Peter Hitchens has a much greater understanding of the God picture than Christopher did. In a controlled NWO dominant world Christopher got the perks. In an ideal world Peter would be more well known.
I am certainly no ashamed of Christians... sure some don't get it and can be hypocrites sure, but there are those who act badly no matter what their beliefs. God is God and he cares little what arrogant, defiant people think. You won't outwit God in the end... nor surprise him with any level of defiance. He has seen it all.
Only a REAL FOOL would claim there is no God! Man creates awesome skyscrapers, fake hearts, tunnels, vehicles etc.. If we are very imperfect then what more can God create THE UNIVERSE! You must accept Jesus Christ as your Savior to receive eternal rest in heaven! Simple! John 3:16 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him! Repent & accept Jesus Christ! Jesus Christ or HELL?!? Visit cbn. com
@stalkingcat123 Ok bottom line; you're an unintelligent individual, you would no doubt like to believe that the fact you express yourself like an idiot does not show how stupid you actually are.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon lol yeah? I express myself like an idiot?. At least my thoughts are comprehensible and follow a logical pattern yours are all over place. Most of that bullshit you spouted made no sense. Your opinion doesn't make you right if you cant understand this, thats your problem not mine (: Again thanks for playing :) lol.
@stalkingcat123 Everything I said made perfect sense you just aren't intelligent enough to understand it. You sound like an idiot and you are one that is all there is to this. If my thoughts seem incomprehensible to you it is only in the manner that your own thoughts would seem incomprehensible to a grub.
The odd little saying you always end with is supposed to get on my nerves is it? If so it's redundant, the monumental stupidity of everything you say is more than annoying enough as it is.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon Your opinion isn't important or relevent to anything, but you. That is the sad fact you missed. Your opinion does not apply to rest of time and space brah. Making jokes to keep the mood light. Can't handle my creativity? Dont reply :)
@stalkingcat123 You are wrong, which is unsurprising and completely in keeping with your moronic nature. That a thing is my opinion does not mean that that is all it is, it can quite easily be objectively true in addition to being my opinion. My opinion does not NECESSARILY apply to the rest of time and space, but it may well do, and does in this case. You are not stupid because it is my opinion that you are, that you are stupid is an independant truth on which I base my opinion.
@stalkingcat123 Some of it is opinion some of it is fact, that what I said makes sense is a fact, I can see exactly where the failure in your understanding lies which lends credence to the opinion part of my comment which is that you are a stupid person. Even that is not truly an opinion though since it either is or is not true independant of whether I think it is true.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon lol okay let me put to you this way you might understand, I doubt it because you lack comprehension and critical thought. If a boat is made to accommodate 20 ppl and your opinion no matter how well informed is that it should be able to hold 75, so you over load the boat and it sinks. doesn't matter what your opinion is the boat always sinks. If you didnt understand. /watch?v=_BDD5rCcu-w
you may get the idea. You can have an opinion doesnt mean its valid
@stalkingcat123 The opinion that a boat with a capacity of 20 can hold 75 people is, by defintion, not well informed.
Also I have never maintained that a thing is correct because it is my opinion, it is you who have repeatedly claimed that my opinions, inherently and necessarily, have nothing to do with reality; a transparently false and idiotic belief. What if my opinion is that the boat can hold 20? Will you still say ''lol that is your opinion that does not make you right''?
@TheRandomguy112 I wont, but I have to question your logic in staying there. Those people are hopeless, and the worst thing is that they revel in their ignorance. wheres a good plague when you need one.
@TheCaptainLulz i stay because i have a little hope in the people here they may not be the most intelligent of people but we have the children so in a couple of years we should see some good progress.
@TheRandomguy112 "All these things cause the Father-General [of the Jesuits] to be feared by the Pope and sovereigns... A sovereign who is not their [the Jesuits'] friend will sooner or later experience their vengeance." (1852)
Luigi Desanctis (Official Censor of the Inquisition)
@TheRandomguy112 ...Wherever a totalitarian movement erupts, whether Communist or Nazi, a Jesuit can be found in the role of 'advisor' or leader; in [Communist] Cuba Fr. Armando Llorente and in Argentina the neo-Nazis are led by Fr. Menvieille."
@TheRandomguy112 "[Jesuit-trained Illuminist Adam] Weishaupt's success in forcing the Vatican to reestablish the abolished Jesuit Order [Ed. Note: it had been abolished in 1773 by Pope Clement XIV], through revival of the Church's original Nazarene Communism in the form of present-day Communism, led to the conspiracy's control by the Society of Jesus [i.e., the Jesuits]...
based on the behaviour of most christians in the world today i am almost ashamed to say i believe in god, but i do, and i think christopher hitchens was a great man. very intelligent and uncompromising in what he believed. he will be missed.
@TomFynn Well, in answer to your first point, I'll simply say that if you cannot see the difference between those two statements there is really nothing I can do to help you.
As to your second question, I am not required to demonstrate a supernatural source, since I don't believe in one. All I have been saying is that one would be required to render morality objective, not subjective.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon A supernatural being would simply make morality commanded, not objective. And as long as you cannot give a precise objective prescription how to establish what said supernatural being commands (scripture does not count), you could not call it objective, even if it was.
@TomFynn You need to get over this belief that I'm trying to convert people to religion or am myself religious. Yes you are correct that we would then run into the problem of ''well how do you know what the objective morality is'', Irrelevant. The ONLY point I make is that no God = no objective morality = nothing is right or wrong.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon I got this so far. And the point I am trying to get across is that we do not need objective morality, so the question in itself is pointless, and even *if*, a supernatural being would (suitable procedures provided) not mean objective, it would mean commanded, and thus arbitrary and therefore not morality. Only if said rules were argued, laid out understandably and generally agreed upon by all parties involved. Which is exactly what we got now.
@TomFynn Right you seem to be making two points. The first being that even moral laws laid down by a creator God would be open to disagreement, the second being that subjective morality is as good as objective morality.
On the first point, if a creator God lays down moral laws they are as immutable and objective as the physical laws that God created, that is, they simply apply themselves to you whatever you happen to feel about it.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon So God the eternal puppet player? Doesn't make it any less of a commandment. And still laws laid down on a whim by some "higher authority" *are* dictates. Since - other than with the laws of physics - one has to assume that said supernatural being has had a choice. Which does *not* apply to the laws of physics.
@TomFynn Why not? On what basis do you assert that the laws of physics could not have been other than as they are?
Also, what do you mean ''life is not perfect''? You're still stuck in making value judgements, as if life would be perfect if everyone agreed. But what reason do we have to suppose that this is so? You imply that there is a perfect way that things ''should'' be, which is the basis of morality, but we've agreed morals are just meaningless subjective feelings.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon Whatever the laws of physics are they do not *choose* as with some supernatural entity. And if that does not choose either, what's the point?
"Life is not perfect" Shorthand for: the distribution of any property in humans is subject of a statistical distribution, as one would expect from a evolutionary process.
@TomFynn As for your second point, it has several problems. Not everyone agrees with the morals of society, and those who do not agree are not in any way wrong or defective, their subjective opinion is as valid as that of the majority.
Also, generally agreed upon social taboos (which is what all subjective moral systems really boil down to) provide no basis to believe any action is actually wrong. If you can avoid punishment by the majority for comitting a rape for example, why not do it?
@MiltiadesOfMarathon Of course not everyone agrees. Life is not perfect. And furthermore, it helps to keep an open mind. Provided the subjective opinion is well reasoned and based on evidence. Fairy tales don't count.
As for escaping punishment: Everybody lies. The innocent so they don't get punished for something they did not do, and the guilty because they do not have a choice. - Babylon 5
"Well I'm dying" *laughter of shock and surprise* "And so are you" *laughter of enlightenment and revealed mortality*.
I have a glass that I wrote a memorial message on, that I drink from each time I have a pang about his death. For my birthday, I'm probably going to buy some Johnny Walker Black and one of his or Bertrand Russell's works.
All of this sounds pretentious but I wouldn't have made it through this years metaphysical anguish without Hitchens and other thinkers.
u a bich mayne u tryin to soun smart n shit but u just a bich! HAHAHAHA! u a bich! u probaly aint got no girl either cuz girls dont like biches! hell nah u better get outta my face dude cuz u aint wanna see wuts bout 2 go down up in dis bich!!! didn't hear me? i say get da fuk out mayne u aint no cool n shit bich
I think we could all learn something fromChristopher Hitchings philosophy. You dont have to believe in an afterlife to be good, and you dont have to be fearful of a supreme beings wraith to be a good person! In life I thought you were often pompous, in death I thought you were a pretty spectacular human being.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon No. Morality comes from mirror neurons in the brain. Mirror neurons are responsible for empathic emotions and solidarity in human beings. Morality wouldnt exist without mirror neurons. People who don't have these, are called psychopaths! Did your god create psychopaths?... No wait, i know your answer... "Theyre possessed by the devil!"
