I don't understand what the big deal is. If you do not want to pray that they don't pray. on memorial day I don't always remember. I celebrate Cinco de Mayo yet I'm not Mexican. Atheist always try to make an issue out of everything.
Hitch lays out a slew of arguments, and religious idiot looks like a deer in the headlights. His only strategy is to repeat his mindless ignorant rhetoric over and over despite the weight of the evidence against him. typical religious person
Did anyone else notice that Tony Perkins attacked the credibility of a letter from James Madison because it was discovered 100 years later, obviously making it not credible? Hey Tony, the bible wasn't written down for HUNDREDS of years after the life of Christ. Obviously old Tony doesn't believe in the credibillity of the bible either.
Perkins, how far it goes back is irrelevant. Is it constitutional? No! End of fucking story. Take your Bible and your hair cut, and go back to church where you can hatch new plots to insert your flaccid religion into the collective ass of American society.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I hate Hitchens!...his lies made me actually root for that bigot Tony Perkins. at 3:08 in, AS USUAL, Hitchens lies. The National Day of prayer HAS INVOLVED HINDU PRAYER! It is a day of PRAYER, and NO SPECIFIC RELIGION IS MENTIONED! Just like his book "God is not Great," Hitchens lies & tells half truths to support his bigoted agenda. Oh, & a government run public school shoved science down my throat for years, never mentioning that science & reason have been challenged by philosophy for years.
Why are we always loosing people like Hitchens, yet fucktards like Perkins are in full swing? MJ is dead while Kark Rove is alive and well AND NOT IN JAIL!!!
Perkins looks more like the kind of thing that might haunt teenagers who were foolish enough to take acid in a deserted lunatic asylum than a spokesman with the ear of national media.
His argument is stupid: "since every old president did it, it must be legit". Sorry, tradition is not always good. I'm sure hazing is good too. I'm sure practicing human sacrifice is just as good as well. Stupid argument led by a stupid man. I'm 21 years old and I have way more experience in structuring an argument than that loser has. I bet he feels pretty pathetic that he has a mind of a 14 year old and writes at a 5th grade level. What a sorry excuse for a human.
Around 6:12 Hitchens tried to embarrass Perkins by asking when the national day of prayer originated, thinking that Perkins wouldn't know. It appeared Hitchens didn't actually know the answer to his own question as he actually listened to Perkins for a short period without interrupting.
The day of prayer could be religious, but that is not necessary. It could be a day of meditative prayer on the vastness and beauty of the universe if one wishes. If it was a day of Christian prayer, which is Hitchens' tenuous argument, that would be different. That would be unconstitutional. His argument is based on the idea that the word "prayer" must imply Christian prayer, and he fails to establish that.
if you dismiss madison's writing because it was discovered 100 yrs after being written, how do you feel about the Bible, written down much further from the events it purported to cover.....
For the government too take favor to one ideal or religion risks alienating others of opposing views. It does not matter the precedent nor tradition, for the government to claim an international day of prayer, a democratic republic mind you, it is definitely alienating one group and favoring another. This democracy is supposed to represent its people, not set it to flames.
@dalhar20 'The highest glory of the American Revolution was this:' It connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity"--President Adams, July 4, 1821
@TiberJai no we cant. Government should ignore religion in order too not alienate those with different religions. This democratic government represents a wide range of people with many different beliefs. But despite ones beliefs in guns, it is an essential right to anybody. The right to bear arms allows us to keep a potentially corrupt and overbearing governemnt at bay. To take this away would be maiming and weakening the people, open to manipulation and in worse case scenarios mass killings.
@dalhar20 it was a joke. But the right to bear arms is rubbish. The rest of the western world has banned guns and or made it extremely hard to get hold of guns. To have a constitution is bollocks to be fair, all laws should be able to be changed and rewritten. And yes religion shouldn't be apart of government.
Isn't it interesting that when a Judge gives an opinion in favor of a right wing conservative point of view the right calls it justice but when a Judge gives an opinion in support of something that conservatives are against they call it "Judicial Activism". Conservatives seem to always want everything there way. Conservatives say they want government out of our daily lives except when they want government to invade someones personal life because they don't agree with who that person loves.
The first words out of Hitchens mouth is just an instant win. I mean. I don't think some people realize just how amazing he is at owning people, even before the other side gets to say a word.
Tony Perkins is ass hole with a terrible agenda, not talking about religion only but about everything else on which he stands for or against... is outermost loonesy.
I really liked how he said that if religious people want to teach intelligent design in schools, churches and the like should teach evolutionary theory in their Sunday School. GET WELL SOON HITCH! THIS WORLD NEEDS YOUR ELOQUENCE IN THE FIGHT AGAINST THE CELESTIAL DICTATORSHIP (which is nonetheless nonexistent)
You can pray whenever you want. Many people have prayed instead of relying on reason and have lost loved ones. I feel prayer doesn't deserve a special day clearly those 80% of americans fail to realise how they're insulting their own god's will. They just want attention like the people putting jesus fishs on their cars or wearing a torture device on their necklace.
"call me christopher" lol! Dude Chris if you dont like it get out, and quit trying to change our American Heritage! You're free to pray or not pray, dont hate on those who do unless you have your own bias agenda to advance. What is so offensive about prayer? GMAB bunch of crybabies
@swamislocal1 Well as a non-American its amzing I have to inform you that constitutionally, America is a secular Republic. But maybe you just hate the constitution and the founding fathers?
@stemcgolf The founding fathers who signed the constitution were predominately Christian, and they signed it "in the year of our Lord". Furthermore, nobody is forcing anyone to pray, it's just a part of the tradition that dates back to the founding fathers. You cant change someones desire to pray, in fact I'm praying for you in about 2 seconds.
@Codeusa Please cite your source. Name one man who signed the Constitution of the United States that was an atheist or agnostic. According to the research I've done they were mostly of various Protestant denominations, with respect to a few Roman Catholic's.
@swamislocal1 A number of signatories were Deists, including Benjamin Franklin, James Madison and Thomas Jefferson, as many well as prominent contemporaries such as Thomas Paine and George Washington. Deism, although philosophically distinct from Agnosticism and Atheism, is practically interchangeable for the purposes of such a discussion.
@swamislocal1 The founding fathers could all have been fundamentalist ministers for all I care, but the fact is that they created a secular Republic. They wrote a first ammendment stating that the government cannot establish a religion. Now what is the problem with that? Pray any time you like.
@stemcgolf Exactly, thank you. They didn't force any religious activity on anyone. They simply excercised, and encouraged people to pray together on a specific day because they knew the power in it. You have the right to refuse to pray, but what gives you the right to tell me not to observe this day. It seems that by abolishing our freedom to pray on a specific day in remeberance of the founding fathers, one has attempted to establish an anti religion, and stripped us of our first ammend right
@swamislocal1 As Hitchens would say- "I leave it in the good taste of the audience". Once again, pray anytime you like, but it is unconstitutional to have a day of pray, because it serves no secular purpose, and since America has a seperation of church and state, they shouldn't endorse any religion, or "anti-religion". No one forces you not to pray, and no one forces me to pray. OK?
