment.
So - don't blame religion, blame political and economical establishment.
Hard core members of religions will not even slightly budge with the reasoning of intelectuals like Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris et al. On the contrary, they'll cling even harder to their irrational convictions. The benefice is for those who can stiil snap out of it.
Israel is a stolen country based on the belief that 'God' gave the land of Palestine to them. If there is no 'God' then give the Palestinians back their land you thieves. Christians and Muslims are not half as dangerous as the Jews are. Only a small percentage of Christians and Muslims think the should use violence to impose their will on the world but all Zionists think killing non-Jews or 'Goym' (cattle) is no more than killing lice.
You could tell by the man's body language, he didn't understand and was upset on a very childish level. I'm not sure what he was doing in the presence of Hitchens.
^^^ where we see how many of the audience are intelligent and clapping, and how many have their arms folded or legs crossed and ears shut, refusing to hear a single word that Hitchens has just said.
I find it quite interesting that this clip has only 2 dislikes. It actually means that people that would dislike what he has to say avoid hearing what he has to say and are perhaps happy to be ignorant and stay in their 'safe' bubble!
That may sound terribly dull to you, but you have to understand most people don't think about morals, or where they come from. Most people just do what they feel is right.
Indeed morals do vary depending on culture, but I believe thats because of culture. The morals change because you're brought up to behave a certain way, not because you're born that way. If left unspoiled I believe we, mostly, all believe in the same kind of right and wrong.
If you say that you are doing something moral because your holy book says to, then what is so wrong with flying a plane into a building if your book says so? Morals are not eternal, and they are constantly evolving.
Nope, because we can observe it around us. True: people commit horrible acts everyday. That does not make what they do right. Differences in morals are not conflicting morals at all, just differences in the details (both anti-abortion and pro-abortion people agree that murdering people is wrong. They just disagree on if an unborn baby is a person, for example). Morals do not change over time, but society conforms to them differently.
@THEEVANTHETOON Ok.... Tell me what details conform to your morals that allow the ownership of slaves??? Most of the founding fathers and most holy books somehow agree with it. Abortion and murder are still touchy subjects because there are so many variables. Either way just because you think something is right today doesn't mean you will in twenty years from now.. Your morals will change as you educate yourself. Besides most people agree that murder is ok during war.
(4th post) As for the prophecies...Several of those were carried out *so that the prophecy might be fulfilled*..meaning it didn't happen by itself, they actively sought to carry out the details of the prophecies...theres nothing magical or miraculous about that.
And really? 500+ ? I have a massive bible right here, and there aren't that many prophecies...and it isn't at all about love. I suggest you read the bible again, like I have.
@DrDopehat "Several of those were carried out *so that the prophecy might be fulfilled*"
True, but not all. Some of the prophecies, such as being born to a virgin, being preceded by a messenger, being sold for 30 pieces of silver, etc. Jesus had no control over, unless, of course, He was divine.
Besides, a majority of prophecies do not regard the Messiah.
"And really? 500+ ?"
To quote you: "I suggest you read the bible again..."
@THEEVANTHETOON Yes, the men who wrote the bible and had access to the old testament had no trouble writing a fiction that is supported by a previous fiction. Anyone can read a "prophesy" that was made 3000 years ago, then write a story about someone who fulfilled that prophesy 2000 years ago. These isn't a single shred of credible evidence supporting anything jesus was supposed to have done and many historical documents directly contradict events the bible claim took place.Take the blinders off
The Bible does not approve of all of its accounts. In Judges, the most bloody book in the Bible, numerous passages troughout the Old Testament make it clear God left Israel during this time.
Christianity is about being a good person and trusting God, both of which require a loving heart.
@THEEVANTHETOON Any book that claims the world is 6-10 thousand years old and that 2 of each of the millions of species of animals were placed on an ark that wouldn't have held a thousand is as anti-science as you can get. God gives orders for the murder of babies (Deut. 3) Allows the selling of your daughter as a sex slave (Exodus 21:1-11) as well as instructions on how to beat slaves ( Ex.21:20-21 Ex.21:26-27) This isn't the perfect word of the creator, its a hateful manifesto full of murder!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
What a pity that Hitchens is so blind that he cannot look at the actions of Jesus of Nazareth and admire a man who, 2000 years ago, offered friendship to areas outside his comfort zone. A pity that Hitchens refuses to read the Gospel's healing stories as signs of hope for those in despair. What an ignorant man to overlook the Church's huge healthcare systems; he accuses religion being antithetical to good health. A well-spoken man who can craft words, but an ignorant man nonetheless.
@bbfrain What a pity you did not hear what he said... at which point did Hitchens refused to look at the actions of Jesus or withdraw his admiration for him?
That sounds to me like "Of course you had to bring up *that* biblical story thats evil, and *that* event which was done by religion that was monstrous and barbaric, and *that* part of the holy texts that deals in horrendous deeds and slaughter...you never mention that Jesus was a good guy and that we have healthcare benefits"
Sir, isn't it rather a pity that your mind has been dulled and destroyed to ignore the inherent dictatorship and evil that resides in all religion ?
@DrDopehat My friend, Christianity is a religion about love. Jesus makes it quite clear Christians are to live humble, loving, selfless, and forgiving lives. You are correct, some Christians have done evil things, but they shouldn't have. One who really loves Christ will not abuse His teachings.
Atheists aren't innocent either, my friend: look up eugenics, the belief that certain races do not deserve to live because they could hinder the evolution of the Human species.
As for eugenics, I know perfectly well what that is...What you said is simply a false statement. There is not a single atheist that believes in- and supports eugenics. Not 1 ...And if somehow you can find 1 in some obscure part of the world, I promise you that person doesn't support eugenics *BECAUSE* hes an atheist.
You might mention Hitler about Eugenics, but I'm sorry...Hitler was a roman catholic and believed he was doing God's work. He wasn't an atheist.
@DrDopehat " There is not a single atheist that believes in- and supports eugenics"
Not anymore, yes, but, especially in the 1920's, groups such as the Ku Klux Klan supported it.
" I promise you that person doesn't support eugenics *BECAUSE* hes an atheist"
A Christian should not support eugenics either. Besides, why shouldn't an atheist support eugenics? According to atheistic beliefs, there is no reason for doing good because eventually, according to you, nothing we do will matter.
The Ku Klux Klan was VERY religious....There was nothing atheist about them. At all..you would be hard pressed to find *anyone* to tell you that they were atheist. You are simply wrong.
And there is no such thing as "Atheistic beliefs"..I don't know where you get this from. There is no rulebook or scripture of atheism..there is no common held beliefs or agreements between atheists. All it means is we don't believe in God(s)..thats all. Also, morals are innate, not holy.
If by "atheist origin" you mean we came to be without a prime mover, without a God, then indeed thats what many of us believe. Thats the whole point...if you don't believe in a God(s), then you can't possibly belief our origins were divine, that'd be hypocrisy.
But that doesn't imply anything beyond that..it doesn't at all mean that nothing matters...its worrying that you'd think so.
Also, yes morals do come from ourselves..otherwise we wouldn't exist.
@DrDopehat "Also, yes morals do come from ourselves"
If morals come from ourselves, you would have no problem if I walked into your house and stole everything, as long as I thought I was doing the right thing.
This explanation only works until someone is wronged.
What? No I would have a problem with that...I would think you were stealing from me. You are suggesting you'd only behave properly because religion tells you to. I find that an appalling suggestion and I hope you don't mean it.
Morals come from ourselves..we are born with the idea of right and wrong. We are born, so to speak, with the golden rule built in. Its part of our species..
@DrDopehat "You are suggesting you'd only behave properly because religion tells you to"
That's completely false (Matthew 19:18, Mark 10:19, etc.)
"No I would have a problem with that"
Why? If I gave you $100 dollars because I thought it was the right thing to do, you would not have a problem with that. If all truth is relative, it doesn't matter what we think, as long as we believe it. If I believe it were right to steal, you should not have a problem with this.
Why? You're really asking why? Because its stealing..I don't care that you think its right, it just means you're screwed up and don't have a proper functioning golden rule. Its not right to steal and *most* people agree with that, and we agree about that because we're born with this system built in, why do I have to repeat this?
"If we believe it were right" But we don't..its irrelevant..we don't believe that, and you don't either.
And what's so bad about stealing if, according to you, all moral truths are relative? If I gave you $100 dollars, you would not mind. What if I thought it was "wrong" to give freely to people? According to your philosophy, you would have a problem with that because I believed I was doing the wrong thing.
This sounds ridiculous, huh? This is what a world with relative morals would look like.
(Note: I do believe stealing is wrong. Doesn't everybody?)
It does not sound ridiculous...you are FORCING your perverse mock "moral relativism" onto what I said. I never said anything like what you're putting out, so I would like it Sir, if you either pay attention to what I say, or simply admit that you are only a good person because you are afraid God is going to judge you, and not because you are a good person.
Being good, not stealing and so forth, is innate..I would mind you being a thief and stop saying otherwise
But why? If all morals are relative, that means no morals are better or worse than any other morals. If I thought it was ok to steal, you should not have a problem with this, as long as I believe I am doing the right thing. By your reasoning, Hitler was moral, because he thought he was doing the right thing.
"you are afraid God is going to judge you"
Good works do not get you into Heaven. Loving and trusting God does.
You are the one who says morals are relative and don't exist. You are the one who says I should be okay with you thinking its okay to steal. You are the one who thinks Hitler was a good person.