@ilisbaani Why would you call him ''my god''? I am an atheist. I simply realize that empathy is not the same thing as morality. Morality is the idea that a thing is right or wrong in an absract sense, beyond its observable consequences in this world. If you base your belief that there exists such a thing as 'good' on the existence of human empathy then you have an extremely flawed belief system and I would advise you to not argue with me further.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon thats convenient that you get to define morality, and then point out why its flawed, according to your original definition. haha you're a dumbass dude.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon yeah, i scored in the 95th percentile for my age group in intelligence. its highly probable that you are NOT part of the 5% thats smarter then me. and no, you're a dumbass.
@Runningjoels If that were true it would be highly probable. It would still be false of course but that is another story.
Not that I actually believe you, people in the top 95th percentile intelligence-wise tend to have far better grammar and spelling abilities and just generally do not express themselves in the manner of retards like you do.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon if you can explain to me the logical connection between following grammar rules and intelligence, then i will agree that i am retarded. otherwise, im going to assume that i save time on following formal rules especially in informal mediums such as youtube video comments. the only point of language is communication, and if my improper grammar leads to you not being able to understand my point, then it confirms my theory that you are retarded.... dumbass
@Runningjoels I never said I could not understand your point, I said that your abysmal spelling and grammar undermines my belief in your assertion of being highly intelligent.
If you are unable to understand how bragging about being in the 95th percentile in terms of intelligence in a comment riddled with obvious errors is problematic then I'm afraid there is really nothing I can do to help you.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon yeah thats what i thought dumbass. cant provide a logical connection between intelligence and following grammar rules. incidently, the IQ test i took didnt have a grammar section. retard
@Runningjoels You're pressing that point? It was so patently moronic I simply assumed I was excused from answering it.
Are you seriously argueing that there is no correlation between a person's intelligence and the quality of their spelling and grammar? All it takes is the existence of such a correlation to establish this ''logical connection'' of yours. Honestly I didn't think I'd have to explain this to someone boasting about being in the 95th percentile.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon theres no, or perhaps only weak, correlation between intelligence and spelling and grammar. intelligence and education level are completely different things, and if you dont understand this, you are truely retarded. there could be geniuses in Africa who will never learn to write. even if you never taught einstein or mozart any grammar rules, they would still be geniuses. do you understand that? ive known many bimbos with perfect grammar, even with good grades, its unrelated
@Runningjoels You believe there is no correlation between intelligence and the quality of a person's spelling and grammar? I mean you assert it as though you have access to facts of some kind though I don't believe you do, I don't believe the research has been done.
It seems to me to be self evidently the case that, generally speaking, people assume greater intelligence in those who are articulate and who write correctly than those who do not, and that this assumption is generally correct.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon no, actually the people who resort to being a grammar nazi are usually the people without intelligent points to make. so they point out trivial things like lack of capitilization to compensate for their stupidity. i kno propper grammar and spelling but save the effort when it comes to youtube. i think thats reasonable. again, spelling and grammar have to do with education, which is seperate from intelligence. anybody can be educated, not everyone is intelligent.
@Runningjoels It may be true that you do know how to express yourself properly, but the fact remains; if a person is going to assert their intelligence in an online comment, it makes sense to at least attempt to not come across as an uneducated, sloppy dullard.
Anyway, you never actually made any points in your original comment, if you had I would have adressed them. What you did was to object to my definition of morality without criticising it or substituting your own, then call me a retard.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon getting in a hissy fit about whose smarter is pointless, since either of us could lie about IQ results. the fact of the matter is that you gave an arbitrary definition for morality and then tried to use that same definition as evidence. that is stupid. you are stupid. i dont need to subsitute my own definition.
@Runningjoels Ok, agreed about it being pointless to argue over IQ, and distasteful as well. I will point out though that the entire argument stemmed from you calling me a 'dumbass' in your very first comment, in keeping with your own lack of intelligence and the borish, classless nature that goes with it.
''that is stupid. you are stupid''
Only if I am wrong, which must be established, not simply asserted. You asserting that my defintion is arbitrary or wrong does not make it so.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon you are exhibit A for my point. the way you say things shows that you are educated. but the logic behind your points show that you are stupid.
Is that so? What i find funny is that you imagine I would be impressed by your claim to be in the 95th percentile. Even if true that still leaves you totally outclassed by me. 95th percentile really isn't all that smart, that puts your IQ at what, 120, 125 tops? You probably werent even the smartest guy in your class at school, let alone in the whole school. Like I said, I'm much smarter than you.
@xnobody777x i followed your ex girlfriends vaginal discharge trail and it came right up to my cock. your ex likes my cock because its huge and veiny. she didnt like your cock because it was tiny and smelled like mushrooms. i like squirting my semen on and around her butthole. she likes it too. she said you're a lazy mexican shit sniffer. she said you liked to sniff her shits before she flushed them. thats gross, lazy. zionist mexican.
@Runningjoels i followed your ex girlfriends vaginal discharge trail and it came right up to my cock. your ex likes my cock because its huge and veiny. she didnt like your cock because it was tiny and smelled like mushrooms. i like squirting my semen on and around her butthole. she likes it too. she said you're a lazy mexican shit sniffer. she said you liked to sniff her shits before she flushed them. thats gross, lazy. zionist mexican.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon Following proper use of grammar has little to do with intellect! It has more to do with amount of effort! Calling somone on improper use of grammar is a joke.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon Lol that is your opinion and it doesn't make you right. Infact it makes you so opposite of right, your wrong. I don't have to back up a fact, you can do the experiment yourself right now.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon Did you not understand "You can do the experiment yourself right now?" Now I am concerned about your reading comprehension. Really obvious test, just put less effort into typing your next poorly thought out comment.
@stalkingcat123 The fact that I can voluntarily degrade the quality of my writing does not prove anything. More intelligent people do better on IQ tests, at any time of their choosing they can simply perform badly, what does this prove?
Are you actually so stupid that you think this constitutes proof? You said it was ''fact'', I assumed you would point me to the revelant peer reviewed research. Do you even understand what a fact is?
@mintwithahole I think the bigger message from him is that we can learn not to ridicule eachother's belief or lack of belief don't you think? This was coming from a a devout atheist who gave the utmost respect to his devout Christian genetic engineer friend.
@Halfturretslicer There are many religions, all adamant about the rightness of the word of God, and yet all have different 'objective moral values'. You don't need God to have objective moral values. They are printed in our DNA, it's in our nature to discriminate between right and wrong: for instance, sane people love and protect kids and know that's how it should be, regardless of their personal beliefs. Also through empathy with other humans we choose how to behave not to hurt anybody.
@bordereye Of course you need God to have objective moral values, in order to be objective the morals must have a nonhuman source obviously. Throughout most of history it has been considered perfectly acceptable to murder, steal, and rape, provided the victims were not members of your in-group.
Natural human morality is no different from the loyalty of one dog in a pack to another.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon Your comment supports my point of view. Throughout history human beings, either theists and atheists, have committed the worst crimes or proved to be generous and noble. Social environment has a strong influence on the way we think and behave, but our natural instincts, if not corrupted by society or mental illness, are shared. The love of a mother and a father for their sons is objective, not subjective; it's printed in their DNA, it's in their very nature.
@bordereye Love for your children is neither objective, nor morality.The love of parents for their children is certainly a strong trend, but nowhere near an absolute, and ultimately, those who do not love their children are as correct as those who do.
I really dont see how you think this supports your assertion that objective morality can exist without God. Why is any action right or wrong? What is the source of these properties?
@MiltiadesOfMarathon Love for children is neither objective nor moral? Do you mean that in a godless world raping kids shouldn't necessarily be condemned? Think about this: if human beings don't have the natural ability to discriminate between Good and Evil, how can they consciously and genuinely follow the word of God? And how could He ever judge them if He hadn't given them the means to understand what is right and what is wrong? I can hardly imagine robots going to Heaven or Hell.
@TomFynn No doubt you felt fairly clever saying that, but I wasnt referring to humans, I was referring to actions. What reason is there to suppose that any action is right or wrong other than how you, personally, feel about it?
