Christopher hitchens quote why believe in a god is wicked

[BritishArrow]

Very good but to be fair Wilson did have a come back to this that was worth seeing but it was cut off. Watch the whole thing

[Textra1]

I haven't seen this Hitch-Slap before. Nice one. As always.

[YesYou123333]

Typical atheist. Cutting the video before Wilson got Hitchens to make a fool of himself.

[skdjhfkdhfa]

@YesYou123333 Hah, I'd love to hear your explanation on Wilson's retort, I REALLY would. I bet you justify it quite nicely in your head. :)

[Hufflewaffle]

Put a knife in his hand and a child in front of him and I think you'd find Wilson retreating from 'God' quicker than lightning.

[martinheideggershut]

It really is the case that contemporary American Protestants are the intellectual equivalent of the Yugo. It didn't used to be that way. In Maher's Religulous the RCs come off the best. The only person to give Hitchens "a run for his money" was Monsignor Lorenzo Albacete.

I'm not a Catholic.

[drfoxcourt]

This shows that Wilson is duplicitous on the Euthyphro dialogue:

Is God moral? Yes. Is whatever he says moral? yes. Can he order you to do something immoral? (Hmmm).

Often the apologist will say God never does order immoral things to be done, but that supposes that slavery, genocide, fratricide, and eternal punishment are all moral.

Reminds me of Nixon's comment "When the President does it, it's not against the law." How tyrannical and awful can you get?

[psb1964]

@tloskywalker1 I don't disagree with you at all.

[josenros]

As a boy in Hebrew school, I was taught that it is my duty to rid the world of the Amaleki tribe, and that if I come across a stranger whose Amaleki heritage is known to me, I am to slaughter him on the spot, no questions asked. The rabbi warned that it is nearly impossible to trace Amaleki heritage, but had no doubt that Haman, Hitler, and anti-semitic people were all derivative. In short, Hitchens' premise is proved once again: religion makes morally normal people do and say disgusting things.

[davemelnick]

@josenros Those are some religious nuts for ya. I luv it whenChris mbarrasses any religious nut (& they panic in the process).

[chropose]

Chris Hitchens is much cooler when bald.

[psb1964]

Maybe the malachites had it coming?

[phelps6660]

@psb1964

The Amalekites were just a small nation/tribal group. In what possible sense does an entire group of possibly thousands of people deserve to be wiped out - the women, the children aswell as the men?

I'd like to see you say that to the face of a 5 year old child.

[psb1964]

@phelps6660 This was meant in jest, to point out just how horrible and ridiculous the idea of 'genocide commanded by god' is. Some things are just so appalling that the best response is pure mockery. Early on, if people had just laughed at Hitler, that would have ended his career. Granted you'd have to be prepared to fight the brownshirts afterwords...but after one person laughed, many others would have joined in.

[DandAinTac]

Would a devout Christian please give me an honest answer to the following question? If you truly believed that God was commanding you to blow up a building full of people, would you do it? You can't say it could never happen, because the Bible contains many instances of God commanding his followers to violence. The honest answer to this question is one reason why I believe an atheist morality based on reason and increasing human welfare and decreasing suffering is superior.

[scruethedemiurge]

@DandAinTac I was raised a fundamentalist christian and I can say you're right. The standard reply, "God wouldn't tell me to do that" is a lie. God allegedly order Abraham to kill his son - expected him to be willing to do it. My answere was if god told me to do that I'd tell him to go fuck himself. I was a fucking teenager and I thought I was sealing my fate in hell, but it was the only honest thing I could do.

[boorens18]

@scruethedemiurge its interesting as religion functions in a perverse sort of test. Those with the strength to leave it are the truly moral. They are the ones who even in the face of torture (hell) will not murder, commit genocide etc. Those that support these religions are the weak willed and potentially evil.

[Stipoon]

@djbehemoth You can't say that the children and the young virgin girls of this tribe were guilty. They were ordered by god to be slaughtered also, well, not the virgins. This is not the word of the creator of the universe at all. It is the word and scribblings of men.

[hkdharmon]

@fdoric So the socialist don't like Hitchens? Who cares?

[bradmanthethird]

hitchens doesn't like the socialists =p

[hkdharmon]

I think that is true.

[fdoric6]

The political depravity of journalist Christopher Hitchens

By David Walsh, October 5, 2001

[revdolaf]

Archeological research seems to suggest these atrocities never really happened, they are more like tall tales from a small tribe. As the story tells it, it is of course still offensive to modern sensibilities. Interesting to note that, the faith of Israel changed over the centuries, since G-d more often than not didn't fight on their side.

[bradmanthethird]

archeological evidence largely suggests that there was never even any meaningful israelite exodus from egypt.

[Gilbavel]

@bradmanthethird Really? Other than the bones of the Jews at the burial sites that had not only their own ritual burial sacraments but those of their meals, that is to say--no pig bones--what is your evidence for no meaningful Israelite exodus from Egypt? Or are you just spouting off without any?