I never claimed ANY of the things you are saying - I'm not even sure you're talking to me...Until you read what I said, and respond to what I said, I will not talk to you any further.
Morals do matter, morals do exist, morals are evolutionary, stealing is wrong..deal with that.
@DrDopehat "You are the one who says morals are relative and don't exist"
I'm saying that merely for the sake of the argument. I certainly do believe morals exist (I know stealing is wrong) and I believe all human beings, Christian or not, are subject to the same moral code.
"I never claimed ANY of the things you are saying"
My friend, you did claim that our morals are subjective, correct? What I've been trying to show is subjective morals are the same as no morals at all.
Would you like to know why I think you believe this? It is because, being created in God's image (Genesis 1:27), we all know the difference between right and wrong, and feel inclined to do what is right. "But I don't believe in God", you may say. Sure, but you can breath whether or not you believe in air, no?. Is this a "God of gaps" fallacy? Sure, but nor is it an argument for the existence of God. It's just my point of view on this subject.
That doesn't work either. If it is part of our species, that means it works. However, things that are right do not always work, and things that do work are not always right. For example, while it may be easier to tell a "little white lie", it's still wrong. Turning the other cheek hardly ever does us any good, but we know these are the right things to do.
Besides, if morals are naturally part of our species, why do we not always do the right thing?
It does work, it has worked and its still working. Developing our innate morals takes time and experience - You are born with the blueprint and pattern to do good for yourself, and by extension others - All it takes is experience and because we're so far along, the passing of knowledge from your parents to get it setup to work with the modern standard.
We do not always do the right thing because we are imperfect, we make mistakes and get influenced by bad people and things
@DrDopehat My friend, I am quite fimilar with Darwin's Theory of Evolution. With Darwin's Theory, traits that "work" are passed down to the next generation, while traits that don't are dropped (There's also genetic mutation, but it's a little hard to compare that to morals). The problem is things that are true do not always work, and things that do work are not always true. "White lies" always work, but we know they are wrong. Turning the other cheek never "works", but we know it is right.
Actually we are quite convinced that the right thing to do when wronged, is to right the wrong..turning the other cheek doesn't accomplish that. We have since grown to handle wrongdoings in a different, more modern way, than say chopping people's hands off for stealing etc.
It is not at all hard to compare this to morals..its why morals keep changing, its why our perception of right and wrong is different than 100 years ago.
@DrDopehat Besides, if you are an atheist, what point is there in doing good? I know you will not believe me, but, according to you, what we do does not matter in the grand scheme of things. Hitler's holocaust, as horrible as it was, does not directly effect anyone today, does it? Atheism provides no reason to live a moral life.
I'm not saying that all atheists are "bad" people. Not at all! I'm just saying a "good" atheist has no advantage over an "bad" atheist.
@THEEVANTHETOON You are dead wrong on your point of no reason to live a moral life. How about we have to deal with each other on a day to day basis for survival. How about, if we are assholes to someone, they in turn will be dicks to us. That turns your life into a bit of a miserable state. BUT, by being decent, you are treated that way in return for the most part. Its cause and effect, not morality that keeps us in line. We are accountable to ourselves and cant pray away our mistakes.
@WingZero75 "How about we have to deal with each other on a day to day basis for survival"
When you're dead, do you think it will matter what occured on a "day to day" basis? Besides, what point is there in donating to charity then? You'll probably never meet those people, right?
Besides, you're getting "nice" and "moral" confused. A guy can be nice yet still be immoral.
(I believe you should donate to charity. I am merely using this absurd example for the sake of the argument.)
What on earth are you talking about??? Whats the point of being good?? You are again suggesting that if you were an atheist, you wouldn't see the point in doing good..you are only good because your religion tells you to, and thats scary...
Atheism is the lack of belief in God, not the rejection of morals...there is nothing moral about religion. In fact it is the pollution of morals in many cases, you've just proved that by saying you dont see the point without a God.
You are the one who thinks being good without God is pointless, you are the one thinks stealing without God is a good idea, you are the one who thinks being a good person without God is impossible, you are the one who thinks there is no point of morals without God...You are *again* **FORCING** your mock version of atheism on me, and I reject and condemn it...
Here is the simplified explanation (Youtube isn't the best place to explain these things): Morals come from a constantly evolving system of reciprocation, kinship, free advertisement from your peers and procreation. The idea that if you do good to others, good things will come to you by extension.
This doesn't cover selfless acts, but thats where kinship comes in..doing things to save/help your own kind for their own sake.
@DrDopehat "Morals come from a constantly evolving system of reciprocation"
1) Provide for me an example of "evolving morals", please.
2) Do you agree that, with morals, we consider some things "right" even though they do not necessarily work? Why or why not?
3) Don't you agree that the inward-being is more important than our outward deeds? Why or why not? If so, how do we determine whether or not we have "good inward character"?
An example of evolving morals? Okay easy...In olden days we thought it was morally wrong for a black person and a white person to have intercourse. We were convinced by and large that it was wrong on a fundamental level.
We don't think this today..its perfectly natural.
2. You're gonna have to provide an example of what you're saying, cause I won't answer something that can be interpreted in a LOT of different ways. Give me a concrete example.
@DrDopehat "In olden days we thought it was morally wrong for a black person and a white person to have intercourse"
Is this a disagreement in "morals" or facts? In the olden days, white people agreed that they should treat fellow human-beings with respect. They just disagreed that black people were people at all.
2) "White lies" always work, but they are the wrong thing to do. Loving your enemies hardly ever works, but we know that it is the right thing to do.
"We know loving your enemy is the right thing to do"
Maybe to you, but I despise my enemies..I don't love them, and I'm not going to. It feels much more natural to me to be opposed to- and in condemnation of my enemies. Please don't speak for me in that regard. I do *not* love my enemies.
So loving your enemies is a bad thing? (Don't you agree that if something is moral, it's opposite is immoral? Don't you agree that loving your enemies and hating your enemies are opposites?) Don't you agree that you can "hate the sin but love the sinner"?
I dont know if loving your enemies is a bad thing. I consider it masochistic and acceptance of the thing that made them your enemies to begin with, of which I do not.
I personally, am of such mindset that I don't want to,or feel like loving my enemies.
What you do with or about your enemies is up to you, that won't create a gap between us. As long as you leave me out of it.Thats all I have to say about it
@DrDopehat "I consider it masochistic and acceptance of the thing that made them your enemies to begin with"
As I've previously stated, you can hate the sin, but love the sinner. If a bully is beating you up at school, obviously you are going to hate the action. However, this doesn't mean you can't love the person, correct?
3. No I don't. If your whole life you were a horrible person on the inside, but was nice to everyone, honest to everyone, loving and caring, perhaps had a family and raised your children well, and in every sense, was a good person..then it doesn't matter other than to yourself that on the inside you were evil. It didn't hurt anybody but you.
What you do inside your own head, is nobody's business but yours
@DrDopehat "If your whole life you were a horrible person on the inside, but...loving..."
Wouldn't you agree that love is an "inward trait", though? Let's look at the Pharisees in the New Testament. These people followed the Law of Moses to the letter. However, on the inside, they hated others and regarded them as "unclean". These guys had all of the outward "stuff", but not inward righteousness. Would you say the Pharisees were good people?
I don't want to talk scripture. Talking scripture only- and can only lead to someone's personal interpretation of it, and I am not interested. I've heard the phrase "You don't understand the TRUE message of the bible/passage" a billion times and nobody, especially religious people, agree 100% on what the bible says.
So you must leave me out of it...Scripture is not proof of itself, nor is anything in it moral without first being extremely immoral in many cases.
I would like you to give a reason that we should not trust the Bible?
"I already explained to you that it comes from an evolved system of reciprocation"
That doesn't explain why our morals are the same. Charles Darwin said that every organism is slightly different than any other. How come our morals aren't different?
@DrDopehat "you are the one who thinks there is no point of morals without God"
Sure, because without God, there could be no morals. Subjective morals is the same as no morals at all.
"your mock version of atheism"
Explain to me the Atheist's perspective on morals. How do we know what is right and what is wrong? Where do our morals come from? Do morals differ from person to person or culture to culture?
If you want an explanation of morals without God, and if you want an explanation of how Atheists deal with morals I'd love to tell you - But then you have to let go of your prejudice and determination on thinking it cant be done and theres no point.
You have to let go of your default reaction of "But then theres no point!" and be realistic, and accept that you are a good person, regardless of a God (or more Gods) or not. Or at least, accept that others can accept this.
@DrDopehat "accept that you are a good person, regardless of a God"
Obviously, you would consider a person such as a murderer a "bad person", and you would consider a person that gives to charity a "good person". However, what units are you using to measure this? Surely a "good person" has done some bad things in their life, while a "bad person" has done some good things. How do you determine what is "bad" and what is "good" if it is never black or white?
You determine whether someone is a good or bad person by ways of information. If on the face of it, a person is good to you, your friends, your family and those you meet..then he is good. If later you find out hes a murderer, you'll call the police and so on...I'm not sure why you're asking these hypothetical questions, cause they answer themselves.
@DrDopehat "You determine whether someone is a good or bad person by ways of information".
I once read a book called "The Book Theif". In this book, there is a character named Rudy. Rudy has a very interesting personality: one moment, he is breaking into the mayor's house to steal cookies. The next, he is giving bread to starving Jews. Now, would you call this person "good" or "bad"?