Invoke evolution if you wish, but clearly, evolution has left us humans with the willingness and capacity to harm others for our own benefit. That is not a bug, it's a feature, it is the way we are supposed to act.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon "I wasnt referring to humans, I was referring to actions" And human actions are not a result of our evolution? And yes, how our actions make us feel is exactly our only way to judge the right and wrong of our actions. That we can also harm our fellow man is also part of evolution. No one ever claimed evolution is perfect. Quite the contrary.
@TomFynn No, evolution IS perfect. Your ridiculous value judgements on evolutionarily advantageous behaviours are meaningless. This was my point, you still assume that actions can be right or wrong, as though morality was objective. On one hand you admit that mere personal feelings constitute morality ,in which case if I feel its ok to murder, steal, or rape, then it is, but on the other hand you still cling to the idea that it is in some abstract way 'wrong' to harm others for personal benefit.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon "evolution IS perfect"? Tell that to the laryngeal nerve of the giraffe.
My point - if you had actually read my posts - was that our judgments of right and wrong *is* based on feelings, which are not "mere" but an important part of our evolutionary apparatus to judge the impact of our actions on others and vice versa and act accordingly. The minority of people who *cannot* do that are called psychopaths.
@TomFynn Of course feelings are 'mere', if that is all you base your morality on then it is extremely flimsy indeed. Besdies which, we naturally 'feel' less bad about harming those different from ourselves, and if feelings are all that matters then this is legitimate, it actually is less wrong to harm those of a different race etc. For most of history it was considered fine to murder, rape, or enslave others, provided they were foreigners, this is natural 'feelings' based morality in action.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon Most of the time in history it was fine to kill people for who you were *programmed* to see as outsiders. Such is also the remnant of our evolution, who made us think in in-group/out-group schemes from back when we we were hunter-gatherers. A thinking that religion with its those-that-are-saved/damned-heathens thinking actually amplified, betraying its origin from the earliest childhood of our species.
@TomFynn It isn't programming though, it is biological hardwiring. We care about our immediate blood relatives more than our extended family, we care about our extended family more than about strangers, we care about strangers of our ethnic group more than strangers of others ethnic groups, and finally, we care about members of our own species more than other species, that is not programming, that is nature. The evolutionary reasons for this are also obvious.
@MiltiadesOfMarathon You notice that your argument renders religion useless, insofar as going against the in-group/out-group grain is concerned? Which to go against would be the whole point?
I take it by your sudden change of subject that you've finally accepted the correctness of my position, and have given up argueing against it? Without a supernatural source of moral authority there is no objective morality, which is to say that there is no morality that is really worth anything.
Quick FYI, the Universe is ~14 billion years old, but the Earth hasn't been around nearly that long. Pretty hard for the human brain to develop naturally on a planet that doesn't exist.
@KiyashiSan I suppose you could make the argument that for the brain to form, the Earth had to exist, and for it to exist, you had to form stars, etc. So technically, the brain 'started' forming at the inception of the universe.
@KiyashiSan The Earth has been around for about a 1/3 of that time, 4.54 Billion years. There was more than enough time for a human brain to develop naturally, even if you were to put the starting point of life way later than the start of earth.
@KiyashiSan The iron in your blood came from stars; the blood that feeds your brain. We're all a lot older than we may like to think. The real question is, after 14 billion years, it's it about time we all grow up?
However that's when everything started. You could say it's pretty hard for a brain to develop naturally in a species that doesn't exist or a planet that doesn't have life or doesn't have DNA. It took the universe 14 billion years to randomly create what we are.
@KiyashiSan you mad bro? the earth is 6.3 billion years old that 6,300,000,000 years thats alot of time for evolution to evolve naturally especially when lizards in our lifetime have evolved massively within mere decades
Okay here it goes, i just want you to know this is a very deep subject me and you are about to enter into so if your not ready to dedicate many youtube pages to it spanning several day's the nit's best if you let me know i don't want to get halfway through a discussion and you get upset and say i'm finished talking with you or don't post back because alot of atheist do that to me
People which say things like he's in fire or they're glad he's dead and call themselves Christian. Aren't one at all, so I don't like it if people are willing to use that person as the example and say that's the true Christian when they very well know that a true Christian is one that follows what the bible says. And doesn't it say not to judge? Obviously Hitchens knew a few good Christians, this video is proof of it, thank you for reading.
@riverstory87 where do you imagine this lake of fire is located? Perhaps within the same realm as the tooth fairy, Santa and flocks of flying unicorns? .... all sound equally ridiculous to me. Hitchens received NO proof throughout his life, and to suggest that he can receive proof after he has died is a clear sign of your insanity.
@MyMyMyAccount I don't know where it is but i bet if you had a choice you would choice for it to be in your own ass so your love hitchen's could have a place to reside forever lol Im fed up with all atheist your so arrogant and im not talking about our small conversation i'm talking in general no one can prove you wrong you would rather cut your own ear's off then hear the truth its pitiful YOU ARE PITIFUL lol
@riverstory87 I'd rather be baskin in sweet hell than be stuck in a fluffy dreamland with that evil monster from your bible(and no,I don't mean beelzebub)!!!!God has more blood on his hands than all atrocites in history combined!As an atheist,I do consider that there may be a chance(however miniscule) that a God might just exist!! I also choose 2 believe that if there is a God, he wouldnt be the loathesome, jealous, egomaniacal, slavemongering, murderer depicted in the "good" book!
@fluggy20033 Why do atheist refer back to the old testament every time they want to show the world how cruel god is?We dont even live by that book not since jesus died on the cross 2000 year's ago it's the new testament we go by sweetheart so get with the program and jesus preached love not hate and how is it our place to judge GOD lol it's silly we are his creation a smaller part of him
@riverstory87 Nice, ignore the wicked stuff and keep the sloppy stuff, despite it being THE WORD OF GOD!!! The truth is the New Testament has had many many revisions, right up until the 1800's (despite no-one hearing from god in 100s of yrs), with buckets of new content and each time its always said to contain new "Revealed Truth"! ie "Religious" opportunists amending the texts to grant themselves even more alleged holiness/power!Your living by a heavily doctored/manipulated relic!
@fluggy20033 Sodom and gomorrah were two city's completely corrupted and set against god.He sent a man named lot in to find just ten descent people and lot failed so yes god had those two city's destroyed.For punishment and example and if you had the ability to make people in your image and they turned on you and did what you told them not to and despised you then you would do the same to preserve goodness in the rest of the world.God owes us nothing he governs whos to say otherwise
@riverstory87 ...and were even at the real moral issue....Lot offered his daughters to be gang raped by the townsfolk ... if that happened today and some guy said God had told him to do it , he would be sectioned!! Thats quite light though compared to Lot getting plied with alcohol and RAPED by BOTH his daughters! Thats right, God saved them because they were SO good, only to see them commit the ultimate betrayal of their Father's trust. Hellbound i'm afraid! Dear God will u ever get it right!??
@fluggy20033 Well dude they just saw the destruction of two big city's they thought they were the only one's left on the planet just because they wasn't that smart doesn't mean they wasn't good people.They thought it was there duty to replenish the earth what's bad about that incest is wrong but is it worse then letting the human race die off without a fight which it wouldn't have but they didn't know that.As for the gang rape people were simple back then they would give there daughters away for
@riverstory87 animals it wasn't a big deal back then like it would be today the townsfolk wanted to have sex with the angels that were holy and sent there by god so lot gave them an option things were different thousands of years ago the fact that you compare a simple civilization to us just shows how foolish you are different moral code in those days they didnt believe like we do they were trying to rape gods holy angels you idiot whats wrong with you how could you argue that
@riverstory87 For starters,if you want your Father's seed..u suggest it,you don't RAPE him!..or u end up in some sordid, reverse Josef Fritzl situation. What do u mean they were simple? So your saying GOD made them simple? Incest isn't just wrong, it's considered pretty evil.. and regardless of their intentions - No.5 Honour thy Father and Mother (an extremely sinister Rape IS NOT considered honouring), and No.10 Do not covet thy neighbours wife (but its ok if its your dead mother's husband?)!
@fluggy20033 God made us with the ability to learn anything we just hadn't progressed that much up to then they were simple minded(much like you but just as capable of learning as anyone else.Well they knew there father wouldn't have went for it if they would have asked because undoubtedly he knew that the world wasn't over but the women didn't if you think women nowadays dont have any common sense imagine them then and if his wife was alive then wouldnt need to have sex with him now would they
@riverstory87 Right...ur story now is God made us simple cavemen(in his image?) and we've grown from that?Lot had dealings with God/Angels-he should've been more enlightened/intelligent 5000yrs ago than any1 today!Despite the fact that Lot was obeying and serving God,He still murders,nay,freezes(?what the hell kinda punishment is turning into a pillar of salt- y not copper or slime?)his wife and let his daughters rape him.If god rewards me like that i'd tell him to fuck right off!!