@stemcgolf Celebrating prayer isn't endorsing a religion.Neither is the dollar bill, "In God we trust". It's recognizing a creator, but just who or what that creator is is up to you and I to decide.We are free to do that thanks to the constitution, and we are free to believe that there is no God.That's seperation of Church and State.According to your philosophy the dollar bill would also be unconstitutional.The fact is, this is how it's been since America was formed, who are you to change it?
@swamislocal1 You are talking jibberish again. " It's recognizing a creator, but just who or what that creator is is up to you and I to decide." Ok. I decide there is no creator. Case closed. Can we please move on now? Isn't your faith strong enough to not have to have the government endorse it?
@stemcgolf Aren't you secure enough in your worldview to not care about the traditions of the founding fathers regarding faith? After all you are the one who wants to change their tradition, not me.
@swamislocal1 Their tradition is irrelevant. Look at my previous comment. BTW Slavery was part of the tradition back then aswell, but that has changed, for the better I think. This is all cleared up by reading the 1st ammendment. Enjoy!
@stemcgolf "Their tradition is irrelevant"? I thought that's what we were discussing. Comparing slavery to prayer says alot about your presupposition regarding the subject. That's like saying Hitler and Mother Teresa are sinonymous. Please quote the section in the first ammendment that says we cant celebrate prayer.
@swamislocal1 We are not discussing tradition. We are discussing law and the constitution. And it couldn't be any clearer in what the founding fathers left;
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"
So how can you read that, and then think that they wanted government endorsed pray? Where is the connection?
@cnestudy1 and people like to say that marriage is the holy matrimony between a man and a women. well thats what the church thinks marriage is. if two people love eachother and wanna get married, let em'. and they say well marriage is also for the intention of having children. well then we shouldn't let people who are fertile get married. its shit like that why i hate religion. if 2 dudes wanna get married. who gives a fuck. its doesnt affect your life
there is no such thing as judicial activism. those who coined that phrase and use it do so simply because the don't like the decisions the judges make.
judges define and enforce the constitution, no more, no less. that some don't like those decisions, and need to call them activist, is nothing less than pure bullshit designed to hoodwink the ignorant into thinking judges have a hidden "liberal agenda" where have we heard that phrase before.
THE TOMB OF THE UNKNOWN SOLDIER : The great irony of it all is if the government had given this dumb dead soldier 24-hour protection when he was alive, like they're doing for his putrefied dead body now, he wouldn't have gotten killed. Let us guard the tomb of the unknown soldier, at considerable taxpayer expense, against the infamous machinations of the unknown body-snatcher.
Tony Perkins tries to look like John-boy Walton to try to put a patina of innocence and goodness on the reprehensible fascism that he actually advocates.
@oaklandj yes, that is essentially it. FRC/Perkins are covert neonazis...and I mean that seriously...they advocate intolerance but it would quickly turn to genocide if they actually could seize total power.
Hitchens is my hero, but i feel soo bad for him. I bet he is entirely ready for the end of the world. I don't know how the world will end, however i'm sure if an asteriod is the cause Chris will be riding it like a cowboy as it heads straight for FOX network.
why do people thinks its a good argument to say that it goes back to the time of george washington and shit like that. its traditon. well that tradition is unconstitutional. what if someone wanted a day of slavery, where you were allowed to have a black slave for a day. hey its just my family's tradidtion from when we used to own slaves. just becasue people have done it for 100's of years, doesn't make it right
[Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: "We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?"; Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it." — "60 Minutes" (5/12/96)]
This guys first words are about activists judges which is a catch phrase for any right winger who disagrees with the judges judgemnet. Clearly if you are a judge and disagree with some right winger you ARE some sort of activist.
it's amazing that the far right is trying to pull off these "christian nation" shenanigans, the public seems to be eating it up. the founding fathers realized that religion DIVIDES us--just look at all the all the back and forth on youtube comments! we will NEVER agree on religion as a nation, which is precisely why the government should NEVER endorse it!
all he has is the logical fallacy of appeal to tradition. what a fucking moron.
"they have always done it". even if thats true, so fucking what?
why should America be a free and indapendant sovereignty? i mean, england has always governed foreign countries. therefore, by his reasoning, england should always govern countries it once did.
Chris Hitchens, in my view, always wins in these debates. He is forever consistent in his logic and clarity of thought. In matters of debate, Chris possesses the courage and strength of Spartacus and the intellectualism of Bertrand Russell. The Christian and Rabbi debaters do not debate Mr. Higgens. Rather they implore him, beseech him, to forget facts and common sense and bend a little their way. It's not happening (lol). By the way, I tend toward agnosticism and not atheism (too dogmatic).
@robertwc82 close. agnostics usually hold the belief that knowledge of god's existance is impossible. it occured to me recently that this is actually quite an arrogant claim. obviously it is impossible to 'know' anything for sure, but if i were to die and wake up in heaven (exactly as described in christianity for example), I would be pretty confident in saying that said god existed. and almost everyone that claims to be agnostic is also an athiest (I get what you're saying)
@xxzmikezxx anyone who claims something cant be kbnow is an idiot (and still an atheist) and yes, arrogant, but not just for the example you gave. you see saying something is unkowable is a claim of 100% certainty. i believe that it is highly unlikely that gods existence will ever be verified either way, but to claim to know for a fact it is unkowable is pressumptuous. search "god in a box" video
I find all religions to be absurd (by varying degrees) and would call myself an Atheist with pride if it weren't for the feeling I sometimes experience when I am immersed in nature. It is like awe or wonder or fascination but much stronger and I will reluctantly label it spirituality. It is the astounding realization of complex order. Because of this there is a tiny portion of my thinking that is open to the idea of Creation. For this reason I call myself an Agnostic.
@doireallyneed1 Agnosticism belongs in a different category. It doesn't answer the question 'do you believe in a god?' which is really a yes or no question. It would be similar to say your favourite flavour ice cream is 'blue'.
Christians, Muslims and any other believer can be an agnostic just like any atheist can be. It's merely a notion that you can place next to your position on god.
As I understand the term "agnostic" means without knowledge. I thought it applied to me as I lack the knowledge that I think I would need to apply the definitive term "believe" to the question of is there or isn't there a God.
@doireallyneed1 I can believe things that I have no knowledge of, they're separate positions. A Christian is perfectly capable of believing in a god without having the knowledge that such a god exists, that makes him an agnostic Christian. In fact I think most modern Christians take that stance, they don't claim absolute knowledge, they go by the 'virtue' of faith, they trust he exists.
I'm not sure that the question 'do you believe in a God?" is really a yes or no question. One side of the dilemma is clear: Yes is yes - but maybe the other side can be split creating a third option. If there is a subtle but fundamental difference between saying "I believe there is no God" and "I do not believe there is a God" then that difference can be characterized by a lack of knowledge.