I haven't read that book and I dont know the full context of the example. You're the one who read it, so its up to you to decide that, not me.
But assuming Rudy is just stealing cookies because he can, not need..then what hes doing is wrong, simple as that. What does that make him as a person? It makes him, at the very least, a thief..which is bad. No amount of good deeds can change that. You can't bypass theft as a good thing by helping starving children.
Of course christians believe the same thing. You're part of the human species as much as I am, so naturally we share the same moral blueprint.
As far as us all being bad..No, I'm not. I haven't stolen any cookies..in fact I haven't stolen anything. I'm not a bad person, and I won't tolerate your book telling me otherwise. Such a presumptuous, revolting and disgusting thing. I reject all of it.
That may sound terribly dull to you, but you have to understand most people don't think about morals, or where they come from. Most people just do what they feel is right.
Indeed morals do vary depending on culture, but I believe thats because of culture. The morals change because you're brought up to behave a certain way, not because you're born that way. If left unspoiled I believe we, mostly, all believe in the same kind of right and wrong.
1a. Explain this "feeling" to you? I already did....Its part of that system I explained (which is short on details I know, but this is youtube) - Everyone has a natural instinct/feeling to do what they feel is right.
2a. Easy - You think worshiping is a moral act. You think going to church is a moral act, you think tithing is a moral act..I'm guessing anyway. I don't ...To me none of those have any moral value other than perhaps to exploit you.
@DrDopehat 1a) "Everyone has a natural instinct/feeling to do what they feel is right"
And where does this "natural instinct" come from? If it's part of our species, how did it become that way?
2a) "You think worshiping is a moral act"
Again, this is a disagreement in details, not morals. I think giving respect where respect is due is moral, and worshipping accomplishes this. You agree that respect should be given where it is due, but you don't agree that worship does this, correct?
I already explained to you that it comes from an evolved system of reciprocation, advertisement, procreation and kinship - all of which are innate in other species too. We're just the only species with a consciousness to talk about it and realize it ...Either you read what I write, or you tell me you're not interested, because I have absolutely no interest in repeating myself over and over.
No, don't construe morals difference as something rhetorically irrelevant. People truly believed in the idea of black&white coupling was morally wrong. You truly believe that prayer, tithing and going to church is a moral act.
That was the examples you asked for, and thats what you got. You can't just decide to call it something else. Those were and are moral differences and evolution of morals.
Again, these are differences in details, not morals. Let's use the abortion example: "Anti-abortion people think it's wrong to murder a human being. Pro-abortions don't disagree, they just don't believe an unborn child is a human being at all". In this example, the people agreed on the "morals", just not the details (whether or not an unborn child is a human).
Yeah okay nevermind this. You are going to keep saying "differences of agreement" and "differences in details" no matter what. I've given you what you want, but I can't force you to accept it.
No it isn't. What I'm saying is that we all have the same *basic* idea of right and wrong. These are usually modified or corrupted depending on where we live, how we're brought up, and our quality of life as a variable of the 2 first things.
Which is why I said..if left untouched by and large by religion, or oppression or other local factors..meaning the person is free to think for themselves..most people believe in the same kind of right and wrong
@DrDopehat 3a) "most people believe in the same kind of right and wrong"
That's my point: we all agree on what is right and what is wrong, regardless of how you were brought up. However, different cultures disagree on details, but not morals themselves.
You can have morals without believing that God gave them to you, just as you can breath whether or not you believe in air.
Your point is that we all agree on whats right or wrong..okay, so you get it, but that doesn't imply or even suggests a God...You can't just default to "God did it" out of thin air, thats a complete non sequitur. You asked me to explain how morals work without God, and I have. You asked me to explain how, as an atheist, I view morals...and I have. Don't bring God into this because there is nothing in what I've said that requires a God.
@DrDopehat "You can't just default to "God did it" out of thin air"
Nor was I trying to prove "God did it". That is a different argument.
"nobody, especially religious people, agree 100% on what the bible says"
The important thing is, however, that not a single Biblical doctrine is in doubt due to interpretations of scripture. While there are indeed parts that are difficult to understand, the Bible's message is quite clear and straightforward.
As I said, I'm not at all interested in the bible. I have a bible and I've read it cover to cover, but apparently I'm not qualified to interpret the message, and I'm always told a bunch of different reasons why, and always told a different interpretation. Not 1 agrees with the other, and if they do its pure coincidence.
As Stephen Fry once said "The idea that the church exists to disseminate the word of God, is nonsense"
And finally whats the point in being Good ? Because it feels nice to be good, because it gets you relationships with other people (which is nice too), both intimate and friendly relationships. It gets you knowledge..it gets you positive feelings when you help others...It gets you a good reputation, which feels nice too, and it gets you smiles and trust from other people, which is also very nice..thats the point.
But is this always true? Have you ever been in a situation when doing the right thing did not "feel" nice?
2) "It gets you a good reputation, which feels nice too"
If you believe morals are relative, could someone just as easily think you were doing the wrong thing when you believed you were doing the right thing?
1b) No I haven't been in a situation where doing the right thing did not feel right..you are talking dilemmas, but thats where its about lesser of two evils, or one where you are asked to sacrifice good to do good...those are up to you to figure out, not me or science behind morals..Nothing can give you the right answer about that, not even your beloved book, and if it tries, its most likely wrong..its no more qualified than you are.
@DrDopehat No I haven't been in a situation where doing the right thing did not feel right"
I said "...feel nice", not "...feel right". If you were being beaten up at school, but you refused to hit the bully back, do you agree that this would "feel" right, but would certainly not "feel" nice?
You keep saying the word "Relative", I never once used that word...count..not once...you keep saying that, I don't, so figure it out for yourself because you're asking me a question about something I never said.
@DrDopehat 2b) True, you have never said "relative". However, you implied it. But saying that we/our culture decides our morals, you are saying that there are no total truths in regards to morallity, or, in other words, that morals are relative.
@DrDopehat "That means morals are the same no matter where you go, and varies to the degree of how and where you were brought up"
I'm not sure what you mean by this, as it appears to be a logical contradiction. To me, you appear to be saying "Morals are the same, but they are also different".
Besides, as discussed before, "differences in morals" are not moral disagreements at all, but simply disagreement about the facts which our morals regard.
Its not a logical contradiction..it means that we have close to universal morals, by minor details vary from place to place depending on how you were brought up, the conditions you live in and the indoctrination you were put through.
Also your "disagreemenet of facts" rhetoric doesn't stand up, and we can keep going back and forth about this for ages, but you asked for moral evolution and differences and whats what you got. Not my fault you don't accept it. Lets drop it.
This is one of the biggest reasons Christianity absolutely must be eradicated for humanity to move forward. Only the mentally ill, insane, schizophrenic brainwashed could ever believe ALL people are "bad" people.
Think about it. They tell their children this- that they are sub-beings. Lesser beings. That there is a magical Ultimate King of Humans floating in the sky- some less literal but still the same idea.
@i3rucei3ruce Bad people? this is exactly why atheist can't solve the problem of what Christianity is, Let's say we all have an Ego, Ego is the accumulation of all our desires, memories, Pain and suffering. Ego is what we know us to be, our Ego is our reality. We guide our actions and reactions according to this Ego. But in reality, Ego is a false accumulation of how we have interpreted life. there's NO, Bad people, only ignorant people of their true self. k: )
You are putting words in my mouth and I don't like it. You want atheism to be void of morals, you want me to marginalize Hitler and the holocaust, you want me to have no moral life - But you're wrong on all counts..
If you cant think for yourself and be a good person for your own and everyone else's sake, but only for God's sake, thats your handicap and nothing to do with me or atheism...Atheism has nothing to do with morals, morals are natural to our species.
@DrDopehat "Hitler was a roman catholic and believed he was doing God's work"
Hitler wasn't Christian. Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than dressing up as a bear makes you one. First, a Christian will do what Jesus told us to do (John 14). Second, Htiler merely used religious beliefs to corrupt people. He merely said He was doing what He did for God because He knew it would get people to follow Him.
Hitler was a roman catholic, the oath you swore to him was in a religious manner where you sword in the name of almighty God, on the belt buckle of every german troop back then it said "God on our side", Hitler wrote in "mein kampf" about how he was doing God's work in exterminating the jews for their deicide, and the Catholic Church (the vatican) celebrated Hitler's birthday every year until his death, and had control over german education.
@DrDopehat "and the Catholic Church (the vatican) celebrated Hitler's birthday every year until his death"
That's because Germany and Italy formed an alliance.
Besides, so what if a few "Christians" behaved badly? We've all done bad things. Perhaps we sould concentrate on being good people rather than criticizng others for the very things we do ourselves.
"a few christians" ? This was the *ENTIRE* Catholic church ..the officials of that religion, all of them, supporting the Nazi party and Hitler. "We've all done bad things"..I'm sorry but I won't be compared to people who supported Hitler..not happening. I reject your insinuation.
We have all the evidence in the world to show that what Hitler did was religious inspired, and that the catholic church supported him.
Mein Kampf and was steeped in religion and mysticism, hardly an atheist. The religious are constantly using this old red herring argument to divert attention away from the fact that hundreds of millions have died or live in abject misery due to "gods servants" and their actions (see crusades, the spreading of hiv due to catholic teaching condoms are evil, banning of stem cell research etc etc etc. The time is now to cast off ancient superstition!