@fluggy20033 My story hasn't changed and it wont change so don't ever insinuate other wise.He gave us the ability to learn all thing's but without t.v.,school and the internet i'm sure knowledge was hard to accumulate especially with having to hunt,farm,raise animals and praise god all at the same time.God told them not to turn back and look but what did she do, ignored god so it wasn't a punishment but more of a foolish mistake on her part.
@fluggy20033 The man was sloppy drunk not retarded you will do anything while inebriated and how is it rape dummy if he let them do it.But you go ahead tell him to fuck off all you want just shows how immature you are i mean come on if you were face to face the creator of the universe the alpha and omega would you really say"fuck off"lol
@riverstory87 "You will do anything when inebriated"??? Honestly?? Thats really a moral standard you would condone/adhere too? Thats your comeback??? This is getting way, way too inane for me 2 possibly continue, fun as it is! U already told me u don't go by the Old Testament,now your speaking like its fact!U seem very glib and unsure about anything your saying... and finally, yes, I would have no problem in telling such a malevolent,petty,jealous(such juvenile emotions,really?)2 get 2 fuck!!!
@fluggy20033 I'm not unsure about anything my beliefs have a firm foundation,i said we don't go by the old testament anymore that's because Jesus came and made everything anew.The old testament is more or less history books and there have been many books with references that characters from the old testament were real so on what grounds do you say that its not?People do all kind's of insane thing's while they are drunk that they would never do sober to argue other wise would be foolish.
@riverstory87 "Good" people don't do "anything" when theyre drunk!! "Evil" people do! If I went out tonight, got a girl blind drunk and raped her (just like Lot's daughters), would u say its ok because she was drunk and "people do anything when they r drunk"! ... or would I more than likely be condemned to hell! Doesnt matter when it is, now or 3 thousand years ago... it is still evil, immoral behaviour! I find the fact that u try and justify it extremely worrying/creepy!!
@fluggy20033 Dude we are not talking about guys raping girls just the opposite actually and what does it take to achieve penetration....an erection so how is it rape if he was aroused.This was a very long time ago guy, peoples minds didn't run on the same wave length as our's they had a different train of thought.What you see as wrong they didn't think was so bad just like scientist believe cavemen would crack there women in the head with a rock before dragging them off to have sex.
@riverstory87 Sodom and Gomorrah??? Old Testament n'est pas? "We dont even live by that book not since jesus died on the cross 2000 year's ago it's the new testament we go by" - not sure where I got that quote from? Why couldn't God (bein the wise fellow he is) just have stopped these cities from existing before they started shaggin each other, he was watchin all the way along. So he saves Lot, turns his wife to salt for merely looking over her shoulder. . . He is so so Just! ...tbc
@riverstory87 All atheists maintain is that people are naturally good (something that religion directly contradicts), and that you can be moral, and live a perfectly happy and fulfilling life WITHOUT any superstition. Religion maintains that we are all naturally evil, that without a supreme dictator we would all be disgusting and immoral, that we should look forward to the destruction of our planet and every living person on it and that THAT is the ultimate REWARD?! ... Atheists, arrogant? PAH.
@MyMyMyAccount Believe what you want,I couldn't care less if nothing happened when you died or if you burned in hell for the rest of eternity,It doesn't matter to me.
@MyMyMyAccount Of course atheist want the world to believe that we are all good inside but we are not.Religion does not say that we are all bad just that we are weak and easily susceptible to outer influence.Look at the music industry (lady gaga,rap artist)one condone's violence the other would be perfectly happy if free sex was happening in the streets with as many partners as they wanted.It's sickening and immoral and godlessness to an extreme.It is immoral and the world cant get enough of it.
fucking i hate hitchens why did he have to die????
hehefromhere 1 day ago
Peter Hitchens has a much greater understanding of the God picture than Christopher did. In a controlled NWO dominant world Christopher got the perks. In an ideal world Peter would be more well known.
RamsesReturns 1 day ago
I am certainly no ashamed of Christians... sure some don't get it and can be hypocrites sure, but there are those who act badly no matter what their beliefs. God is God and he cares little what arrogant, defiant people think. You won't outwit God in the end... nor surprise him with any level of defiance. He has seen it all.
RamsesReturns 1 day ago
Even in the face of death he was a witty son of a bitch.
Nirvana451994Cobain 3 days ago 6
This has been flagged as spam show
Only a REAL FOOL would claim there is no God! Man creates awesome skyscrapers, fake hearts, tunnels, vehicles etc.. If we are very imperfect then what more can God create THE UNIVERSE! You must accept Jesus Christ as your Savior to receive eternal rest in heaven! Simple! John 3:16 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him! Repent & accept Jesus Christ! Jesus Christ or HELL?!? Visit cbn. com
tigersforchrist 3 days ago
"The fact that I can voluntarily degrade the quality of my writing does not prove anything"
Thank you for proving me right :) Lawl. Lol what was all that about I.Q.? You lack critical thought lol :) Thanks for playing. Ahaha
stalkingcat123 1 week ago
@stalkingcat123 Ok bottom line; you're an unintelligent individual, you would no doubt like to believe that the fact you express yourself like an idiot does not show how stupid you actually are.
It does.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 1 week ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon lol yeah? I express myself like an idiot?. At least my thoughts are comprehensible and follow a logical pattern yours are all over place. Most of that bullshit you spouted made no sense. Your opinion doesn't make you right if you cant understand this, thats your problem not mine (: Again thanks for playing :) lol.
stalkingcat123 1 week ago
@stalkingcat123 Everything I said made perfect sense you just aren't intelligent enough to understand it. You sound like an idiot and you are one that is all there is to this. If my thoughts seem incomprehensible to you it is only in the manner that your own thoughts would seem incomprehensible to a grub.
The odd little saying you always end with is supposed to get on my nerves is it? If so it's redundant, the monumental stupidity of everything you say is more than annoying enough as it is.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 1 week ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon Your opinion isn't important or relevent to anything, but you. That is the sad fact you missed. Your opinion does not apply to rest of time and space brah. Making jokes to keep the mood light. Can't handle my creativity? Dont reply :)
stalkingcat123 6 days ago
@stalkingcat123 You are wrong, which is unsurprising and completely in keeping with your moronic nature. That a thing is my opinion does not mean that that is all it is, it can quite easily be objectively true in addition to being my opinion. My opinion does not NECESSARILY apply to the rest of time and space, but it may well do, and does in this case. You are not stupid because it is my opinion that you are, that you are stupid is an independant truth on which I base my opinion.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 6 days ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon lol that is your opinion that does not make you right :) thanks for playing. :)
stalkingcat123 6 days ago
@stalkingcat123 Some of it is opinion some of it is fact, that what I said makes sense is a fact, I can see exactly where the failure in your understanding lies which lends credence to the opinion part of my comment which is that you are a stupid person. Even that is not truly an opinion though since it either is or is not true independant of whether I think it is true.
It is true by the way, rest assured.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 6 days ago
Comment removed
stalkingcat123 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MiltiadesOfMarathon lol okay let me put to you this way you might understand, I doubt it because you lack comprehension and critical thought. If a boat is made to accommodate 20 ppl and your opinion no matter how well informed is that it should be able to hold 75, so you over load the boat and it sinks. doesn't matter what your opinion is the boat always sinks. If you didnt understand. /watch?v=_BDD5rCcu-w
you may get the idea. You can have an opinion doesnt mean its valid
stalkingcat123 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@stalkingcat123 The opinion that a boat with a capacity of 20 can hold 75 people is, by defintion, not well informed.
Also I have never maintained that a thing is correct because it is my opinion, it is you who have repeatedly claimed that my opinions, inherently and necessarily, have nothing to do with reality; a transparently false and idiotic belief. What if my opinion is that the boat can hold 20? Will you still say ''lol that is your opinion that does not make you right''?
MiltiadesOfMarathon 6 days ago
the world is a little less bright now....we miss u Hitch :*( how are we gonna Hitchslap Thiests now?
genestarwind7 1 week ago
0:35 ...Bummer
MaestroAlvis 1 week ago
a day where all the smart people die off and were only left with dumb people.
vindelextreme 1 week ago
@vindelextreme that happened already in the US bible belt.
TheCaptainLulz 1 week ago
@TheCaptainLulz i live in the bible belt and theirs still an underground resistance of logic were fighting the good fight. never forget us
TheRandomguy112 1 week ago
@TheRandomguy112 I wont, but I have to question your logic in staying there. Those people are hopeless, and the worst thing is that they revel in their ignorance. wheres a good plague when you need one.