@doireallyneed1 It's still a binary question. The question 'do you believe there is no god?' is a different one.
If you do not believe there is a god then that makes you an atheist, whether you lack the belief or actively believe there is not one doesn't matter, in both cases you're an atheist. 'I'm an agnostic' does not answer the question as it leaves the possibility that you're a believer.
But leaving the possibility open (possibility, mind you, not definitive) is precisely the reason for the third option. I neither believe nor disbelieve because I don't believe I have seen all the evidence yet.
@doireallyneed1 I don't think you fully understand the definition of the word atheist, either that or your social peers / community has already attached so much negative connotations to the word that you're looking for a way out.
Everyone who doesn't believe in a god is an atheist. It doesn't matter if you call yourself an agnostic, a secularist an antitheist or whatever, the moment you don't say 'yes' to the question 'do you believe in a god?' means you're an atheist.
@doireallyneed1 There's only one. 'The lack of a believe in gods' is what makes you an atheist, saying you're an agnostic is dodging the real question.
I don't think that there is a universally accepted, comprehensive definition of Atheism. Do you dismiss the arguments of the etymologists that make distinctions between hard and soft, weak and strong, positive and negative, explicit and implicit Atheism?
@doireallyneed1 Taking them into account in this context is erroneous, it would be making a category error. All the different types of atheisms are still encompassed by atheism and therefore atheism. I make a big deal out of this because it's important for people to understand that atheism is a really large and diverse group while agnosticism is merely a notion that can be applied to theism as well as atheism, it's such a common notion that it's stripped of any meaning at all.
Do you feel that it is politically important that those who label themselves Agnostic or otherwise "soft" Atheists get down off the fence so to speak? What about those who label themselves as spiritual without being religious. Unless I am mistaken Buddhism is a religion with no deity or deities. If the bottom line definition of Atheism is 'The lack of a belief in God(s)' then shouldn't these people be counted as Atheists?
@doireallyneed1 That's part of it, but my biggest point is that if you just say you're an agnostic you haven't actually answered the question, you could still be a believer or a non-believer (not necessarily disbeliever). Christians can easily be agnostics as well.
Agnosticism doesn't say all that much of you, any intellectual honest person will admit that there's no absolute knowledge, but that doesn't mean they still can believe.
If we put the semantics aside for a moment, though, and look at the issue from a practical point of view then the binary aspect of the question dissappears. Could you imagine a more emotionally charged and elementally humane concept then "Is there something else?". So, in the light that knowledge of "the something else" is fundamentally impossible then there must a multitude of degrees between these poles. There must be a label that reflects these degrees, no?
@doireallyneed1 Sure, but there's nothing stopping an atheist from asking that same question, likewise it doesn't mean that all atheists ponder that question either.
It's perfectly possible to have all kinds of different viewpoints over that binary choice between theism and atheism. But they're only relevant on a lower scale. Everyone is either a theist or an atheist. The rest are all side-notes that will matter when the context makes them relevant.
Ok. I guess I'm an Atheist. But out of curiousity, to return to the semantics of the word 'Atheist', How do followers of Buddhism or other mystical ways of thinking whose doctrines do not include any deities fit into the picture?
I thought that Deism was the belief in a supreme being while rejecting any religious doctrines. Some definitions of Buddism that I was looking at actually do categorize it as being philosophically Atheistic because of the lack of dieties and the lack of any creation doctrine yet it is clearly a faith due to the supernatural elements (reincarnation, karma etc.)
@robertwc82 I wouldn't label myself anything agnostic unless we are including very obscure forms of God, otherwise I would label myself a Gnostic-Anti Theist
Why is it that (seemingly) every american news/debate show i watch on youtube every american lacks basic skills of communication. Everyone is always talking in each others mouths, interrupting each others and/or using ridicule instead of presenting valid arguments. I'm impressed Mr.Hitchens did'nt ask the other gentleman to Shut the hell up.
Do people have to suffer through this on every debate show in the states?
Why not learn to let others speak and present arguments like proper adults?
wow. bit of advice for the far right. save some money and don't take gay marriage to the supreme court. jumping up and down crowing "judicial activism" and "things have always been that way" won't get you very far there. and perkins is in a leadership position? man, if i knew i was debating hitchens, i would studied my ass off; that guy is NOT kidding around. it's clear perkins is ill prepared for this little chat. inexcusable in this day and age of youtube.
Every time a judge acts in accordance with constitutional law prohibiting religious encroachment in government, every self-righteous Christian proclaims "judicial activism."
I wonder how Christians would feel if atheists forced government to promote a day of non-prayer in which everyone is encouraged to not pray. Of course, you are not forced to not pray just as you are not forced to pray during a national day of prayer. But, it just goes to show the ridiculousness and absurdity of prayer day.
@JaMoond bravo. just imagine how violently the religious folk of this nation would lose their collective shit if a national day of NON-prayer was introduced. atheists would never do so, since we realize it isn't our place, nor our right, to do so. but do they think they can impose their basic view that some god exists? of course they do. don't people that pray know to do so on their own? do they need a day designated for it? obviously, it is a promotion of the idea that praying should be done.
It makes no difference whatsoever whether this National Day of Prayer proclamation is compulsory or not. It is a government endorsement of religious practice which is, as such, a violation of the First Amendment.
Wow. This family research guy arguments were "we always did this so it must be right." He would have probably endorsed slavery too with this logic, especially b/c his favorite holy book clearly allows slaves.
What I don't understand is why atheists even care. It's not forced and it does date back to the founders. I mean we all know this country was founded in the CHRISTIAN belief system. That's why it's Christians who CHOOSE to pray on this day. If your not Christian, then simply ignore it. Damn people want to build a mosque by ground zero yet get bent out of shape for Christians praying for the nation. No wonder this country is going downhill.
@Muse4life05 The point has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not atheists care about the prayer, its about the 1st amendment. The amendment prohibits the making of any law "respecting an establishment of religion". The judge did not do it simply because he wants to agitate religious minded. The problem is NOT in prayer what so ever. The problem lies in the 1st amendment stating that there shall be no laws respecting an establishment of religion. The law for a national prayer day is that.
@Muse4life05 "That's why it's Christians who CHOOSE to pray on this day. If your not Christian, then simply ignore it." thats a perfectly good reason not to have a day of prayer, as far as i understand sunday kind of fits this whole day of prayer idea without the government needing to enforce it
Tony Perkins makes my blood boil. I hate that man with every ounce of hate in my body. If I ever met him, It would take all the restraint I could muster in order to refrain from seeing how many of his teeth I could knock out. I have always thought I would have a difficult time harming another human being, but I honestly think I could put a .38 in his mouth and laugh before I pulled the trigger as he pleads for his life.