Indeed sir, and it doesn't even stop there. What about the LRA (Lords Resistance Army) that kidnaps and employs children as an armed force. What about the cover up of child rape done by the catholic church and covered up by them too who are more worried about the image of the catholic church than they are about the victims.
There is a lot to be said but the very best thing to do, in my opinion, is to openly oppose religion..we're better than this.
@DrDopehat (cont.) You may say "Not every atheist believes in eugenics". That's true, but not every Christian (in fact, very few) believes we have a right to hate non-Christians (Jesus makes it quite clear non-Christians are loved too).
However, let's each focus on living good lives, and not criticize each other for the very things we do ourselves.
Please don't misunderstand me Sir, I do not actively seek out Christians or any other religious people, to tell them that I think they're wrong and all that stuff. I am perfectly happy to let religious people be religious - My problem arises where religion can no longer be kept private and is attempted imposed into schools, politics, science and used as excuses to commit horrible crimes.
Also I disagree with most of what your first post said :)
@DrDopehat Even I will agree that church and state should be kept seperate. The church would get corrupted.
People should not be using Christianity as an excuse. Jesus taught people to turn the other cheek, love others, etc. He did not support violence, at all (when He was arrested, He told His disciples to put their swords away).
Christianity isn't anti-science. Were the creation story completely disproved tomorrow, Christianity would still stand.
(3rd post) As for criticism etc. I'm sorry but I will, and have every right to, criticize religion..especially if that religion seeks to impose itself on my life, oppress women, threaten free speech, commit horrible acts *in the name of religion* and get away with it, corrupts science, advocates prejudice and endorses slavery.
If you keep your religion to yourself, I have no beef with you...but the religions themselves and the people openly representing them, I do oppose.
@DrDopehat "commit horrible acts *in the name of religion*"
People abuse religion all the time. Jesus makes it clear "fighting for him" is still a sin. He told us to turn the other cheek, and that merely hating someone is just as bad as murdering them. People who abuse Christ's teachings are not Christians at all (John 14).
People do horrible acts in the name of religion, not because of the fundamentalists of religion, but because of the fundamentals of religion. if the fundamentals of your religion isn't violent, then neither are the fundamentalists...There is simply no way around that.
If at the core, your religion is peaceful and loving..then violence won't happen in the name of it. Such isn't the case though.
You sir, are a good person - I can tell, but not because of religion.
@DrDopehat "If at the core, your religion is peaceful and loving..then violence won't happen in the name of it"
Well, unfortunately, people abuse religion. People will take one or two verses out of context and get people to believe they mean that we should hurt others who do not share the same beliefs.
who is the victim opposite of hitchens in these videos? i cant find any names but would love to hear another delivery of finely starched asses to an inferior intellect.
@nthomas87 HAHAHAHAHA, god damn that's funny, i'm at work working a 16 hour shift watching some hitch and began falling asleep until i read your post....now i can't stop laughing, thanx for waking me up....oh yeah, hitch is the man!
Notice the people that do not clap. Of course i'm not saying they are the only ones that reject it in the room, but you can tell most of those people(not clapping) don't buy it. So, after that brilliant improvisation of a response, and spot on reasoning they still somehow reject it. I don't get it. What happens in their heads? Were they refusing to listen? What in the fuck kind of shit do they have to say to themselves? In general, the people that listen to hitch still refuse... i don't get it.
@snipeshow920 EXACTLY what I was thinking....exactly! I'm shaking my head, thinking, "After THIS, how can they just go about their business as usual?" It's unfathomable.
its because the truth is too painful for most people to admit. after nazi germany had *gone* many people still thought that hitler was the best thing that ever happened to the earth. a lot of people dont accept the armenian genocide occured. i happen to know some cubans that think castro is the best thing that happened to cuba (can you freaking beleive that).for a person to change beleifs after having them for decades is tantamount to telling them that they should be a new person
It's really not true though, is it? It's a minority of Christians who hope for an end time and to pass them off as 'not really believers' is basically a load of bollocks.
I must say that Hitchens puts human intelligence in a very interesting perspective...usually the smartest amongst us that are well known are scientists. Gives me hope for the world, lol
I worry that I'm going to force material like this on my future children but I feel that it would only be right to ensure that they are made aware of this man and the many others who are doing their bit for humanity and evolutionary progress. essential viewing/listening.
@CaffeinatedThinking How is that not enough evidence to believe the Bible is from God and not from man. The prophets clearly were right in everything they said, how can you still dought that they are not speaking of their own imagination but of God's word. They predicted the exact location and doings of the harlot church 500 years before it took root. If you won’t believe in God after this than you won’t believe even if someone rises from the dead in front of you.
@lacatuscovalschi "They predicted the exact location and doings of the harlot church 500 years before it took root" that prediction would be pretty easy to fulfill for the sake of fulfilling a prediction.
@tjv323 not it wouldnt because with that prediction you have to fullfill the others. which is take over the kings of the earth kill the saints live in luxury. Now nobody can delebratley fullfill all these things unless God allowed it and God predicted it and told us before it happend
Well done Christopher ,and fuck all them stupid delusion Christians
popatapataioo 1 week ago
The Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) are essentially the same : schizophrenic.
We bring love and peace ... by telling you everyone else is an enemy to be avoided, hated and even killed when ordered.
We bring hope ... by telling you the world is hopeless and doomed.
We bring truth ... by telling you the most twisted lies you've ever heard.
We bring knowledge ... by telling you 'God' is the answer to every question you shouldn't ask.
TheHigherVoltage 1 month ago
If i had been asked that question, I might say that I spend my time trying to convince people there is no god, or that man's reasoning for god isn't reasonable because the belief in god leads to self-indulgence in ignorance, violence, hatred, homophobia, sexism, unjust condemnation of others, war, brain washing, and poor decision making. I think the reason why he tries his hand like so is a very clear one.
jdub94ful 1 month ago
As described here. His was a life well spent.
chodaboy51500 1 month ago
He sounds like he's delivering a sermon. Wow, I heard Americans don't understand irony, but this is something else.
SuperQweertyuiop 1 month ago
The King is dead! Long live the King!
R.I.P. Christopher Hitchens
Lockjaw95 2 months ago in playlist Favorite videos 8
totally agree with hitchens, religion is a social poison, it ruins lives, instills hatred, and its kept alive by the donations of those it draws in.
DemoraX 3 months ago
@theeventhetoon No one says we are all "bad people" show me in the bible where it says that. But we ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of GOD though. Therefore the only thing we have comming to us is DEATH. We are not bad people, WE ARE DEAD PEOPLE!!!! ETHICAL TECHERS TRY TO MAKE BAD PEOPLE GOOD! JESUS CAME TO MAKE DEAD PEOPLE LIVE! +++
hevy99 3 months ago
People have been forced to misunderstand some statements of Karl Marx. Actually Marx didn't compere religion to opium, but painkiller (analgesic). That's very useful to remember coz Marx mentioned that people turn to religion because nobody here has replied their cry . That's the main critic people can ever give. Religion is the consequence of bad society organized by establishment.
So - don't blame religion, blame political and economical establishment.
frankandersson76 3 months ago
Hard core members of religions will not even slightly budge with the reasoning of intelectuals like Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris et al. On the contrary, they'll cling even harder to their irrational convictions. The benefice is for those who can stiil snap out of it.
cuevarap 4 months ago
So the next time Hitchens throws out a challenge,just be quiet lmfao.
Go the Hitch.
Hope the man gets better.
naybobdenod 4 months ago
Beautifully said, fuck religon. Fuck it hard in the ass.
JayDee98765 5 months ago
@JayDee98765 not quite so eloquent... If you aspire to being a public speaker I'd work on your delivery. XD
MrLittletomdj 5 months ago
@MrLittletomdj Its the damn hitchens lol he inspires passion! and round about 3am in the morning eloquence has gone out the window! :D
JayDee98765 5 months ago
Israel is a stolen country based on the belief that 'God' gave the land of Palestine to them. If there is no 'God' then give the Palestinians back their land you thieves. Christians and Muslims are not half as dangerous as the Jews are. Only a small percentage of Christians and Muslims think the should use violence to impose their will on the world but all Zionists think killing non-Jews or 'Goym' (cattle) is no more than killing lice.
guydecervens 5 months ago
Every time Christopher destroys an argument, the world is a much better place.
Thumbs up if you agree
moviedude120796 5 months ago 13
One of the greatest thinkers of our time. Bar non.
Zed1967 6 months ago 3
You could tell by the man's body language, he didn't understand and was upset on a very childish level. I'm not sure what he was doing in the presence of Hitchens.
Llynok 6 months ago 3
kicks bitchens ass
jonniec7 7 months ago
5:59
^^^ where we see how many of the audience are intelligent and clapping, and how many have their arms folded or legs crossed and ears shut, refusing to hear a single word that Hitchens has just said.
Straddllw 7 months ago
I find it quite interesting that this clip has only 2 dislikes. It actually means that people that would dislike what he has to say avoid hearing what he has to say and are perhaps happy to be ignorant and stay in their 'safe' bubble!
peterfileproductions 9 months ago
@Lodine66 Nihilist.
wowbringer 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DrDopehat
(3rd post)
That may sound terribly dull to you, but you have to understand most people don't think about morals, or where they come from. Most people just do what they feel is right.
Indeed morals do vary depending on culture, but I believe thats because of culture. The morals change because you're brought up to behave a certain way, not because you're born that way. If left unspoiled I believe we, mostly, all believe in the same kind of right and wrong.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
He got hitchslapped.