TheCaptainLulz 1 week ago
@TheCaptainLulz i stay because i have a little hope in the people here they may not be the most intelligent of people but we have the children so in a couple of years we should see some good progress.
TheRandomguy112 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheRandomguy112 "All these things cause the Father-General [of the Jesuits] to be feared by the Pope and sovereigns... A sovereign who is not their [the Jesuits'] friend will sooner or later experience their vengeance." (1852)
Luigi Desanctis (Official Censor of the Inquisition)
augustmaquet 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheRandomguy112 ...Wherever a totalitarian movement erupts, whether Communist or Nazi, a Jesuit can be found in the role of 'advisor' or leader; in [Communist] Cuba Fr. Armando Llorente and in Argentina the neo-Nazis are led by Fr. Menvieille."
Emanuel M. Josephson (1968)
augustmaquet 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheRandomguy112 "[Jesuit-trained Illuminist Adam] Weishaupt's success in forcing the Vatican to reestablish the abolished Jesuit Order [Ed. Note: it had been abolished in 1773 by Pope Clement XIV], through revival of the Church's original Nazarene Communism in the form of present-day Communism, led to the conspiracy's control by the Society of Jesus [i.e., the Jesuits]...
augustmaquet 1 week ago
Hitchens earned respect from atheists and theists alike.
squamish4244 1 week ago
Comment removed
mocroroosje18 1 week ago
based on the behaviour of most christians in the world today i am almost ashamed to say i believe in god, but i do, and i think christopher hitchens was a great man. very intelligent and uncompromising in what he believed. he will be missed.
jordanstromsk 2 weeks ago
@jordanstromsk nice thoughts, keep praying to your god who is burning him in hell now
Bananayoghurt1000 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ahhhhaaaha- im so glad this toad faced british homo is dead
americansRscum 2 weeks ago
@americansRscum
Yeah, we're much better off with useless homophobe idiots like you, aren't we? Eat shit, monkey boy.
gcaveney 2 weeks ago
@americansRscum Shut the fuck up you Cuntless troll.
charlieiscool1000 1 week ago
Comment removed
MiltiadesOfMarathon 2 weeks ago
And the difference between ''Without God there is no objective morality'' and ''Religion is useless'' is?
PS: Objectivity has to to with being able to demonstrate. So demonstrate a supernatural source, will you?
TomFynn 2 weeks ago
@TomFynn Well, in answer to your first point, I'll simply say that if you cannot see the difference between those two statements there is really nothing I can do to help you.
As to your second question, I am not required to demonstrate a supernatural source, since I don't believe in one. All I have been saying is that one would be required to render morality objective, not subjective.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 2 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon A supernatural being would simply make morality commanded, not objective. And as long as you cannot give a precise objective prescription how to establish what said supernatural being commands (scripture does not count), you could not call it objective, even if it was.
TomFynn 2 weeks ago
@TomFynn You need to get over this belief that I'm trying to convert people to religion or am myself religious. Yes you are correct that we would then run into the problem of ''well how do you know what the objective morality is'', Irrelevant. The ONLY point I make is that no God = no objective morality = nothing is right or wrong.
That's it.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 2 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon I got this so far. And the point I am trying to get across is that we do not need objective morality, so the question in itself is pointless, and even *if*, a supernatural being would (suitable procedures provided) not mean objective, it would mean commanded, and thus arbitrary and therefore not morality. Only if said rules were argued, laid out understandably and generally agreed upon by all parties involved. Which is exactly what we got now.
TomFynn 2 weeks ago
@TomFynn Right you seem to be making two points. The first being that even moral laws laid down by a creator God would be open to disagreement, the second being that subjective morality is as good as objective morality.
On the first point, if a creator God lays down moral laws they are as immutable and objective as the physical laws that God created, that is, they simply apply themselves to you whatever you happen to feel about it.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 2 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon So God the eternal puppet player? Doesn't make it any less of a commandment. And still laws laid down on a whim by some "higher authority" *are* dictates. Since - other than with the laws of physics - one has to assume that said supernatural being has had a choice. Which does *not* apply to the laws of physics.
TomFynn 2 weeks ago
@TomFynn Why not? On what basis do you assert that the laws of physics could not have been other than as they are?
Also, what do you mean ''life is not perfect''? You're still stuck in making value judgements, as if life would be perfect if everyone agreed. But what reason do we have to suppose that this is so? You imply that there is a perfect way that things ''should'' be, which is the basis of morality, but we've agreed morals are just meaningless subjective feelings.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 2 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon Whatever the laws of physics are they do not *choose* as with some supernatural entity. And if that does not choose either, what's the point?
"Life is not perfect" Shorthand for: the distribution of any property in humans is subject of a statistical distribution, as one would expect from a evolutionary process.
TomFynn 2 weeks ago
@TomFynn As for your second point, it has several problems. Not everyone agrees with the morals of society, and those who do not agree are not in any way wrong or defective, their subjective opinion is as valid as that of the majority.
Also, generally agreed upon social taboos (which is what all subjective moral systems really boil down to) provide no basis to believe any action is actually wrong. If you can avoid punishment by the majority for comitting a rape for example, why not do it?
MiltiadesOfMarathon 2 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon Of course not everyone agrees. Life is not perfect. And furthermore, it helps to keep an open mind. Provided the subjective opinion is well reasoned and based on evidence. Fairy tales don't count.
As for escaping punishment: Everybody lies. The innocent so they don't get punished for something they did not do, and the guilty because they do not have a choice. - Babylon 5
TomFynn 2 weeks ago
what a retarded audience (those who laughed at him saying that he's dying) and what a nice answer he gave to them...!
arianseyedi 3 weeks ago
"Well I'm dying" *laughter of shock and surprise* "And so are you" *laughter of enlightenment and revealed mortality*.
I have a glass that I wrote a memorial message on, that I drink from each time I have a pang about his death. For my birthday, I'm probably going to buy some Johnny Walker Black and one of his or Bertrand Russell's works.
All of this sounds pretentious but I wouldn't have made it through this years metaphysical anguish without Hitchens and other thinkers.
wildvenisson 3 weeks ago
He set up his own joke.
SenorZorrozzz 3 weeks ago
One of the smartest men in our lifetime and he still couldn't lay off the smokes. I only recently discovered who you are Chris and I miss you dearly.
117ty 3 weeks ago
I teared up when he said he was dying. You will and always will be missed Christopher.
WildManDan15 3 weeks ago
"Well I'm dying..but so are you."
malkirion 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
u a bich mayne u tryin to soun smart n shit but u just a bich! HAHAHAHA! u a bich! u probaly aint got no girl either cuz girls dont like biches! hell nah u better get outta my face dude cuz u aint wanna see wuts bout 2 go down up in dis bich!!! didn't hear me? i say get da fuk out mayne u aint no cool n shit bich
xnobody777x 3 weeks ago
rest in peace, sir
kblargh 1 month ago 6
I think we could all learn something fromChristopher Hitchings philosophy. You dont have to believe in an afterlife to be good, and you dont have to be fearful of a supreme beings wraith to be a good person! In life I thought you were often pompous, in death I thought you were a pretty spectacular human being.
mintwithahole 1 month ago 14
@mintwithahole There's no such thing as ''good'' without a supernatural source of moral authority.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 4 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon No. Morality comes from mirror neurons in the brain. Mirror neurons are responsible for empathic emotions and solidarity in human beings. Morality wouldnt exist without mirror neurons. People who don't have these, are called psychopaths! Did your god create psychopaths?... No wait, i know your answer... "Theyre possessed by the devil!"
riiight... ;)
ilisbaani 4 weeks ago
@ilisbaani Why would you call him ''my god''? I am an atheist. I simply realize that empathy is not the same thing as morality. Morality is the idea that a thing is right or wrong in an absract sense, beyond its observable consequences in this world. If you base your belief that there exists such a thing as 'good' on the existence of human empathy then you have an extremely flawed belief system and I would advise you to not argue with me further.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 3 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon thats convenient that you get to define morality, and then point out why its flawed, according to your original definition. haha you're a dumbass dude.
Runningjoels 3 weeks ago
@Runningjoels I'm much smarter than you.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 3 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon yeah, i scored in the 95th percentile for my age group in intelligence. its highly probable that you are NOT part of the 5% thats smarter then me. and no, you're a dumbass.
Runningjoels 3 weeks ago
@Runningjoels If that were true it would be highly probable. It would still be false of course but that is another story.