"Why are you calling for her impeachment?" "Well Anderson, because I disagree with her, I have no idea how the government works, and I probably couldn't pass a high school civics class. Also, I'm a smug asshole who is in desperate need of having a Louisville Slugger wrapped around the back of my head."
What if the Govt. now says "National day of no prayer" on a Sunday ?
Govt. should be out of this. There should be no mandated govt. issued "National Day of Prayer". You want to have a personal one, fine. Get a bunch of like minded religious people and pray in your private property without disturbing your neighbors. How hard is that ?
Btw does this guy not understand the difference between precedent and law. The national day of prayer wasn't state sponsored until 1988. Just as serving 2 terms was a precedent set by washignton until it became law
Why do the right-wingers always pull this "judicial activism" card? The court system is in place to evaluate the constitutionality of laws, and as far as I can see it, that is all the judge did, so how is this activism?
And on the point about tradition, tradition or what the founders did does not determine constitutionality. All the founders owned slaves, does that make slavery constitutional?
Look what happened to Thomas Paine. He was a celebrity around the world UNTIL he wrote Age of Reason. He then was ignored and hated by the vast majority of people who once supported him. He died practically alone.
Clearly unconstitutional, however I'm in favor of keeping it just because it's such a glaring badge of Christian hypocrisy... Not my opinion, but Jesus'. Read Matt 6 5-6. Jesus says public prayer is ignored by God and that you should pray in secret.
Never mind that all these Christians are misrepresenting what the founding fathers would have wanted... they can't even get what JESUS would stand for right!
The judge shouldn't be impeach. She was correct. How would you feel if the government made a "National Day for Chanting". You would feel the same way. Religion and Government should stay apart or we will all suffer another Witch Hunt panic.
"Judicial arrogance and ignorance." Does this guy even know how our federal judicial branch works? Impeachment? Really? For simply making a ruling that he disagrees with? Who is the arrogant one here, the judge who gave good reasoining for the ruling, or the douche bag arguing to have that judge removed from the bench for disagreeing with the Christians? Can Christians at least see why anti-theists like Hitchens, and myself despise them?
The same experts who claim that life evolved over millions of years also have a concensus opinion that an ELE occured about 70,000 years ago killing off about 95% of life on the planet. How do you expalin this? I don't believe that some dusty Babalonian God created life from a lump of clay, however I don't believe in the alternate theories either. Either way, faith in the explination of the unexplainable is required! No one has nailed it yet.
@kadene2 Fine, if it's a free country then banish the national day of prayer and if people still want to pray on that day they can mark their calender.
@kadene2 The quarrel is about christianity seeping through the walls of a secular government like mold. When Relgious people can once again play judge, jurry, and executioner to the Constatution. Religion has already fucked up humanity in the past and now they're back to do it again. The National Day of Prayer is a small attempt to destroy our American Freedom...
WTF is this guy talking about? George Washington (who was still alive in 1952, I guess?)? Activist court (yes, how dare that judge uphold the Constitution!)? A judge thinking he had greater wisdom then all the presidents (despite that many presidents flat refused to establish a national day of prayer)? This guy is a seriously smarmy git. GO CHRIS! Take down these idiots.
One smiles at you with raised eyebrows, the other one looks like the angry, graven image of "contempt for stupidity" and exudes an ever so slight scent of good whiskey.
Tony Perkins main point in this debate was that historical precedent should override and guide modern thought and laws, then as a Christian, he should be in support of slavery, rape, torture, scarifice of children, and the killing of nonbelivers. Doesn't the historical precedent of the Christian Bible and "God" require if not demand this?
Hilarious how HItchens always looks hung over and about to throw up on such contemptible lying fools as Tony Perkins.
walterglanz 4 days ago
I don't understand what the big deal is. If you do not want to pray that they don't pray. on memorial day I don't always remember. I celebrate Cinco de Mayo yet I'm not Mexican. Atheist always try to make an issue out of everything.
waynepoint 1 week ago
Hitch lays out a slew of arguments, and religious idiot looks like a deer in the headlights. His only strategy is to repeat his mindless ignorant rhetoric over and over despite the weight of the evidence against him. typical religious person
yobouysway 1 week ago
Did anyone else notice that Tony Perkins attacked the credibility of a letter from James Madison because it was discovered 100 years later, obviously making it not credible? Hey Tony, the bible wasn't written down for HUNDREDS of years after the life of Christ. Obviously old Tony doesn't believe in the credibillity of the bible either.
kindheart48 2 weeks ago
Perkins, how far it goes back is irrelevant. Is it constitutional? No! End of fucking story. Take your Bible and your hair cut, and go back to church where you can hatch new plots to insert your flaccid religion into the collective ass of American society.
firstatheist 3 weeks ago
Tony Perkins is fascist douche bag that any ability to understand reason and logic
sethwright 3 weeks ago
"You can be proud of this great tradition of intolerance"
RequinRequiem 1 month ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I hate Hitchens!...his lies made me actually root for that bigot Tony Perkins. at 3:08 in, AS USUAL, Hitchens lies. The National Day of prayer HAS INVOLVED HINDU PRAYER! It is a day of PRAYER, and NO SPECIFIC RELIGION IS MENTIONED! Just like his book "God is not Great," Hitchens lies & tells half truths to support his bigoted agenda. Oh, & a government run public school shoved science down my throat for years, never mentioning that science & reason have been challenged by philosophy for years.
mysticresistence 2 months ago
@mysticresistence your either joking or an idiot
blindedbro 1 month ago
Why are we always loosing people like Hitchens, yet fucktards like Perkins are in full swing? MJ is dead while Kark Rove is alive and well AND NOT IN JAIL!!!
TheDalinkwent 2 months ago
Perkins version of reasonable arguing is astounding...just because something is tradition, does not make it right.
coin0peratedgrl85 2 months ago
Perkins needs lessons on how to listen
BETAmosquito 2 months ago
There is no substitute for Christopher Hitchens, he has set the course, so we must fight on in his memory.
ShaaaBang73 2 months ago 3
there is no replacement for the "HITCH".... wtf are we gonna do now...?