SourcesAreEverything 10 months ago
If you say that you are doing something moral because your holy book says to, then what is so wrong with flying a plane into a building if your book says so? Morals are not eternal, and they are constantly evolving.
railroadtrash09 10 months ago
@railroadtrash09 "because your holy book says to"
Nope, because we can observe it around us. True: people commit horrible acts everyday. That does not make what they do right. Differences in morals are not conflicting morals at all, just differences in the details (both anti-abortion and pro-abortion people agree that murdering people is wrong. They just disagree on if an unborn baby is a person, for example). Morals do not change over time, but society conforms to them differently.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON Ok.... Tell me what details conform to your morals that allow the ownership of slaves??? Most of the founding fathers and most holy books somehow agree with it. Abortion and murder are still touchy subjects because there are so many variables. Either way just because you think something is right today doesn't mean you will in twenty years from now.. Your morals will change as you educate yourself. Besides most people agree that murder is ok during war.
railroadtrash09 10 months ago
who, what made god
must have been one hell of a big bang
paranoidnutter 10 months ago
@paranoidnutter God did not need to be created, tis why writings such as Thomas Aquinas call Him the "uncaused cause".
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON which again goes to show just how insular and ignorant christians are, twat
paranoidnutter 10 months ago
@paranoidnutter My friend, Christianity is a completely historical and logical faith.
1) Christianity is not anti-science. Were the creation story in Genesis 1 completely disproved tomorrow, Christianity would still stand.
2) Christianity is not a set of rules or rituals. It's about loving others.
3) Extra-biblical non-Christian writings confirm much of the Gospels
4) Of the 500+ prophecies in the Bible, as far as we know, not a single one has been incorrect.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
(4th post) As for the prophecies...Several of those were carried out *so that the prophecy might be fulfilled*..meaning it didn't happen by itself, they actively sought to carry out the details of the prophecies...theres nothing magical or miraculous about that.
And really? 500+ ? I have a massive bible right here, and there aren't that many prophecies...and it isn't at all about love. I suggest you read the bible again, like I have.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "Several of those were carried out *so that the prophecy might be fulfilled*"
True, but not all. Some of the prophecies, such as being born to a virgin, being preceded by a messenger, being sold for 30 pieces of silver, etc. Jesus had no control over, unless, of course, He was divine.
Besides, a majority of prophecies do not regard the Messiah.
"And really? 500+ ?"
To quote you: "I suggest you read the bible again..."
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON Yes, the men who wrote the bible and had access to the old testament had no trouble writing a fiction that is supported by a previous fiction. Anyone can read a "prophesy" that was made 3000 years ago, then write a story about someone who fulfilled that prophesy 2000 years ago. These isn't a single shred of credible evidence supporting anything jesus was supposed to have done and many historical documents directly contradict events the bible claim took place.Take the blinders off
250garbear 2 months ago
@DrDopehat "it isn't at all about love".
The Bible does not approve of all of its accounts. In Judges, the most bloody book in the Bible, numerous passages troughout the Old Testament make it clear God left Israel during this time.
Christianity is about being a good person and trusting God, both of which require a loving heart.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON Any book that claims the world is 6-10 thousand years old and that 2 of each of the millions of species of animals were placed on an ark that wouldn't have held a thousand is as anti-science as you can get. God gives orders for the murder of babies (Deut. 3) Allows the selling of your daughter as a sex slave (Exodus 21:1-11) as well as instructions on how to beat slaves ( Ex.21:20-21 Ex.21:26-27) This isn't the perfect word of the creator, its a hateful manifesto full of murder!
250garbear 2 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
What a pity that Hitchens is so blind that he cannot look at the actions of Jesus of Nazareth and admire a man who, 2000 years ago, offered friendship to areas outside his comfort zone. A pity that Hitchens refuses to read the Gospel's healing stories as signs of hope for those in despair. What an ignorant man to overlook the Church's huge healthcare systems; he accuses religion being antithetical to good health. A well-spoken man who can craft words, but an ignorant man nonetheless.
bbfrain 11 months ago
@bbfrain What a pity you did not hear what he said... at which point did Hitchens refused to look at the actions of Jesus or withdraw his admiration for him?
SexxyB3ast 11 months ago
@bbfrain
That sounds to me like "Of course you had to bring up *that* biblical story thats evil, and *that* event which was done by religion that was monstrous and barbaric, and *that* part of the holy texts that deals in horrendous deeds and slaughter...you never mention that Jesus was a good guy and that we have healthcare benefits"
Sir, isn't it rather a pity that your mind has been dulled and destroyed to ignore the inherent dictatorship and evil that resides in all religion ?
DrDopehat 11 months ago
@DrDopehat My friend, Christianity is a religion about love. Jesus makes it quite clear Christians are to live humble, loving, selfless, and forgiving lives. You are correct, some Christians have done evil things, but they shouldn't have. One who really loves Christ will not abuse His teachings.
Atheists aren't innocent either, my friend: look up eugenics, the belief that certain races do not deserve to live because they could hinder the evolution of the Human species.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
As for eugenics, I know perfectly well what that is...What you said is simply a false statement. There is not a single atheist that believes in- and supports eugenics. Not 1 ...And if somehow you can find 1 in some obscure part of the world, I promise you that person doesn't support eugenics *BECAUSE* hes an atheist.
You might mention Hitler about Eugenics, but I'm sorry...Hitler was a roman catholic and believed he was doing God's work. He wasn't an atheist.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat " There is not a single atheist that believes in- and supports eugenics"
Not anymore, yes, but, especially in the 1920's, groups such as the Ku Klux Klan supported it.
" I promise you that person doesn't support eugenics *BECAUSE* hes an atheist"
A Christian should not support eugenics either. Besides, why shouldn't an atheist support eugenics? According to atheistic beliefs, there is no reason for doing good because eventually, according to you, nothing we do will matter.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
The Ku Klux Klan was VERY religious....There was nothing atheist about them. At all..you would be hard pressed to find *anyone* to tell you that they were atheist. You are simply wrong.
And there is no such thing as "Atheistic beliefs"..I don't know where you get this from. There is no rulebook or scripture of atheism..there is no common held beliefs or agreements between atheists. All it means is we don't believe in God(s)..thats all. Also, morals are innate, not holy.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat " "Atheistic beliefs"..I don't know where you get this from"
It's a belief of atheist origin. Does that mean all atheists believe it? No, but some do.
How would you describe "atheism"? How would you describe "religion"?
"Also, morals are innate, not holy"
Our morals are objective. They do not come from ourselves, nor our cultures, but we each have intuitive knowledge of right and wrong.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
If by "atheist origin" you mean we came to be without a prime mover, without a God, then indeed thats what many of us believe. Thats the whole point...if you don't believe in a God(s), then you can't possibly belief our origins were divine, that'd be hypocrisy.
But that doesn't imply anything beyond that..it doesn't at all mean that nothing matters...its worrying that you'd think so.
Also, yes morals do come from ourselves..otherwise we wouldn't exist.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "Also, yes morals do come from ourselves"
If morals come from ourselves, you would have no problem if I walked into your house and stole everything, as long as I thought I was doing the right thing.
This explanation only works until someone is wronged.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
What? No I would have a problem with that...I would think you were stealing from me. You are suggesting you'd only behave properly because religion tells you to. I find that an appalling suggestion and I hope you don't mean it.
Morals come from ourselves..we are born with the idea of right and wrong. We are born, so to speak, with the golden rule built in. Its part of our species..
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "You are suggesting you'd only behave properly because religion tells you to"
That's completely false (Matthew 19:18, Mark 10:19, etc.)
"No I would have a problem with that"
Why? If I gave you $100 dollars because I thought it was the right thing to do, you would not have a problem with that. If all truth is relative, it doesn't matter what we think, as long as we believe it. If I believe it were right to steal, you should not have a problem with this.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
Why? You're really asking why? Because its stealing..I don't care that you think its right, it just means you're screwed up and don't have a proper functioning golden rule. Its not right to steal and *most* people agree with that, and we agree about that because we're born with this system built in, why do I have to repeat this?
"If we believe it were right" But we don't..its irrelevant..we don't believe that, and you don't either.
Morals aren't divine, they're natural.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "Because its stealing"
And what's so bad about stealing if, according to you, all moral truths are relative? If I gave you $100 dollars, you would not mind. What if I thought it was "wrong" to give freely to people? According to your philosophy, you would have a problem with that because I believed I was doing the wrong thing.
This sounds ridiculous, huh? This is what a world with relative morals would look like.
(Note: I do believe stealing is wrong. Doesn't everybody?)
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
It does not sound ridiculous...you are FORCING your perverse mock "moral relativism" onto what I said. I never said anything like what you're putting out, so I would like it Sir, if you either pay attention to what I say, or simply admit that you are only a good person because you are afraid God is going to judge you, and not because you are a good person.
Being good, not stealing and so forth, is innate..I would mind you being a thief and stop saying otherwise
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "I would mind you being a thief"
But why? If all morals are relative, that means no morals are better or worse than any other morals. If I thought it was ok to steal, you should not have a problem with this, as long as I believe I am doing the right thing. By your reasoning, Hitler was moral, because he thought he was doing the right thing.
"you are afraid God is going to judge you"
Good works do not get you into Heaven. Loving and trusting God does.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
You are the one who says morals are relative and don't exist. You are the one who says I should be okay with you thinking its okay to steal. You are the one who thinks Hitler was a good person.