Not that I actually believe you, people in the top 95th percentile intelligence-wise tend to have far better grammar and spelling abilities and just generally do not express themselves in the manner of retards like you do.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
Runningjoels 3 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon if you can explain to me the logical connection between following grammar rules and intelligence, then i will agree that i am retarded. otherwise, im going to assume that i save time on following formal rules especially in informal mediums such as youtube video comments. the only point of language is communication, and if my improper grammar leads to you not being able to understand my point, then it confirms my theory that you are retarded.... dumbass
Runningjoels 3 weeks ago
@Runningjoels I never said I could not understand your point, I said that your abysmal spelling and grammar undermines my belief in your assertion of being highly intelligent.
If you are unable to understand how bragging about being in the 95th percentile in terms of intelligence in a comment riddled with obvious errors is problematic then I'm afraid there is really nothing I can do to help you.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 3 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon yeah thats what i thought dumbass. cant provide a logical connection between intelligence and following grammar rules. incidently, the IQ test i took didnt have a grammar section. retard
Runningjoels 3 weeks ago
@Runningjoels You're pressing that point? It was so patently moronic I simply assumed I was excused from answering it.
Are you seriously argueing that there is no correlation between a person's intelligence and the quality of their spelling and grammar? All it takes is the existence of such a correlation to establish this ''logical connection'' of yours. Honestly I didn't think I'd have to explain this to someone boasting about being in the 95th percentile.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
Runningjoels 3 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon theres no, or perhaps only weak, correlation between intelligence and spelling and grammar. intelligence and education level are completely different things, and if you dont understand this, you are truely retarded. there could be geniuses in Africa who will never learn to write. even if you never taught einstein or mozart any grammar rules, they would still be geniuses. do you understand that? ive known many bimbos with perfect grammar, even with good grades, its unrelated
Runningjoels 3 weeks ago
@Runningjoels You believe there is no correlation between intelligence and the quality of a person's spelling and grammar? I mean you assert it as though you have access to facts of some kind though I don't believe you do, I don't believe the research has been done.
It seems to me to be self evidently the case that, generally speaking, people assume greater intelligence in those who are articulate and who write correctly than those who do not, and that this assumption is generally correct.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 3 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon no, actually the people who resort to being a grammar nazi are usually the people without intelligent points to make. so they point out trivial things like lack of capitilization to compensate for their stupidity. i kno propper grammar and spelling but save the effort when it comes to youtube. i think thats reasonable. again, spelling and grammar have to do with education, which is seperate from intelligence. anybody can be educated, not everyone is intelligent.
Runningjoels 3 weeks ago
@Runningjoels It may be true that you do know how to express yourself properly, but the fact remains; if a person is going to assert their intelligence in an online comment, it makes sense to at least attempt to not come across as an uneducated, sloppy dullard.
Anyway, you never actually made any points in your original comment, if you had I would have adressed them. What you did was to object to my definition of morality without criticising it or substituting your own, then call me a retard.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 3 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon getting in a hissy fit about whose smarter is pointless, since either of us could lie about IQ results. the fact of the matter is that you gave an arbitrary definition for morality and then tried to use that same definition as evidence. that is stupid. you are stupid. i dont need to subsitute my own definition.
Runningjoels 3 weeks ago
@Runningjoels i win, you mad bro?
Runningjoels 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Runningjoels Ok, agreed about it being pointless to argue over IQ, and distasteful as well. I will point out though that the entire argument stemmed from you calling me a 'dumbass' in your very first comment, in keeping with your own lack of intelligence and the borish, classless nature that goes with it.
''that is stupid. you are stupid''
Only if I am wrong, which must be established, not simply asserted. You asserting that my defintion is arbitrary or wrong does not make it so.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 3 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon you are exhibit A for my point. the way you say things shows that you are educated. but the logic behind your points show that you are stupid.
Runningjoels 3 weeks ago
Is that so? What i find funny is that you imagine I would be impressed by your claim to be in the 95th percentile. Even if true that still leaves you totally outclassed by me. 95th percentile really isn't all that smart, that puts your IQ at what, 120, 125 tops? You probably werent even the smartest guy in your class at school, let alone in the whole school. Like I said, I'm much smarter than you.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 3 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon I followed the whole debate, and I think you won. Honestly, that douche is just mad he can't do no sausage tomato, you heard?
xnobody777x 3 weeks ago
@xnobody777x i followed your ex girlfriends vaginal discharge trail and it came right up to my cock. your ex likes my cock because its huge and veiny. she didnt like your cock because it was tiny and smelled like mushrooms. i like squirting my semen on and around her butthole. she likes it too. she said you're a lazy mexican shit sniffer. she said you liked to sniff her shits before she flushed them. thats gross, lazy. zionist mexican.
Runningjoels 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Runningjoels i followed your ex girlfriends vaginal discharge trail and it came right up to my cock. your ex likes my cock because its huge and veiny. she didnt like your cock because it was tiny and smelled like mushrooms. i like squirting my semen on and around her butthole. she likes it too. she said you're a lazy mexican shit sniffer. she said you liked to sniff her shits before she flushed them. thats gross, lazy. zionist mexican.
xnobody777x 3 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon Following proper use of grammar has little to do with intellect! It has more to do with amount of effort! Calling somone on improper use of grammar is a joke.
stalkingcat123 1 week ago
@stalkingcat123 You assert that as though it is fact, though I seriously doubt you have anything more to back it up than your own stupid imaginings.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 1 week ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon Lol that is your opinion and it doesn't make you right. Infact it makes you so opposite of right, your wrong. I don't have to back up a fact, you can do the experiment yourself right now.
stalkingcat123 1 week ago
@stalkingcat123 So I am wrong and you do have something to back up your claim?
Very well then, let's hear it.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 1 week ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon Did you not understand "You can do the experiment yourself right now?" Now I am concerned about your reading comprehension. Really obvious test, just put less effort into typing your next poorly thought out comment.
Thanks for playing
stalkingcat123 1 week ago
@stalkingcat123 The fact that I can voluntarily degrade the quality of my writing does not prove anything. More intelligent people do better on IQ tests, at any time of their choosing they can simply perform badly, what does this prove?
Are you actually so stupid that you think this constitutes proof? You said it was ''fact'', I assumed you would point me to the revelant peer reviewed research. Do you even understand what a fact is?
You are stupid, there is no other way to put it.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 1 week ago
Comment removed
stalkingcat123 1 week ago
Comment removed
xnobody777x 3 weeks ago
@mintwithahole I think the bigger message from him is that we can learn not to ridicule eachother's belief or lack of belief don't you think? This was coming from a a devout atheist who gave the utmost respect to his devout Christian genetic engineer friend.
psalmsurfer1 3 weeks ago
@mintwithahole But if there is no god then what foundation is there for objective moral values, in which a person can be objectively "good"?
Halfturretslicer 3 weeks ago
@Halfturretslicer There are many religions, all adamant about the rightness of the word of God, and yet all have different 'objective moral values'. You don't need God to have objective moral values. They are printed in our DNA, it's in our nature to discriminate between right and wrong: for instance, sane people love and protect kids and know that's how it should be, regardless of their personal beliefs. Also through empathy with other humans we choose how to behave not to hurt anybody.
bordereye 3 weeks ago
@bordereye Of course you need God to have objective moral values, in order to be objective the morals must have a nonhuman source obviously. Throughout most of history it has been considered perfectly acceptable to murder, steal, and rape, provided the victims were not members of your in-group.
Natural human morality is no different from the loyalty of one dog in a pack to another.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 2 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon Your comment supports my point of view. Throughout history human beings, either theists and atheists, have committed the worst crimes or proved to be generous and noble. Social environment has a strong influence on the way we think and behave, but our natural instincts, if not corrupted by society or mental illness, are shared. The love of a mother and a father for their sons is objective, not subjective; it's printed in their DNA, it's in their very nature.
bordereye 2 weeks ago
@bordereye Love for your children is neither objective, nor morality.The love of parents for their children is certainly a strong trend, but nowhere near an absolute, and ultimately, those who do not love their children are as correct as those who do.
I really dont see how you think this supports your assertion that objective morality can exist without God. Why is any action right or wrong? What is the source of these properties?
MiltiadesOfMarathon 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
bordereye 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MiltiadesOfMarathon Love for children is neither objective nor moral? Do you mean that in a godless world raping kids shouldn't necessarily be condemned? Think about this: if human beings don't have the natural ability to discriminate between Good and Evil, how can they consciously and genuinely follow the word of God? And how could He ever judge them if He hadn't given them the means to understand what is right and what is wrong? I can hardly imagine robots going to Heaven or Hell.
bordereye 2 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon "What is the source of these properties?" As with everything in humans the source is evolution.