MpowerdAPE 2 months ago
Perkins looks more like the kind of thing that might haunt teenagers who were foolish enough to take acid in a deserted lunatic asylum than a spokesman with the ear of national media.
gabiotta 2 months ago
His argument is stupid: "since every old president did it, it must be legit". Sorry, tradition is not always good. I'm sure hazing is good too. I'm sure practicing human sacrifice is just as good as well. Stupid argument led by a stupid man. I'm 21 years old and I have way more experience in structuring an argument than that loser has. I bet he feels pretty pathetic that he has a mind of a 14 year old and writes at a 5th grade level. What a sorry excuse for a human.
aznlalaland 2 months ago 3
If only they prayed hard enough, this could've been averted.
aznlalaland 2 months ago
Around 6:12 Hitchens tried to embarrass Perkins by asking when the national day of prayer originated, thinking that Perkins wouldn't know. It appeared Hitchens didn't actually know the answer to his own question as he actually listened to Perkins for a short period without interrupting.
indoctus41 2 months ago
The day of prayer could be religious, but that is not necessary. It could be a day of meditative prayer on the vastness and beauty of the universe if one wishes. If it was a day of Christian prayer, which is Hitchens' tenuous argument, that would be different. That would be unconstitutional. His argument is based on the idea that the word "prayer" must imply Christian prayer, and he fails to establish that.
indoctus41 2 months ago
if you dismiss madison's writing because it was discovered 100 yrs after being written, how do you feel about the Bible, written down much further from the events it purported to cover.....
elgar104 4 months ago
who cares if u wanna pry pry if u don't than don't this argument has no purpose at all it's useless!!!
jozsefkacsa 4 months ago
For the government too take favor to one ideal or religion risks alienating others of opposing views. It does not matter the precedent nor tradition, for the government to claim an international day of prayer, a democratic republic mind you, it is definitely alienating one group and favoring another. This democracy is supposed to represent its people, not set it to flames.
dalhar20 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dalhar20 'The highest glory of the American Revolution was this:' It connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity"--President Adams, July 4, 1821
revhowardgoss 5 months ago
@revhowardgoss Source for that quote please??
atheistram 2 months ago
So if religion in government can be ignored in the constitution, can we ignore the right to bear arms, and ban guns.
TiberJai 5 months ago
@TiberJai no we cant. Government should ignore religion in order too not alienate those with different religions. This democratic government represents a wide range of people with many different beliefs. But despite ones beliefs in guns, it is an essential right to anybody. The right to bear arms allows us to keep a potentially corrupt and overbearing governemnt at bay. To take this away would be maiming and weakening the people, open to manipulation and in worse case scenarios mass killings.
dalhar20 5 months ago
@dalhar20 it was a joke. But the right to bear arms is rubbish. The rest of the western world has banned guns and or made it extremely hard to get hold of guns. To have a constitution is bollocks to be fair, all laws should be able to be changed and rewritten. And yes religion shouldn't be apart of government.
TiberJai 4 months ago
Oh please, everytime a judge does something a right-wing dominionist christian disagrees with it's judicial activism, give it a rest, Tony Jerkins.
RandomBS88 5 months ago
Impeach the judge for follwing the constitution? lol christianity derrrp!
groovyengineer 5 months ago 10
@groovyengineer but of course! the constitution is obviously not supported by biblical scripture.
1n354a 5 months ago
Isn't it interesting that when a Judge gives an opinion in favor of a right wing conservative point of view the right calls it justice but when a Judge gives an opinion in support of something that conservatives are against they call it "Judicial Activism". Conservatives seem to always want everything there way. Conservatives say they want government out of our daily lives except when they want government to invade someones personal life because they don't agree with who that person loves.
allthatfun 6 months ago 3
Hitchslapped!!!!!
gupsphoo 6 months ago 21
HItch spanks this freak, Perkins, and rightly so.
Tippersnore 6 months ago 2
hitchens wipes the floor with perkins.
420simpson 7 months ago
tony perkins is a moron.
420simpson 7 months ago
Three words: wall of separation.
MIJVI 7 months ago
I drew a picture of Mr. Hitchens on my leg as I watched this. It is pretty good if I do say so myself.
LTM32893 7 months ago
I miss Hitchens
Ladiesman1447 7 months ago
tony perkins is a tool
MrStupidfag 7 months ago
@woppy42 I love you.
razzlefrog 8 months ago
The first words out of Hitchens mouth is just an instant win. I mean. I don't think some people realize just how amazing he is at owning people, even before the other side gets to say a word.
bajramovic92 8 months ago
Tony Perkins is ass hole with a terrible agenda, not talking about religion only but about everything else on which he stands for or against... is outermost loonesy.
FreeMason34 9 months ago
I really liked how he said that if religious people want to teach intelligent design in schools, churches and the like should teach evolutionary theory in their Sunday School. GET WELL SOON HITCH! THIS WORLD NEEDS YOUR ELOQUENCE IN THE FIGHT AGAINST THE CELESTIAL DICTATORSHIP (which is nonetheless nonexistent)
princeofdrit 10 months ago
"Judicial Activism" = "That judge didn't agree with me."
123gwf 11 months ago
Tony Perkins is ignorant, viscious, and arrogant...terrible combination for a public figure.
edgwaterprog 11 months ago
You can pray whenever you want. Many people have prayed instead of relying on reason and have lost loved ones. I feel prayer doesn't deserve a special day clearly those 80% of americans fail to realise how they're insulting their own god's will. They just want attention like the people putting jesus fishs on their cars or wearing a torture device on their necklace.
clipsryan 1 year ago
If this was the national "Muslim day of prayer" people would be out with their pitchforks. The gov should not be dictating when anyone should pray.
gombis666 1 year ago
Hitchens seems extremely against Christianity. Prayer applies to all faiths, and people who dont fall into a religious category.
swamislocal1 1 year ago
Wow. Hitchens ate Perkins for lunch! LOVE IT. Thanks, Christopher.
Perkins's argument was so thin, and it was very apparent when watching him. He was flailing.
Scott3843 1 year ago
Hitchens handed Tony his ass hahahaha
autumncathedral 1 year ago
"call me christopher" lol! Dude Chris if you dont like it get out, and quit trying to change our American Heritage! You're free to pray or not pray, dont hate on those who do unless you have your own bias agenda to advance. What is so offensive about prayer? GMAB bunch of crybabies
swamislocal1 1 year ago
@swamislocal1 Well as a non-American its amzing I have to inform you that constitutionally, America is a secular Republic. But maybe you just hate the constitution and the founding fathers?
stemcgolf 1 year ago
@stemcgolf The founding fathers who signed the constitution were predominately Christian, and they signed it "in the year of our Lord". Furthermore, nobody is forcing anyone to pray, it's just a part of the tradition that dates back to the founding fathers. You cant change someones desire to pray, in fact I'm praying for you in about 2 seconds.
swamislocal1 1 year ago
@swamislocal1 Lol, so that's why they said America is not a Christian nation and most of them were Atheist or Agnostic. Amazing.
Codeusa 1 year ago
@Codeusa Please cite your source. Name one man who signed the Constitution of the United States that was an atheist or agnostic. According to the research I've done they were mostly of various Protestant denominations, with respect to a few Roman Catholic's.
swamislocal1 1 year ago
@swamislocal1 A number of signatories were Deists, including Benjamin Franklin, James Madison and Thomas Jefferson, as many well as prominent contemporaries such as Thomas Paine and George Washington. Deism, although philosophically distinct from Agnosticism and Atheism, is practically interchangeable for the purposes of such a discussion.
Traitorfish 1 year ago
@Traitorfish Atheism and Deism are as far apart as the east is from the west! Interchangable!LOL!
swamislocal1 1 year ago
@swamislocal1 How are they not? Both mean the abandonment of all religious practices; the differences are largely academic.