I never claimed ANY of the things you are saying - I'm not even sure you're talking to me...Until you read what I said, and respond to what I said, I will not talk to you any further.
Morals do matter, morals do exist, morals are evolutionary, stealing is wrong..deal with that.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "You are the one who says morals are relative and don't exist"
I'm saying that merely for the sake of the argument. I certainly do believe morals exist (I know stealing is wrong) and I believe all human beings, Christian or not, are subject to the same moral code.
"I never claimed ANY of the things you are saying"
My friend, you did claim that our morals are subjective, correct? What I've been trying to show is subjective morals are the same as no morals at all.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "Morals do matter"
Would you like to know why I think you believe this? It is because, being created in God's image (Genesis 1:27), we all know the difference between right and wrong, and feel inclined to do what is right. "But I don't believe in God", you may say. Sure, but you can breath whether or not you believe in air, no?. Is this a "God of gaps" fallacy? Sure, but nor is it an argument for the existence of God. It's just my point of view on this subject.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "Its part of our species"
That doesn't work either. If it is part of our species, that means it works. However, things that are right do not always work, and things that do work are not always right. For example, while it may be easier to tell a "little white lie", it's still wrong. Turning the other cheek hardly ever does us any good, but we know these are the right things to do.
Besides, if morals are naturally part of our species, why do we not always do the right thing?
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
It does work, it has worked and its still working. Developing our innate morals takes time and experience - You are born with the blueprint and pattern to do good for yourself, and by extension others - All it takes is experience and because we're so far along, the passing of knowledge from your parents to get it setup to work with the modern standard.
We do not always do the right thing because we are imperfect, we make mistakes and get influenced by bad people and things
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat My friend, I am quite fimilar with Darwin's Theory of Evolution. With Darwin's Theory, traits that "work" are passed down to the next generation, while traits that don't are dropped (There's also genetic mutation, but it's a little hard to compare that to morals). The problem is things that are true do not always work, and things that do work are not always true. "White lies" always work, but we know they are wrong. Turning the other cheek never "works", but we know it is right.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
Actually we are quite convinced that the right thing to do when wronged, is to right the wrong..turning the other cheek doesn't accomplish that. We have since grown to handle wrongdoings in a different, more modern way, than say chopping people's hands off for stealing etc.
It is not at all hard to compare this to morals..its why morals keep changing, its why our perception of right and wrong is different than 100 years ago.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "turning the other cheek doesn't accomplish that"
Gandhi "turned the other cheek". So did Martin Luther King Jr. They could have built an army, it would have been quicker, but they didn't.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@DrDopehat Besides, if you are an atheist, what point is there in doing good? I know you will not believe me, but, according to you, what we do does not matter in the grand scheme of things. Hitler's holocaust, as horrible as it was, does not directly effect anyone today, does it? Atheism provides no reason to live a moral life.
I'm not saying that all atheists are "bad" people. Not at all! I'm just saying a "good" atheist has no advantage over an "bad" atheist.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON You are dead wrong on your point of no reason to live a moral life. How about we have to deal with each other on a day to day basis for survival. How about, if we are assholes to someone, they in turn will be dicks to us. That turns your life into a bit of a miserable state. BUT, by being decent, you are treated that way in return for the most part. Its cause and effect, not morality that keeps us in line. We are accountable to ourselves and cant pray away our mistakes.
WingZero75 10 months ago
@WingZero75 "How about we have to deal with each other on a day to day basis for survival"
When you're dead, do you think it will matter what occured on a "day to day" basis? Besides, what point is there in donating to charity then? You'll probably never meet those people, right?
Besides, you're getting "nice" and "moral" confused. A guy can be nice yet still be immoral.
(I believe you should donate to charity. I am merely using this absurd example for the sake of the argument.)
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
What on earth are you talking about??? Whats the point of being good?? You are again suggesting that if you were an atheist, you wouldn't see the point in doing good..you are only good because your religion tells you to, and thats scary...
Atheism is the lack of belief in God, not the rejection of morals...there is nothing moral about religion. In fact it is the pollution of morals in many cases, you've just proved that by saying you dont see the point without a God.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "You are again suggesting that if you were an atheist, you wouldn't see the point in doing good"
So explain to me the point of doing good from an Atheist's point of view if eventually, everything you do will not even matter?
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
You are the one who thinks being good without God is pointless, you are the one thinks stealing without God is a good idea, you are the one who thinks being a good person without God is impossible, you are the one who thinks there is no point of morals without God...You are *again* **FORCING** your mock version of atheism on me, and I reject and condemn it...
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "You are the one who thinks being good without God is pointless"
Sure, but I do believe that without God, there would be no morals.
"you are the one thinks stealing without God is a good idea"
Again, I merely used this absurd example for the sake of the argument.
"you are the one who thinks being a good person without God is impossible"
I do believe atheist can be good and moral people. What I am saying is there is no point to this, however.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
Here is the simplified explanation (Youtube isn't the best place to explain these things): Morals come from a constantly evolving system of reciprocation, kinship, free advertisement from your peers and procreation. The idea that if you do good to others, good things will come to you by extension.
This doesn't cover selfless acts, but thats where kinship comes in..doing things to save/help your own kind for their own sake.
The point is co-existence and progression.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "Morals come from a constantly evolving system of reciprocation"
1) Provide for me an example of "evolving morals", please.
2) Do you agree that, with morals, we consider some things "right" even though they do not necessarily work? Why or why not?
3) Don't you agree that the inward-being is more important than our outward deeds? Why or why not? If so, how do we determine whether or not we have "good inward character"?
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
An example of evolving morals? Okay easy...In olden days we thought it was morally wrong for a black person and a white person to have intercourse. We were convinced by and large that it was wrong on a fundamental level.
We don't think this today..its perfectly natural.
2. You're gonna have to provide an example of what you're saying, cause I won't answer something that can be interpreted in a LOT of different ways. Give me a concrete example.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "In olden days we thought it was morally wrong for a black person and a white person to have intercourse"
Is this a disagreement in "morals" or facts? In the olden days, white people agreed that they should treat fellow human-beings with respect. They just disagreed that black people were people at all.
2) "White lies" always work, but they are the wrong thing to do. Loving your enemies hardly ever works, but we know that it is the right thing to do.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
"We know loving your enemy is the right thing to do"
Maybe to you, but I despise my enemies..I don't love them, and I'm not going to. It feels much more natural to me to be opposed to- and in condemnation of my enemies. Please don't speak for me in that regard. I do *not* love my enemies.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat " I do *not* love my enemies"
So loving your enemies is a bad thing? (Don't you agree that if something is moral, it's opposite is immoral? Don't you agree that loving your enemies and hating your enemies are opposites?) Don't you agree that you can "hate the sin but love the sinner"?
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
I dont know if loving your enemies is a bad thing. I consider it masochistic and acceptance of the thing that made them your enemies to begin with, of which I do not.
I personally, am of such mindset that I don't want to,or feel like loving my enemies.
What you do with or about your enemies is up to you, that won't create a gap between us. As long as you leave me out of it.Thats all I have to say about it
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "I consider it masochistic and acceptance of the thing that made them your enemies to begin with"
As I've previously stated, you can hate the sin, but love the sinner. If a bully is beating you up at school, obviously you are going to hate the action. However, this doesn't mean you can't love the person, correct?
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON If a bully beats you up in school, go get Karate lessons and beat seven kinds of crap out of the little piece of shit.
Everybody should try to avoid making enemies, but for those that have made themselves your enemies: Kick em where it hurts.
TomFynn 7 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
(cont)
3. No I don't. If your whole life you were a horrible person on the inside, but was nice to everyone, honest to everyone, loving and caring, perhaps had a family and raised your children well, and in every sense, was a good person..then it doesn't matter other than to yourself that on the inside you were evil. It didn't hurt anybody but you.
What you do inside your own head, is nobody's business but yours
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "If your whole life you were a horrible person on the inside, but...loving..."
Wouldn't you agree that love is an "inward trait", though? Let's look at the Pharisees in the New Testament. These people followed the Law of Moses to the letter. However, on the inside, they hated others and regarded them as "unclean". These guys had all of the outward "stuff", but not inward righteousness. Would you say the Pharisees were good people?
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
I don't want to talk scripture. Talking scripture only- and can only lead to someone's personal interpretation of it, and I am not interested. I've heard the phrase "You don't understand the TRUE message of the bible/passage" a billion times and nobody, especially religious people, agree 100% on what the bible says.
So you must leave me out of it...Scripture is not proof of itself, nor is anything in it moral without first being extremely immoral in many cases.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "Scripture is not proof of itself"
I would like you to give a reason that we should not trust the Bible?
"I already explained to you that it comes from an evolved system of reciprocation"
That doesn't explain why our morals are the same. Charles Darwin said that every organism is slightly different than any other. How come our morals aren't different?
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "you are the one who thinks there is no point of morals without God"
Sure, because without God, there could be no morals. Subjective morals is the same as no morals at all.
"your mock version of atheism"
Explain to me the Atheist's perspective on morals. How do we know what is right and what is wrong? Where do our morals come from? Do morals differ from person to person or culture to culture?
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
If you want an explanation of morals without God, and if you want an explanation of how Atheists deal with morals I'd love to tell you - But then you have to let go of your prejudice and determination on thinking it cant be done and theres no point.