TomFynn 2 weeks ago
@TomFynn No doubt you felt fairly clever saying that, but I wasnt referring to humans, I was referring to actions. What reason is there to suppose that any action is right or wrong other than how you, personally, feel about it?
Invoke evolution if you wish, but clearly, evolution has left us humans with the willingness and capacity to harm others for our own benefit. That is not a bug, it's a feature, it is the way we are supposed to act.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 2 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon "I wasnt referring to humans, I was referring to actions" And human actions are not a result of our evolution? And yes, how our actions make us feel is exactly our only way to judge the right and wrong of our actions. That we can also harm our fellow man is also part of evolution. No one ever claimed evolution is perfect. Quite the contrary.
TomFynn 2 weeks ago
@TomFynn No, evolution IS perfect. Your ridiculous value judgements on evolutionarily advantageous behaviours are meaningless. This was my point, you still assume that actions can be right or wrong, as though morality was objective. On one hand you admit that mere personal feelings constitute morality ,in which case if I feel its ok to murder, steal, or rape, then it is, but on the other hand you still cling to the idea that it is in some abstract way 'wrong' to harm others for personal benefit.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 2 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon "evolution IS perfect"? Tell that to the laryngeal nerve of the giraffe.
My point - if you had actually read my posts - was that our judgments of right and wrong *is* based on feelings, which are not "mere" but an important part of our evolutionary apparatus to judge the impact of our actions on others and vice versa and act accordingly. The minority of people who *cannot* do that are called psychopaths.
TomFynn 2 weeks ago
@TomFynn Of course feelings are 'mere', if that is all you base your morality on then it is extremely flimsy indeed. Besdies which, we naturally 'feel' less bad about harming those different from ourselves, and if feelings are all that matters then this is legitimate, it actually is less wrong to harm those of a different race etc. For most of history it was considered fine to murder, rape, or enslave others, provided they were foreigners, this is natural 'feelings' based morality in action.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 2 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon Most of the time in history it was fine to kill people for who you were *programmed* to see as outsiders. Such is also the remnant of our evolution, who made us think in in-group/out-group schemes from back when we we were hunter-gatherers. A thinking that religion with its those-that-are-saved/damned-heathens thinking actually amplified, betraying its origin from the earliest childhood of our species.
But we are learning. Time to grow up.
TomFynn 2 weeks ago
@TomFynn It isn't programming though, it is biological hardwiring. We care about our immediate blood relatives more than our extended family, we care about our extended family more than about strangers, we care about strangers of our ethnic group more than strangers of others ethnic groups, and finally, we care about members of our own species more than other species, that is not programming, that is nature. The evolutionary reasons for this are also obvious.
You can't un-learn your biology.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 2 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon You notice that your argument renders religion useless, insofar as going against the in-group/out-group grain is concerned? Which to go against would be the whole point?
TomFynn 2 weeks ago
@TomFynn Irrelavent, that is a different debate.
I take it by your sudden change of subject that you've finally accepted the correctness of my position, and have given up argueing against it? Without a supernatural source of moral authority there is no objective morality, which is to say that there is no morality that is really worth anything.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 2 weeks ago
@MiltiadesOfMarathon "sudden change of subject" Did you actually read my posts?
And if you need a supernatural source for your morality, you are a truly sad fuck.
TomFynn 2 weeks ago
@TomFynn I read your posts, you just aren't that intelligent and so aren't really saying anything worthwhile.
Yes you changed the subject from this:
''Without God there is no objective morality''
To this:
''Religion is useless''
If you want to debate the usefulness of religion I am happy to, but it is a change of subject.
And yes, I need a supernatural source in order to consider any action abstractly right or wrong. If you understood objectivity you would as well.
MiltiadesOfMarathon 2 weeks ago
@mintwithahole He died with a lot of dignity. I agree with what you said.
lilmissmachiavelli 3 weeks ago
Great man, great mind.
elfmotat 1 month ago 2
Why did the audience laugh when he said he was dying?
cemalson 1 month ago
@cemalson Morbid humor, its very common among suffering people.
leslucas 1 month ago
Quick FYI, the Universe is ~14 billion years old, but the Earth hasn't been around nearly that long. Pretty hard for the human brain to develop naturally on a planet that doesn't exist.
KiyashiSan 1 month ago 33
@KiyashiSan Yes, damn hard to develop on a planet has only been around for a mere 4.5 billion years...
TomFynn 1 month ago
@KiyashiSan I think he may have mistakenly said billion instead of million maybe.
DrBlueDot 1 month ago
@KiyashiSan You could argue that the evolution of the universe and the planet could be part of the development of the human brain.
Zero21595 1 month ago
@KiyashiSan 4.5bya
TehSxc18yearOld 1 month ago
@KiyashiSan Wow, yeah, and also when we haven't been around for that long on Earth.. relatively speaking ofcourse.
Naxide 1 month ago
@KiyashiSan I suppose you could make the argument that for the brain to form, the Earth had to exist, and for it to exist, you had to form stars, etc. So technically, the brain 'started' forming at the inception of the universe.
Barkspawn 1 month ago
@KiyashiSan The Earth has been around for about a 1/3 of that time, 4.54 Billion years. There was more than enough time for a human brain to develop naturally, even if you were to put the starting point of life way later than the start of earth.
shaggy413x 3 weeks ago
@KiyashiSan He could have just been arguing that the start of the universe was the start of the long journey to the mind as it is today
AiluroPanda 3 weeks ago
@KiyashiSan I would love to see the documentation on how they came to conclude the universe is that old lol
psalmsurfer1 3 weeks ago
@KiyashiSan we have a winner
jeounghh87 3 weeks ago
@KiyashiSan The iron in your blood came from stars; the blood that feeds your brain. We're all a lot older than we may like to think. The real question is, after 14 billion years, it's it about time we all grow up?
lefort292 3 weeks ago
@KiyashiSan
However that's when everything started. You could say it's pretty hard for a brain to develop naturally in a species that doesn't exist or a planet that doesn't have life or doesn't have DNA. It took the universe 14 billion years to randomly create what we are.
benjaminluckinbill07 2 weeks ago
@KiyashiSan
4.5 billion years is plenty of time, thank you.
AdNeeb 2 weeks ago
@KiyashiSan you mad bro? the earth is 6.3 billion years old that 6,300,000,000 years thats alot of time for evolution to evolve naturally especially when lizards in our lifetime have evolved massively within mere decades
brasher01 2 weeks ago
@KiyashiSan Also, to go one step further. The humans arent 4.5billions years old either :)
thewizard2006 2 weeks ago
these my friends... are balls!
dzwadziescia 1 month ago
Comment removed
fluggy20033 1 month ago
14 billion years WHAT A IDIOT the earth is 6000 years
3ofusalone 1 month ago
@3ofusalone It's actually over 4 billion years old, not 6000 years old.
JordansGuitarCovers 1 month ago 2
@3ofusalone HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA "breathes" hahahahAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHA
CyclonexxxIce 1 month ago
Hitchens was LAZY and opportunistic.
Kostly 1 month ago
Comment removed
fluggy20033 1 month ago
Okay here it goes, i just want you to know this is a very deep subject me and you are about to enter into so if your not ready to dedicate many youtube pages to it spanning several day's the nit's best if you let me know i don't want to get halfway through a discussion and you get upset and say i'm finished talking with you or don't post back because alot of atheist do that to me
riverstory87 1 month ago
too bad he is in hell
Andytheantiathiest 1 month ago
People which say things like he's in fire or they're glad he's dead and call themselves Christian. Aren't one at all, so I don't like it if people are willing to use that person as the example and say that's the true Christian when they very well know that a true Christian is one that follows what the bible says. And doesn't it say not to judge? Obviously Hitchens knew a few good Christians, this video is proof of it, thank you for reading.
CoolNightSky 1 month ago
@riverstory87 where do you imagine this lake of fire is located? Perhaps within the same realm as the tooth fairy, Santa and flocks of flying unicorns? .... all sound equally ridiculous to me. Hitchens received NO proof throughout his life, and to suggest that he can receive proof after he has died is a clear sign of your insanity.