Traitorfish 1 year ago
@swamislocal1 The founding fathers could all have been fundamentalist ministers for all I care, but the fact is that they created a secular Republic. They wrote a first ammendment stating that the government cannot establish a religion. Now what is the problem with that? Pray any time you like.
stemcgolf 1 year ago
@stemcgolf Exactly, thank you. They didn't force any religious activity on anyone. They simply excercised, and encouraged people to pray together on a specific day because they knew the power in it. You have the right to refuse to pray, but what gives you the right to tell me not to observe this day. It seems that by abolishing our freedom to pray on a specific day in remeberance of the founding fathers, one has attempted to establish an anti religion, and stripped us of our first ammend right
swamislocal1 1 year ago
@swamislocal1 As Hitchens would say- "I leave it in the good taste of the audience". Once again, pray anytime you like, but it is unconstitutional to have a day of pray, because it serves no secular purpose, and since America has a seperation of church and state, they shouldn't endorse any religion, or "anti-religion". No one forces you not to pray, and no one forces me to pray. OK?
stemcgolf 1 year ago
@stemcgolf Celebrating prayer isn't endorsing a religion.Neither is the dollar bill, "In God we trust". It's recognizing a creator, but just who or what that creator is is up to you and I to decide.We are free to do that thanks to the constitution, and we are free to believe that there is no God.That's seperation of Church and State.According to your philosophy the dollar bill would also be unconstitutional.The fact is, this is how it's been since America was formed, who are you to change it?
swamislocal1 1 year ago
@swamislocal1 You are talking jibberish again. " It's recognizing a creator, but just who or what that creator is is up to you and I to decide." Ok. I decide there is no creator. Case closed. Can we please move on now? Isn't your faith strong enough to not have to have the government endorse it?
stemcgolf 1 year ago
@stemcgolf Aren't you secure enough in your worldview to not care about the traditions of the founding fathers regarding faith? After all you are the one who wants to change their tradition, not me.
swamislocal1 1 year ago
@swamislocal1 Their tradition is irrelevant. Look at my previous comment. BTW Slavery was part of the tradition back then aswell, but that has changed, for the better I think. This is all cleared up by reading the 1st ammendment. Enjoy!
stemcgolf 1 year ago
@stemcgolf "Their tradition is irrelevant"? I thought that's what we were discussing. Comparing slavery to prayer says alot about your presupposition regarding the subject. That's like saying Hitler and Mother Teresa are sinonymous. Please quote the section in the first ammendment that says we cant celebrate prayer.
swamislocal1 1 year ago
@swamislocal1 "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"
Like the judge said in this case, prayer serves no secular purpose. And deists don't pray.
You didn't address the tradition point. Mother Teresa was a crackpot but I never compared her to Hitler.
stemcgolf 1 year ago
@swamislocal1 We are not discussing tradition. We are discussing law and the constitution. And it couldn't be any clearer in what the founding fathers left;
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"
So how can you read that, and then think that they wanted government endorsed pray? Where is the connection?
stemcgolf 1 year ago
@swamislocal1 heritage?!?!? HAHWHAH
JaaS0on 1 year ago
Religimon er Religion.
baigandine 1 year ago
@baigandine Evolved from Creatormon
nimpo46 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why does anybody debate Hitchens? You know you are going to lose
JLJorgenson18 1 year ago
@cnestudy1 and people like to say that marriage is the holy matrimony between a man and a women. well thats what the church thinks marriage is. if two people love eachother and wanna get married, let em'. and they say well marriage is also for the intention of having children. well then we shouldn't let people who are fertile get married. its shit like that why i hate religion. if 2 dudes wanna get married. who gives a fuck. its doesnt affect your life
kiddhitta 1 year ago
how did all this work out? was the judge impeached? was the ruling overturned?
Zookeeper1983 1 year ago
there is no such thing as judicial activism. those who coined that phrase and use it do so simply because the don't like the decisions the judges make.
judges define and enforce the constitution, no more, no less. that some don't like those decisions, and need to call them activist, is nothing less than pure bullshit designed to hoodwink the ignorant into thinking judges have a hidden "liberal agenda" where have we heard that phrase before.
wntoply6 1 year ago
THE TOMB OF THE UNKNOWN SOLDIER : The great irony of it all is if the government had given this dumb dead soldier 24-hour protection when he was alive, like they're doing for his putrefied dead body now, he wouldn't have gotten killed. Let us guard the tomb of the unknown soldier, at considerable taxpayer expense, against the infamous machinations of the unknown body-snatcher.
YTubeArraignment 1 year ago
Tony Perkins tries to look like John-boy Walton to try to put a patina of innocence and goodness on the reprehensible fascism that he actually advocates.
oaklandj 1 year ago
@oaklandj yes, that is essentially it. FRC/Perkins are covert neonazis...and I mean that seriously...they advocate intolerance but it would quickly turn to genocide if they actually could seize total power.
LegalEagleX 1 year ago
judicial activism!!!! haha
enzoelise 1 year ago
I say fuck you to god everyday, surprise surprise, nothing happens.
Art4261 1 year ago
Hitchens is my hero, but i feel soo bad for him. I bet he is entirely ready for the end of the world. I don't know how the world will end, however i'm sure if an asteriod is the cause Chris will be riding it like a cowboy as it heads straight for FOX network.
roadman89NE 1 year ago
also what part of separation of church and state do they not understand. prayer is a church thing, keep it out of the states.
chad
tattooconnection.us
MrTattooConnection 1 year ago
why do people thinks its a good argument to say that it goes back to the time of george washington and shit like that. its traditon. well that tradition is unconstitutional. what if someone wanted a day of slavery, where you were allowed to have a black slave for a day. hey its just my family's tradidtion from when we used to own slaves. just becasue people have done it for 100's of years, doesn't make it right
kiddhitta 1 year ago
[Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: "We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?"; Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it." — "60 Minutes" (5/12/96)]
Hitchens supports this
YTubeArraignment 1 year ago
@YTubeArraignment
1 id like a source of this claim and 2 why does it matter in this case?
bouncer599 1 year ago
ha ha ha IN GOLD WE TRUST Ha ha ha
Fuck all Fucking Gods Ha ha ha
Satan Lucifer Luzbel SAVE ha ha ha
DesIlluminatti 1 year ago
This guys first words are about activists judges which is a catch phrase for any right winger who disagrees with the judges judgemnet. Clearly if you are a judge and disagree with some right winger you ARE some sort of activist.
jklein17 1 year ago
it's amazing that the far right is trying to pull off these "christian nation" shenanigans, the public seems to be eating it up. the founding fathers realized that religion DIVIDES us--just look at all the all the back and forth on youtube comments! we will NEVER agree on religion as a nation, which is precisely why the government should NEVER endorse it!
bethnor 1 year ago
all he has is the logical fallacy of appeal to tradition. what a fucking moron.