You have to let go of your default reaction of "But then theres no point!" and be realistic, and accept that you are a good person, regardless of a God (or more Gods) or not. Or at least, accept that others can accept this.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "accept that you are a good person, regardless of a God"
Obviously, you would consider a person such as a murderer a "bad person", and you would consider a person that gives to charity a "good person". However, what units are you using to measure this? Surely a "good person" has done some bad things in their life, while a "bad person" has done some good things. How do you determine what is "bad" and what is "good" if it is never black or white?
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
You determine whether someone is a good or bad person by ways of information. If on the face of it, a person is good to you, your friends, your family and those you meet..then he is good. If later you find out hes a murderer, you'll call the police and so on...I'm not sure why you're asking these hypothetical questions, cause they answer themselves.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "You determine whether someone is a good or bad person by ways of information".
I once read a book called "The Book Theif". In this book, there is a character named Rudy. Rudy has a very interesting personality: one moment, he is breaking into the mayor's house to steal cookies. The next, he is giving bread to starving Jews. Now, would you call this person "good" or "bad"?
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
I haven't read that book and I dont know the full context of the example. You're the one who read it, so its up to you to decide that, not me.
But assuming Rudy is just stealing cookies because he can, not need..then what hes doing is wrong, simple as that. What does that make him as a person? It makes him, at the very least, a thief..which is bad. No amount of good deeds can change that. You can't bypass theft as a good thing by helping starving children.
What do you think?
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "No amount of good deeds can change that"
Christians believe that exact same thing; we have all done bad things and no amount of good deeds can change that.
"What do you think?"
I think Rudy was a "bad" person (as we all are).
Yes, Rudy was just stealing cookies because he felt like it.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
Of course christians believe the same thing. You're part of the human species as much as I am, so naturally we share the same moral blueprint.
As far as us all being bad..No, I'm not. I haven't stolen any cookies..in fact I haven't stolen anything. I'm not a bad person, and I won't tolerate your book telling me otherwise. Such a presumptuous, revolting and disgusting thing. I reject all of it.
DrDopehat 10 months ago 3
@THEEVANTHETOON
(3rd post)
That may sound terribly dull to you, but you have to understand most people don't think about morals, or where they come from. Most people just do what they feel is right.
Indeed morals do vary depending on culture, but I believe thats because of culture. The morals change because you're brought up to behave a certain way, not because you're born that way. If left unspoiled I believe we, mostly, all believe in the same kind of right and wrong.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat
1) "Most people just do what they feel is right"
Explain this "feeling" to me.
2) "morals do vary depending on culture"
Provide for me an example of different morals in different cultures.
3)"all believe in the same kind of right and wrong"
Isn't this the same thing as objective morals? Please explain.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
1a. Explain this "feeling" to you? I already did....Its part of that system I explained (which is short on details I know, but this is youtube) - Everyone has a natural instinct/feeling to do what they feel is right.
2a. Easy - You think worshiping is a moral act. You think going to church is a moral act, you think tithing is a moral act..I'm guessing anyway. I don't ...To me none of those have any moral value other than perhaps to exploit you.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat 1a) "Everyone has a natural instinct/feeling to do what they feel is right"
And where does this "natural instinct" come from? If it's part of our species, how did it become that way?
2a) "You think worshiping is a moral act"
Again, this is a disagreement in details, not morals. I think giving respect where respect is due is moral, and worshipping accomplishes this. You agree that respect should be given where it is due, but you don't agree that worship does this, correct?
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
"How did it become that way"
I already explained to you that it comes from an evolved system of reciprocation, advertisement, procreation and kinship - all of which are innate in other species too. We're just the only species with a consciousness to talk about it and realize it ...Either you read what I write, or you tell me you're not interested, because I have absolutely no interest in repeating myself over and over.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
"Disagreement of details"
No, don't construe morals difference as something rhetorically irrelevant. People truly believed in the idea of black&white coupling was morally wrong. You truly believe that prayer, tithing and going to church is a moral act.
That was the examples you asked for, and thats what you got. You can't just decide to call it something else. Those were and are moral differences and evolution of morals.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "Those were and are moral differences"
Again, these are differences in details, not morals. Let's use the abortion example: "Anti-abortion people think it's wrong to murder a human being. Pro-abortions don't disagree, they just don't believe an unborn child is a human being at all". In this example, the people agreed on the "morals", just not the details (whether or not an unborn child is a human).
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
Yeah okay nevermind this. You are going to keep saying "differences of agreement" and "differences in details" no matter what. I've given you what you want, but I can't force you to accept it.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
(cont)
3a)
No it isn't. What I'm saying is that we all have the same *basic* idea of right and wrong. These are usually modified or corrupted depending on where we live, how we're brought up, and our quality of life as a variable of the 2 first things.
Which is why I said..if left untouched by and large by religion, or oppression or other local factors..meaning the person is free to think for themselves..most people believe in the same kind of right and wrong
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat 3a) "most people believe in the same kind of right and wrong"
That's my point: we all agree on what is right and what is wrong, regardless of how you were brought up. However, different cultures disagree on details, but not morals themselves.
You can have morals without believing that God gave them to you, just as you can breath whether or not you believe in air.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
Your point is that we all agree on whats right or wrong..okay, so you get it, but that doesn't imply or even suggests a God...You can't just default to "God did it" out of thin air, thats a complete non sequitur. You asked me to explain how morals work without God, and I have. You asked me to explain how, as an atheist, I view morals...and I have. Don't bring God into this because there is nothing in what I've said that requires a God.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "You can't just default to "God did it" out of thin air"
Nor was I trying to prove "God did it". That is a different argument.
"nobody, especially religious people, agree 100% on what the bible says"
The important thing is, however, that not a single Biblical doctrine is in doubt due to interpretations of scripture. While there are indeed parts that are difficult to understand, the Bible's message is quite clear and straightforward.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
As I said, I'm not at all interested in the bible. I have a bible and I've read it cover to cover, but apparently I'm not qualified to interpret the message, and I'm always told a bunch of different reasons why, and always told a different interpretation. Not 1 agrees with the other, and if they do its pure coincidence.
As Stephen Fry once said "The idea that the church exists to disseminate the word of God, is nonsense"
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
And finally whats the point in being Good ? Because it feels nice to be good, because it gets you relationships with other people (which is nice too), both intimate and friendly relationships. It gets you knowledge..it gets you positive feelings when you help others...It gets you a good reputation, which feels nice too, and it gets you smiles and trust from other people, which is also very nice..thats the point.
Working together, living together etc. :)
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat
1)"Because it feels nice to be good"
But is this always true? Have you ever been in a situation when doing the right thing did not "feel" nice?
2) "It gets you a good reputation, which feels nice too"
If you believe morals are relative, could someone just as easily think you were doing the wrong thing when you believed you were doing the right thing?
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
1b) No I haven't been in a situation where doing the right thing did not feel right..you are talking dilemmas, but thats where its about lesser of two evils, or one where you are asked to sacrifice good to do good...those are up to you to figure out, not me or science behind morals..Nothing can give you the right answer about that, not even your beloved book, and if it tries, its most likely wrong..its no more qualified than you are.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat No I haven't been in a situation where doing the right thing did not feel right"
I said "...feel nice", not "...feel right". If you were being beaten up at school, but you refused to hit the bully back, do you agree that this would "feel" right, but would certainly not "feel" nice?
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
2b)
You keep saying the word "Relative", I never once used that word...count..not once...you keep saying that, I don't, so figure it out for yourself because you're asking me a question about something I never said.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat 2b) True, you have never said "relative". However, you implied it. But saying that we/our culture decides our morals, you are saying that there are no total truths in regards to morallity, or, in other words, that morals are relative.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
No you're saying that morals are relative...I'm saying morals are the same, but are modified depending on where you live and how you're brought up.
That means morals are the same no matter where you go, and varies to the degree of how and where you were brought up.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "That means morals are the same no matter where you go, and varies to the degree of how and where you were brought up"
I'm not sure what you mean by this, as it appears to be a logical contradiction. To me, you appear to be saying "Morals are the same, but they are also different".
Besides, as discussed before, "differences in morals" are not moral disagreements at all, but simply disagreement about the facts which our morals regard.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
Its not a logical contradiction..it means that we have close to universal morals, by minor details vary from place to place depending on how you were brought up, the conditions you live in and the indoctrination you were put through.
Also your "disagreemenet of facts" rhetoric doesn't stand up, and we can keep going back and forth about this for ages, but you asked for moral evolution and differences and whats what you got. Not my fault you don't accept it. Lets drop it.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "Also your "disagreemenet of facts" rhetoric doesn't stand up"
Provide for me an example of "pure moral disagreement".
"I'm not a bad person"
We're all bad people. Our good deeds cannot cancel out our bad deeds, and we have all committed bad deeds.
"I've read it cover to cover"
I do appreciate your effort to understand the Christian faith, my friend. Thank you.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON "We're all bad people."
This is one of the biggest reasons Christianity absolutely must be eradicated for humanity to move forward. Only the mentally ill, insane, schizophrenic brainwashed could ever believe ALL people are "bad" people.
Think about it. They tell their children this- that they are sub-beings. Lesser beings. That there is a magical Ultimate King of Humans floating in the sky- some less literal but still the same idea.
This nonsense absolutely must go.
i3rucei3ruce 9 months ago 25
WolfEyesatNight 3 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
You are putting words in my mouth and I don't like it. You want atheism to be void of morals, you want me to marginalize Hitler and the holocaust, you want me to have no moral life - But you're wrong on all counts..