MyMyMyAccount 1 month ago
@MyMyMyAccount I don't know where it is but i bet if you had a choice you would choice for it to be in your own ass so your love hitchen's could have a place to reside forever lol Im fed up with all atheist your so arrogant and im not talking about our small conversation i'm talking in general no one can prove you wrong you would rather cut your own ear's off then hear the truth its pitiful YOU ARE PITIFUL lol
riverstory87 1 month ago
@riverstory87 I'd rather be baskin in sweet hell than be stuck in a fluffy dreamland with that evil monster from your bible(and no,I don't mean beelzebub)!!!!God has more blood on his hands than all atrocites in history combined!As an atheist,I do consider that there may be a chance(however miniscule) that a God might just exist!! I also choose 2 believe that if there is a God, he wouldnt be the loathesome, jealous, egomaniacal, slavemongering, murderer depicted in the "good" book!
fluggy20033 1 month ago
@fluggy20033 Why do atheist refer back to the old testament every time they want to show the world how cruel god is?We dont even live by that book not since jesus died on the cross 2000 year's ago it's the new testament we go by sweetheart so get with the program and jesus preached love not hate and how is it our place to judge GOD lol it's silly we are his creation a smaller part of him
riverstory87 1 month ago
@riverstory87 Nice, ignore the wicked stuff and keep the sloppy stuff, despite it being THE WORD OF GOD!!! The truth is the New Testament has had many many revisions, right up until the 1800's (despite no-one hearing from god in 100s of yrs), with buckets of new content and each time its always said to contain new "Revealed Truth"! ie "Religious" opportunists amending the texts to grant themselves even more alleged holiness/power!Your living by a heavily doctored/manipulated relic!
fluggy20033 1 month ago
@fluggy20033 Sodom and gomorrah were two city's completely corrupted and set against god.He sent a man named lot in to find just ten descent people and lot failed so yes god had those two city's destroyed.For punishment and example and if you had the ability to make people in your image and they turned on you and did what you told them not to and despised you then you would do the same to preserve goodness in the rest of the world.God owes us nothing he governs whos to say otherwise
riverstory87 1 month ago
@riverstory87 ...and were even at the real moral issue....Lot offered his daughters to be gang raped by the townsfolk ... if that happened today and some guy said God had told him to do it , he would be sectioned!! Thats quite light though compared to Lot getting plied with alcohol and RAPED by BOTH his daughters! Thats right, God saved them because they were SO good, only to see them commit the ultimate betrayal of their Father's trust. Hellbound i'm afraid! Dear God will u ever get it right!??
fluggy20033 1 month ago
@fluggy20033 Well dude they just saw the destruction of two big city's they thought they were the only one's left on the planet just because they wasn't that smart doesn't mean they wasn't good people.They thought it was there duty to replenish the earth what's bad about that incest is wrong but is it worse then letting the human race die off without a fight which it wouldn't have but they didn't know that.As for the gang rape people were simple back then they would give there daughters away for
riverstory87 1 month ago
@riverstory87 animals it wasn't a big deal back then like it would be today the townsfolk wanted to have sex with the angels that were holy and sent there by god so lot gave them an option things were different thousands of years ago the fact that you compare a simple civilization to us just shows how foolish you are different moral code in those days they didnt believe like we do they were trying to rape gods holy angels you idiot whats wrong with you how could you argue that
riverstory87 1 month ago
@riverstory87 For starters,if you want your Father's seed..u suggest it,you don't RAPE him!..or u end up in some sordid, reverse Josef Fritzl situation. What do u mean they were simple? So your saying GOD made them simple? Incest isn't just wrong, it's considered pretty evil.. and regardless of their intentions - No.5 Honour thy Father and Mother (an extremely sinister Rape IS NOT considered honouring), and No.10 Do not covet thy neighbours wife (but its ok if its your dead mother's husband?)!
fluggy20033 1 month ago
@fluggy20033 God made us with the ability to learn anything we just hadn't progressed that much up to then they were simple minded(much like you but just as capable of learning as anyone else.Well they knew there father wouldn't have went for it if they would have asked because undoubtedly he knew that the world wasn't over but the women didn't if you think women nowadays dont have any common sense imagine them then and if his wife was alive then wouldnt need to have sex with him now would they
riverstory87 1 month ago
@riverstory87 Right...ur story now is God made us simple cavemen(in his image?) and we've grown from that?Lot had dealings with God/Angels-he should've been more enlightened/intelligent 5000yrs ago than any1 today!Despite the fact that Lot was obeying and serving God,He still murders,nay,freezes(?what the hell kinda punishment is turning into a pillar of salt- y not copper or slime?)his wife and let his daughters rape him.If god rewards me like that i'd tell him to fuck right off!!
fluggy20033 1 month ago
@fluggy20033 My story hasn't changed and it wont change so don't ever insinuate other wise.He gave us the ability to learn all thing's but without t.v.,school and the internet i'm sure knowledge was hard to accumulate especially with having to hunt,farm,raise animals and praise god all at the same time.God told them not to turn back and look but what did she do, ignored god so it wasn't a punishment but more of a foolish mistake on her part.
riverstory87 1 month ago
@fluggy20033 The man was sloppy drunk not retarded you will do anything while inebriated and how is it rape dummy if he let them do it.But you go ahead tell him to fuck off all you want just shows how immature you are i mean come on if you were face to face the creator of the universe the alpha and omega would you really say"fuck off"lol
riverstory87 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@riverstory87 "You will do anything when inebriated"??? Honestly?? Thats really a moral standard you would condone/adhere too? Thats your comeback??? This is getting way, way too inane for me 2 possibly continue, fun as it is! U already told me u don't go by the Old Testament,now your speaking like its fact!U seem very glib and unsure about anything your saying... and finally, yes, I would have no problem in telling such a malevolent,petty,jealous(such juvenile emotions,really?)2 get 2 fuck!!!
fluggy20033 1 month ago
@fluggy20033 I'm not unsure about anything my beliefs have a firm foundation,i said we don't go by the old testament anymore that's because Jesus came and made everything anew.The old testament is more or less history books and there have been many books with references that characters from the old testament were real so on what grounds do you say that its not?People do all kind's of insane thing's while they are drunk that they would never do sober to argue other wise would be foolish.
riverstory87 1 month ago
@riverstory87 "Good" people don't do "anything" when theyre drunk!! "Evil" people do! If I went out tonight, got a girl blind drunk and raped her (just like Lot's daughters), would u say its ok because she was drunk and "people do anything when they r drunk"! ... or would I more than likely be condemned to hell! Doesnt matter when it is, now or 3 thousand years ago... it is still evil, immoral behaviour! I find the fact that u try and justify it extremely worrying/creepy!!
fluggy20033 1 month ago
@fluggy20033 Dude we are not talking about guys raping girls just the opposite actually and what does it take to achieve penetration....an erection so how is it rape if he was aroused.This was a very long time ago guy, peoples minds didn't run on the same wave length as our's they had a different train of thought.What you see as wrong they didn't think was so bad just like scientist believe cavemen would crack there women in the head with a rock before dragging them off to have sex.
riverstory87 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@riverstory87 Sodom and Gomorrah??? Old Testament n'est pas? "We dont even live by that book not since jesus died on the cross 2000 year's ago it's the new testament we go by" - not sure where I got that quote from? Why couldn't God (bein the wise fellow he is) just have stopped these cities from existing before they started shaggin each other, he was watchin all the way along. So he saves Lot, turns his wife to salt for merely looking over her shoulder. . . He is so so Just! ...tbc
fluggy20033 1 month ago
@riverstory87 All atheists maintain is that people are naturally good (something that religion directly contradicts), and that you can be moral, and live a perfectly happy and fulfilling life WITHOUT any superstition. Religion maintains that we are all naturally evil, that without a supreme dictator we would all be disgusting and immoral, that we should look forward to the destruction of our planet and every living person on it and that THAT is the ultimate REWARD?! ... Atheists, arrogant? PAH.
MyMyMyAccount 1 month ago
@MyMyMyAccount Believe what you want,I couldn't care less if nothing happened when you died or if you burned in hell for the rest of eternity,It doesn't matter to me.
riverstory87 1 month ago
@MyMyMyAccount
Actually, atheists maintain that "evil" is a merely human construct which can be considered as nothing more than actions which impede our survival.
MatteoriteX 1 month ago
@MyMyMyAccount Of course atheist want the world to believe that we are all good inside but we are not.Religion does not say that we are all bad just that we are weak and easily susceptible to outer influence.Look at the music industry (lady gaga,rap artist)one condone's violence the other would be perfectly happy if free sex was happening in the streets with as many partners as they wanted.It's sickening and immoral and godlessness to an extreme.It is immoral and the world cant get enough of it.
riverstory87 1 month ago
@riverstory87 So yes without god you will have no morals to ground you down it would be like animals at the zoo anything goes.
riverstory87 1 month ago
@riverstory87 Grow up, why don't you look outside your window for once
philyuppie 1 month ago