"they have always done it". even if thats true, so fucking what?
why should America be a free and indapendant sovereignty? i mean, england has always governed foreign countries. therefore, by his reasoning, england should always govern countries it once did.
robertwc82 1 year ago
Family Reserach Council = FRC = F**king Righteous C**ts
ikkoikki 1 year ago
Hitch slaps this idiot
kidlomax 1 year ago
Chris Hitchens, in my view, always wins in these debates. He is forever consistent in his logic and clarity of thought. In matters of debate, Chris possesses the courage and strength of Spartacus and the intellectualism of Bertrand Russell. The Christian and Rabbi debaters do not debate Mr. Higgens. Rather they implore him, beseech him, to forget facts and common sense and bend a little their way. It's not happening (lol). By the way, I tend toward agnosticism and not atheism (too dogmatic).
MrAnthonyVance 1 year ago
@MrAnthonyVance agnosticism and atheism is not mutually exclusive. christianity and agnosticism is not mutually exclusive.
theism is an acceptance of the claim a god exists.
atheism is a rejection of the claim god exists (it is not a claim that god does not exist)
gnostic means to know agnostic means to not know.
all people on this planet are agnostic, whether they are atheist or theist.
so do you accept theist claims or not?
there is no dogma, just lack of acceptance of unproven claims. period!
robertwc82 1 year ago 27
@robertwc82 close. agnostics usually hold the belief that knowledge of god's existance is impossible. it occured to me recently that this is actually quite an arrogant claim. obviously it is impossible to 'know' anything for sure, but if i were to die and wake up in heaven (exactly as described in christianity for example), I would be pretty confident in saying that said god existed. and almost everyone that claims to be agnostic is also an athiest (I get what you're saying)
xxzmikezxx 1 year ago
@xxzmikezxx anyone who claims something cant be kbnow is an idiot (and still an atheist) and yes, arrogant, but not just for the example you gave. you see saying something is unkowable is a claim of 100% certainty. i believe that it is highly unlikely that gods existence will ever be verified either way, but to claim to know for a fact it is unkowable is pressumptuous. search "god in a box" video
robertwc82 1 year ago
@robertwc82 Indeed, agnosticism is just a red herring.
BaileysBeads 10 months ago
@BaileysBeads,
I find all religions to be absurd (by varying degrees) and would call myself an Atheist with pride if it weren't for the feeling I sometimes experience when I am immersed in nature. It is like awe or wonder or fascination but much stronger and I will reluctantly label it spirituality. It is the astounding realization of complex order. Because of this there is a tiny portion of my thinking that is open to the idea of Creation. For this reason I call myself an Agnostic.
doireallyneed1 10 months ago
@doireallyneed1 Agnosticism belongs in a different category. It doesn't answer the question 'do you believe in a god?' which is really a yes or no question. It would be similar to say your favourite flavour ice cream is 'blue'.
Christians, Muslims and any other believer can be an agnostic just like any atheist can be. It's merely a notion that you can place next to your position on god.
BaileysBeads 10 months ago
@BaileysBeads,
As I understand the term "agnostic" means without knowledge. I thought it applied to me as I lack the knowledge that I think I would need to apply the definitive term "believe" to the question of is there or isn't there a God.
Have I got it wrong?
doireallyneed1 10 months ago
@doireallyneed1 I can believe things that I have no knowledge of, they're separate positions. A Christian is perfectly capable of believing in a god without having the knowledge that such a god exists, that makes him an agnostic Christian. In fact I think most modern Christians take that stance, they don't claim absolute knowledge, they go by the 'virtue' of faith, they trust he exists.
BaileysBeads 10 months ago
@BaileysBeads,
I'm not sure that the question 'do you believe in a God?" is really a yes or no question. One side of the dilemma is clear: Yes is yes - but maybe the other side can be split creating a third option. If there is a subtle but fundamental difference between saying "I believe there is no God" and "I do not believe there is a God" then that difference can be characterized by a lack of knowledge.
doireallyneed1 10 months ago
@doireallyneed1 It's still a binary question. The question 'do you believe there is no god?' is a different one.
If you do not believe there is a god then that makes you an atheist, whether you lack the belief or actively believe there is not one doesn't matter, in both cases you're an atheist. 'I'm an agnostic' does not answer the question as it leaves the possibility that you're a believer.
BaileysBeads 10 months ago
@BaileysBeads,
But leaving the possibility open (possibility, mind you, not definitive) is precisely the reason for the third option. I neither believe nor disbelieve because I don't believe I have seen all the evidence yet.
doireallyneed1 10 months ago
@doireallyneed1 I don't think you fully understand the definition of the word atheist, either that or your social peers / community has already attached so much negative connotations to the word that you're looking for a way out.
Everyone who doesn't believe in a god is an atheist. It doesn't matter if you call yourself an agnostic, a secularist an antitheist or whatever, the moment you don't say 'yes' to the question 'do you believe in a god?' means you're an atheist.
BaileysBeads 10 months ago
@BaileysBeads,
It it the definition of Atheism that we are discussing. Which definition are you working from?
doireallyneed1 10 months ago
@doireallyneed1 There's only one. 'The lack of a believe in gods' is what makes you an atheist, saying you're an agnostic is dodging the real question.
BaileysBeads 10 months ago
@BaileysBeads,
I don't think that there is a universally accepted, comprehensive definition of Atheism. Do you dismiss the arguments of the etymologists that make distinctions between hard and soft, weak and strong, positive and negative, explicit and implicit Atheism?
doireallyneed1 10 months ago
@doireallyneed1 Taking them into account in this context is erroneous, it would be making a category error. All the different types of atheisms are still encompassed by atheism and therefore atheism. I make a big deal out of this because it's important for people to understand that atheism is a really large and diverse group while agnosticism is merely a notion that can be applied to theism as well as atheism, it's such a common notion that it's stripped of any meaning at all.
BaileysBeads 10 months ago
@BaileysBeads,
Do you feel that it is politically important that those who label themselves Agnostic or otherwise "soft" Atheists get down off the fence so to speak? What about those who label themselves as spiritual without being religious. Unless I am mistaken Buddhism is a religion with no deity or deities. If the bottom line definition of Atheism is 'The lack of a belief in God(s)' then shouldn't these people be counted as Atheists?
doireallyneed1 10 months ago
@doireallyneed1 That's part of it, but my biggest point is that if you just say you're an agnostic you haven't actually answered the question, you could still be a believer or a non-believer (not necessarily disbeliever). Christians can easily be agnostics as well.
Agnosticism doesn't say all that much of you, any intellectual honest person will admit that there's no absolute knowledge, but that doesn't mean they still can believe.