If you cant think for yourself and be a good person for your own and everyone else's sake, but only for God's sake, thats your handicap and nothing to do with me or atheism...Atheism has nothing to do with morals, morals are natural to our species.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "Hitler was a roman catholic and believed he was doing God's work"
Hitler wasn't Christian. Going to church doesn't make you a Christian any more than dressing up as a bear makes you one. First, a Christian will do what Jesus told us to do (John 14). Second, Htiler merely used religious beliefs to corrupt people. He merely said He was doing what He did for God because He knew it would get people to follow Him.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
Hitler was a roman catholic, the oath you swore to him was in a religious manner where you sword in the name of almighty God, on the belt buckle of every german troop back then it said "God on our side", Hitler wrote in "mein kampf" about how he was doing God's work in exterminating the jews for their deicide, and the Catholic Church (the vatican) celebrated Hitler's birthday every year until his death, and had control over german education.
He was a roman catholic.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "He was a roman catholic"
On the outside or in his heart?
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "and the Catholic Church (the vatican) celebrated Hitler's birthday every year until his death"
That's because Germany and Italy formed an alliance.
Besides, so what if a few "Christians" behaved badly? We've all done bad things. Perhaps we sould concentrate on being good people rather than criticizng others for the very things we do ourselves.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
"a few christians" ? This was the *ENTIRE* Catholic church ..the officials of that religion, all of them, supporting the Nazi party and Hitler. "We've all done bad things"..I'm sorry but I won't be compared to people who supported Hitler..not happening. I reject your insinuation.
We have all the evidence in the world to show that what Hitler did was religious inspired, and that the catholic church supported him.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat True, Hitler makes mention of god in
Mein Kampf and was steeped in religion and mysticism, hardly an atheist. The religious are constantly using this old red herring argument to divert attention away from the fact that hundreds of millions have died or live in abject misery due to "gods servants" and their actions (see crusades, the spreading of hiv due to catholic teaching condoms are evil, banning of stem cell research etc etc etc. The time is now to cast off ancient superstition!
250garbear 2 months ago
@250garbear
Indeed sir, and it doesn't even stop there. What about the LRA (Lords Resistance Army) that kidnaps and employs children as an armed force. What about the cover up of child rape done by the catholic church and covered up by them too who are more worried about the image of the catholic church than they are about the victims.
There is a lot to be said but the very best thing to do, in my opinion, is to openly oppose religion..we're better than this.
DrDopehat 2 months ago
@DrDopehat (cont.) You may say "Not every atheist believes in eugenics". That's true, but not every Christian (in fact, very few) believes we have a right to hate non-Christians (Jesus makes it quite clear non-Christians are loved too).
However, let's each focus on living good lives, and not criticize each other for the very things we do ourselves.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
Please don't misunderstand me Sir, I do not actively seek out Christians or any other religious people, to tell them that I think they're wrong and all that stuff. I am perfectly happy to let religious people be religious - My problem arises where religion can no longer be kept private and is attempted imposed into schools, politics, science and used as excuses to commit horrible crimes.
Also I disagree with most of what your first post said :)
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat Even I will agree that church and state should be kept seperate. The church would get corrupted.
People should not be using Christianity as an excuse. Jesus taught people to turn the other cheek, love others, etc. He did not support violence, at all (when He was arrested, He told His disciples to put their swords away).
Christianity isn't anti-science. Were the creation story completely disproved tomorrow, Christianity would still stand.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
(3rd post) As for criticism etc. I'm sorry but I will, and have every right to, criticize religion..especially if that religion seeks to impose itself on my life, oppress women, threaten free speech, commit horrible acts *in the name of religion* and get away with it, corrupts science, advocates prejudice and endorses slavery.
If you keep your religion to yourself, I have no beef with you...but the religions themselves and the people openly representing them, I do oppose.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "commit horrible acts *in the name of religion*"
People abuse religion all the time. Jesus makes it clear "fighting for him" is still a sin. He told us to turn the other cheek, and that merely hating someone is just as bad as murdering them. People who abuse Christ's teachings are not Christians at all (John 14).
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
@THEEVANTHETOON
People do horrible acts in the name of religion, not because of the fundamentalists of religion, but because of the fundamentals of religion. if the fundamentals of your religion isn't violent, then neither are the fundamentalists...There is simply no way around that.
If at the core, your religion is peaceful and loving..then violence won't happen in the name of it. Such isn't the case though.
You sir, are a good person - I can tell, but not because of religion.
DrDopehat 10 months ago
@DrDopehat "If at the core, your religion is peaceful and loving..then violence won't happen in the name of it"
Well, unfortunately, people abuse religion. People will take one or two verses out of context and get people to believe they mean that we should hurt others who do not share the same beliefs.
THEEVANTHETOON 10 months ago
one dislike, bet that guy wouldnt be doing well in this debate
Menla1 11 months ago
to bad there isn't a commandment for "Thou should think Critically"..
ab330 1 year ago 3
who is the victim opposite of hitchens in these videos? i cant find any names but would love to hear another delivery of finely starched asses to an inferior intellect.
nthomas87 1 year ago
@nthomas87 HAHAHAHAHA, god damn that's funny, i'm at work working a 16 hour shift watching some hitch and began falling asleep until i read your post....now i can't stop laughing, thanx for waking me up....oh yeah, hitch is the man!
TheDoc1313 1 year ago
Notice the people that do not clap. Of course i'm not saying they are the only ones that reject it in the room, but you can tell most of those people(not clapping) don't buy it. So, after that brilliant improvisation of a response, and spot on reasoning they still somehow reject it. I don't get it. What happens in their heads? Were they refusing to listen? What in the fuck kind of shit do they have to say to themselves? In general, the people that listen to hitch still refuse... i don't get it.
snipeshow920 1 year ago 2
@snipeshow920 EXACTLY what I was thinking....exactly! I'm shaking my head, thinking, "After THIS, how can they just go about their business as usual?" It's unfathomable.
BrannonMcConkey 1 year ago
@snipesh
its because the truth is too painful for most people to admit. after nazi germany had *gone* many people still thought that hitler was the best thing that ever happened to the earth. a lot of people dont accept the armenian genocide occured. i happen to know some cubans that think castro is the best thing that happened to cuba (can you freaking beleive that).for a person to change beleifs after having them for decades is tantamount to telling them that they should be a new person
logicsnumberis666 1 year ago
It's really not true though, is it? It's a minority of Christians who hope for an end time and to pass them off as 'not really believers' is basically a load of bollocks.
CuriousMoth 1 year ago
I must say that Hitchens puts human intelligence in a very interesting perspective...usually the smartest amongst us that are well known are scientists. Gives me hope for the world, lol
Territomauvais 1 year ago
Drunk as hell and still logical and eloquent enough to absolutely, and totally, decimate religious thought.
xSolraccarloSx 1 year ago
I worry that I'm going to force material like this on my future children but I feel that it would only be right to ensure that they are made aware of this man and the many others who are doing their bit for humanity and evolutionary progress. essential viewing/listening.
alexmothernorthyork 1 year ago
The best thing about this debate is that Hitchens is so obviously drunk.
WastedTourist 1 year ago 2
@WastedTourist He's so intelligent that he has to slow his neurons down with alcohol... otherwise no-one understands him ;)
cakeisnotanumber 1 year ago 2
The man with the question went from ignorent to intellegent in under 4minutes!!!! thats the power of the HitchBomb baby!!!!!!!
johnefcblue 1 year ago 6
Hitchens is one of the brightest minds of our times.
herradurafatal 1 year ago 5
My mind ... Has been blown...
ChristianEvolution 1 year ago
what if there was a god, trust me mr he si gonna fuk us all
aramoist 1 year ago
5:58 notice the guy in the blue shirt who asked the question isn't clapping. :(
Invisible sky wizard FTW!!!
b3nmitchell 1 year ago
Wow. I need to go buy one of his books. Any suggestions?
sirchompsalot 1 year ago
@sirchompsalot uhh all of them!
tjv323 1 year ago
@sirchompsalot "God Is Not Great - How Religion Poisons Everything"
fuevic 1 year ago
This man has to live.
Atheist503 1 year ago 3
Christopher Hitchens.
Because your argument was just destroyed!
pheeson 1 year ago
This little explanation of his reason to go out and do all these debates is so eloquent. I can listen to it over and over. It gives me chills.
medea1492 1 year ago 5
I have nothing but respect for this man and his work
welshnickm 1 year ago 58
@CaffeinatedThinking How is that not enough evidence to believe the Bible is from God and not from man. The prophets clearly were right in everything they said, how can you still dought that they are not speaking of their own imagination but of God's word. They predicted the exact location and doings of the harlot church 500 years before it took root. If you won’t believe in God after this than you won’t believe even if someone rises from the dead in front of you.
lacatuscovalschi 1 year ago
@lacatuscovalschi "They predicted the exact location and doings of the harlot church 500 years before it took root" that prediction would be pretty easy to fulfill for the sake of fulfilling a prediction.
tjv323 1 year ago
@tjv323 not it wouldnt because with that prediction you have to fullfill the others. which is take over the kings of the earth kill the saints live in luxury. Now nobody can delebratley fullfill all these things unless God allowed it and God predicted it and told us before it happend
lacatuscovalschi 1 year ago
if you really think theres a man in the sky,keeping score something is wrong with you
SvendsenAtheist 1 year ago 2
@SvendsenAtheist Well said.
xSolraccarloSx 1 year ago