[Niveous23]

@bradmanthethird And this is surprisingly supported by Jewish Anthropologists, who HOPE and WISH it were so. But as professionals have to admit when they've found nothing, and thus-far have found a whole lot of nothing.

[bradmanthethird]

@Niveous23 Not true, look at gilbavel's post, aparently they found a bunch of bones which were not belonging to pigs as well as a couple of dead jews, it must be the exodus...

[Niveous23]

@bradmanthethird  lol...

[MrSalamander7]

I love the reasoning, it's like, "Absolute morality exists because of god. God exists because of absolute morality. Whatever is absolutely moral is what god said and whatever god said is absolutely moral."

Sure, whatever moron.

[hkdharmon]

Circular reasoning is rampant in theology.

[BRtankbuster]

That's a very easy excuse. After all, the Amalekites aren't able to protest against the accusations, since they were all exterminated.

At any rate, the genocide of an entire tribe, children, women, and elderly included can NEVER be justified. Especially not through a trivial excuse like 'they were marauders'.

[darkhyena]

It is exactly the same justification used by the Serbs to commit genocide on Bosnian Muslims. They blamed them for attacks they comitted in the 14th century, and wanted the land conquered in that period back. It didnt matter that it happened centuries ago, and that every muslim who conquered Bosnia had been dead for almost a millenium.

Milosevic and his cronies were condemned for crimes against humanity. Moses and Joshua would be convicted for the same thing.

[Steadno]

destruction via logic

[PathogensQuest]

Wilson is absolutely no match for Hitchens.

[Inferno41]

not to mention a monster for supporting genocide

[jamesjohnking]

Few would be.

[ZOMGWTFFTL]

@PathogensQuest Nobody is, but Doug fails particularly hard. 

[ZOMGWTFFTL]

"I know you get a bang out of it." Fucking zing lol that was my favorite part of this whole debate series they did. Just so happens to be in this short clip. Good stuff.

[fkerpants]

Wilson is a psycho. "I believe that it was okay to kill the Amalekites." This is the perfect example why religion is something that should be left behind. Can this man hear what he's saying?

[timothy51886]

No religious people understand is reason. They follow their own realities because actual reality is to cold and harsh for them

[pugay69]

he is not a psycho. Hitchens liked debating him precisely because W. sticks to his guns and follows his position to its logical conclusions without trying to water things down. It is precisely this honest quality that allows his beliefs to actually be exposed for what they are. He has far more intellectual integrity than any religious moderate.

[SockbatReplica]

Yes because a moderate would say Hitchens was just taking that passage literally(What's supposed to be the metaphor behind the extermination of the Amalekites?.. Or any of the other Old Testament barberisms for that matter?) Wilson atleast cops out to the fact that according to his faith that when devinely mandated genocide is not just alright but it's compulsory.

[kusalaviro]

That's true, at least he shows his stripes...

[NoBitchASSnes1]

@fkerpants It truly is scary

[rycka1983]

@fkerpants this is living example of how good people can do or would do bad things and why.

[YesYou123333]

@fkerpants Awwww, is the death of the Amalekites keeping you up at night? How about the death of the Nazis in WWII Europe? Does that make you cry too? Or, how about your buddies in North Korea. The atheists who starbe their people to death. Do you have a tear for them? Or, how about your buddy Stalin? Are the deaths he caused touching your heart? No, only the deaths in the Bible make you cry. Lousy hypocrite.

[fkerpants]

@YesYou123333 You'd make a whole lot more sense if you could spell. Is this the whole "atheists have killed lots of people" canard? So, who has killed people in the name of atheism? Just curious.

"I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator..."

- Adolf Hitler

- Mein Kampf

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter."

- Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922

Oh, and Hitler was a Christian. So, suck it.

[YesYou123333]

@fkerpants You didn't answer my question. Are you crying out your eyeballs for the dead Nazis? You're sure crying your ass off for these poor helpless Amalekites. Why not the Nazis too?

[fkerpants]

@YesYou123333 So, why would I cry over dead Nazis? Are you trying to say Amalekites were like Nazis? Is that some sad way of trying to box me in?

In the Bible, God speaks of exterminating the Amalekites. The Nazis that were killed were killed in a war to stop them. Those are two radically different things.

[YesYou123333]

@fkerpants Yeah. You look pretty boxed in. Any ideas on how to get out?

[fkerpants]

@YesYou123333 Uh...yeah. Sure. Whatever you say.

[YesYou123333]

@fkerpants Here, I'll help you out. You don't cry for the Nazis because it doesn't forward your God-Hating agenda. There I got you out. You owe me one.

[fkerpants]

@YesYou123333 How can I hate something I don't believe in?

I'll bet you hate the Tooth Fairy as much as I hate your God. I can't hate something I don't believe in...douche.

[YesYou123333]

@fkerpants And people like you think WE"RE delusional. What is the relationship between the Tooth Fairy and God?

[fkerpants]

@YesYou123333 Both require faith to believe in. There's absolutely no evidence in the existence of either.

[Kaitsatsu]

@YesYou123333 lol @ comparing the genocide fo the Amalakites to defeating the nazis. If you really want to make that comparison, a better and less disengeneous comparison would be;

The nazis invaded somewhere (say Poland for example) and killed people. Then 400 years later, long after Poland had been freed, the Polish invaded Germany, killed every man, woman, child and destroyed their proporty for somthing that their ancestors did and then took their land.

[mongobobo]

wow....

[thruthem]

And God said 'Thou shall kill them all and that shall be the whole of the law"

[urbster1]

Exactly. Divine command morality reduces all morality to moral relativism: whatever God commands is moral, be it rape, suicide bombing, child sacrifice, and on, and on and on and on........

[JemyM]

No, if you believe that God is moral, then that is the moral thing. It's not relative. However, it becomes relative in the disagreement on what God think is moral. If there was a such thing as Gods moral law, everyone would agree on it.

[urbster1]

I think we agree, but to clarify, simply believing God is moral is not sufficient to make an act moral. The existence of God as a perfectly moral being would have to be proven before everyone would be able to agree on God's moral law. I do think that something like an objective morality exists, but I don't think it comes from God (nor is it absolute). We might all be able to actually agree on our morals if it weren't for people constantly claiming that morality HAS to come from God!

[smilz32]

Everyone would agree, except for the malachites, i suppose . . .

[JemyM]

My theory is that morality is a natural progression from reacting to biological needs. Humans who share needs, develop socialised rules/behavior to cover and protect those needs. There are those who aren't born with mainstream needs, but may still have need for others, and might adapt/protect the established rules in return. This goes both ways, as it might make individuals follow rules that helps noone. Guilt when not following a rule, might have served evolutionary purposes.

[JemyM]

If the theory I described is true, mainstream biology is the source of objective morality. It will naturally develop in a certain direction each time a large population of human beings have the chance to establish their own rules. Morality expressed in totalitarian regimes will instead match the leaders needs.

[urbster1]

I agree with everything but the last sentence you wrote. Why would that have to be the case? Other behaviors in evolution or biology don't "match a totalitarian leader's needs." Unless I am misunderstanding what you're saying.

[JemyM]

Needs vary from individual to individual, thus individual needs aren't the source of morality, but mainstream needs. However, if a single or a few people establish their own needs as the rules of the land, they will likely do so a long with the claim that their opinion is the moral one, where as opinions against them are immoral. Within a generation or two, socialization will make such rules known as morality, even if when examined, they don't represent mainstream needs.

[urbster1]

See I don't think morality is solely about needs, but about desires. Many people boil it down to values and talk about "intrinsic value," but I don't believe in that. I think that values actually boil down further to desires. Of course, I guess you could say that needs are our most basic desires. But there is more to it than that.

[JemyM]

Needs and desires are closely related but yes, desires might be a better word for it. A desire might not be beneficial for you in the long run though. There's another layer of morality, based on control over self. It's about recognizing that a short-term desire might collide with a long-term desire/need or goal that is ultimately better than the short-term one. Such morality is rooted in our ability to imagine consequences of our actions and understand that our emotions might mislead us.

[urbster1]

Aha! See that's where I believe that morality is "empirical ethics." It's where you take that imagination, that "I wonder if" and you put it to the test. At some point, scientists are going to know much more than they know now about our brains. And we will really be able to test the outcomes of moral situations to see who is made the happiest by whatever outcomes of the situation. You may want to read up on this on Richard Carrier's blog, or Alonzo Fyfe's. The theory is "desire utilitarianism".

[JemyM]

Google "Talks Jonathan Haidt on the moral roots of liberals and conservatives" and "Malcolm Gladwell on spaghetti sauce", both videos on TED.

What I learned from those videos is that there might not be one universal true morality that is easily found. A civilization that supports "humanity" need to be balanced so that genetically generated minorities without mainstream needs might have their needs covered if possible.

[omegavalerius]

what exactly is a genetically generated minority?

[JemyM]

Not necessary genetic. I'm talking about people who are born with significant traits that belongs to less than 50% of the population, but is still found in any randomly selected population.

Lefthanded, homosexuals, people with asperger syndrome, people with less than optimal hearing or eyesight etc.

Any civilization that wants continued stability will probably need to develop support for these minorities simply because they are a natural part of humanity even if their needs aren't mainstream.

[omegavalerius]

why don't you just say minority then?...genetically generated sounds like intentionally generating something through genetics.

[JemyM]

Minority can be based on ideas and you can get rid of an idea.

The point is that these minorities are minorities you cannot get rid of permanently. They are simply there, generated by humanity.

You will for example always have a % who are lefthanded, and those lefthanded will have righthanded who want them to be happy, who will fight for them and protect them if necessary. Thus, if you want to support mainstream humanity, you must also support lefthanded.

[JemyM]

That said, I confess that I haven't tried to articulate my theory fully. "Genetic" might be a completely wrong word.

[LikeAPossum]

yikes!