BaileysBeads 10 months ago
@BaileysBeads,
If we put the semantics aside for a moment, though, and look at the issue from a practical point of view then the binary aspect of the question dissappears. Could you imagine a more emotionally charged and elementally humane concept then "Is there something else?". So, in the light that knowledge of "the something else" is fundamentally impossible then there must a multitude of degrees between these poles. There must be a label that reflects these degrees, no?
doireallyneed1 10 months ago
@doireallyneed1 Sure, but there's nothing stopping an atheist from asking that same question, likewise it doesn't mean that all atheists ponder that question either.
It's perfectly possible to have all kinds of different viewpoints over that binary choice between theism and atheism. But they're only relevant on a lower scale. Everyone is either a theist or an atheist. The rest are all side-notes that will matter when the context makes them relevant.
BaileysBeads 10 months ago
@BaileysBeads,
Ok. I guess I'm an Atheist. But out of curiousity, to return to the semantics of the word 'Atheist', How do followers of Buddhism or other mystical ways of thinking whose doctrines do not include any deities fit into the picture?
doireallyneed1 9 months ago
@doireallyneed1 They're deists. Which can overlap with atheism. All it means is that within atheism there's a broad scope of diversity.
BaileysBeads 9 months ago
@BaileysBeads,
I thought that Deism was the belief in a supreme being while rejecting any religious doctrines. Some definitions of Buddism that I was looking at actually do categorize it as being philosophically Atheistic because of the lack of dieties and the lack of any creation doctrine yet it is clearly a faith due to the supernatural elements (reincarnation, karma etc.)
doireallyneed1 9 months ago
@doireallyneed1 Deism is a broad sets of beliefs which all have a mystical and supernatural take on the universe.
That's the thing, atheists can even believe in supernatural elements. What you're thinking about are materialists.
BaileysBeads 9 months ago
@robertwc82 I wouldn't label myself anything agnostic unless we are including very obscure forms of God, otherwise I would label myself a Gnostic-Anti Theist
avacadoconquat 6 months ago
@robertwc82 What's with the no grammar, whatsoever?
MrVirtualCoder 5 months ago
Comment removed
MrAnthonyVance 1 year ago
Why is it that (seemingly) every american news/debate show i watch on youtube every american lacks basic skills of communication. Everyone is always talking in each others mouths, interrupting each others and/or using ridicule instead of presenting valid arguments. I'm impressed Mr.Hitchens did'nt ask the other gentleman to Shut the hell up.
Do people have to suffer through this on every debate show in the states?
Why not learn to let others speak and present arguments like proper adults?
codexdelux 1 year ago
hes the only atheist that I liked..Hitchens
wisesatyr72 1 year ago
Hitchens is a foul, nasty bastard and I love him for it.
Tony on the other hand is a sheepish little twit who loves distorting the truth to fit his idiotic beliefs.
ChoujiMan 1 year ago
@ChoujiMan oh. there's nothing sheepish about perkins at all.
that's precisely why he's so dangerous.
the rest is definitely true.
bethnor 1 year ago
wow. bit of advice for the far right. save some money and don't take gay marriage to the supreme court. jumping up and down crowing "judicial activism" and "things have always been that way" won't get you very far there. and perkins is in a leadership position? man, if i knew i was debating hitchens, i would studied my ass off; that guy is NOT kidding around. it's clear perkins is ill prepared for this little chat. inexcusable in this day and age of youtube.
bethnor 1 year ago 2
Wisconsin REPRESENT!
mtllica1991 1 year ago
Every time a judge acts in accordance with constitutional law prohibiting religious encroachment in government, every self-righteous Christian proclaims "judicial activism."
I wonder how Christians would feel if atheists forced government to promote a day of non-prayer in which everyone is encouraged to not pray. Of course, you are not forced to not pray just as you are not forced to pray during a national day of prayer. But, it just goes to show the ridiculousness and absurdity of prayer day.
JaMoond 1 year ago 48
@JaMoond bravo. just imagine how violently the religious folk of this nation would lose their collective shit if a national day of NON-prayer was introduced. atheists would never do so, since we realize it isn't our place, nor our right, to do so. but do they think they can impose their basic view that some god exists? of course they do. don't people that pray know to do so on their own? do they need a day designated for it? obviously, it is a promotion of the idea that praying should be done.
slyjokerg 1 year ago
It makes no difference whatsoever whether this National Day of Prayer proclamation is compulsory or not. It is a government endorsement of religious practice which is, as such, a violation of the First Amendment.
Kailoa36 1 year ago 2
Wow. This family research guy arguments were "we always did this so it must be right." He would have probably endorsed slavery too with this logic, especially b/c his favorite holy book clearly allows slaves.
mrpayne123 1 year ago
haha, I love how Mr. Hitchens stole the last word at the end: "There you are, perfect intolerance."
pasacaglia 1 year ago
dont mess with mr hitchens.
stitcha123 1 year ago
What I don't understand is why atheists even care. It's not forced and it does date back to the founders. I mean we all know this country was founded in the CHRISTIAN belief system. That's why it's Christians who CHOOSE to pray on this day. If your not Christian, then simply ignore it. Damn people want to build a mosque by ground zero yet get bent out of shape for Christians praying for the nation. No wonder this country is going downhill.
Muse4life05 1 year ago
@Muse4life05 The point has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not atheists care about the prayer, its about the 1st amendment. The amendment prohibits the making of any law "respecting an establishment of religion". The judge did not do it simply because he wants to agitate religious minded. The problem is NOT in prayer what so ever. The problem lies in the 1st amendment stating that there shall be no laws respecting an establishment of religion. The law for a national prayer day is that.
vPsychoC 1 year ago
@Muse4life05 I hope you are joking...
BrellK 1 year ago
@Muse4life05 "That's why it's Christians who CHOOSE to pray on this day. If your not Christian, then simply ignore it." thats a perfectly good reason not to have a day of prayer, as far as i understand sunday kind of fits this whole day of prayer idea without the government needing to enforce it
orloth 1 year ago
Tony Perkins makes my blood boil. I hate that man with every ounce of hate in my body. If I ever met him, It would take all the restraint I could muster in order to refrain from seeing how many of his teeth I could knock out. I have always thought I would have a difficult time harming another human being, but I honestly think I could put a .38 in his mouth and laugh before I pulled the trigger as he pleads for his life.
el100783 1 year ago
"Why are you calling for her impeachment?" "Well Anderson, because I disagree with her, I have no idea how the government works, and I probably couldn't pass a high school civics class. Also, I'm a smug asshole who is in desperate need of having a Louisville Slugger wrapped around the back of my head."
el100783 1 year ago
What if the Govt. now says "National day of no prayer" on a Sunday ?
Govt. should be out of this. There should be no mandated govt. issued "National Day of Prayer". You want to have a personal one, fine. Get a bunch of like minded religious people and pray in your private property without disturbing your neighbors. How hard is that ?
fanirama 1 year ago
Reason: 1 Bullshit: 0
gary031183 1 year ago
@GOPguy826
It may well be. Could be argued it needs to be dropped but is it Government sponsored.
It is not a christian only holiday.
Nor even the true birth date of Jesus
VideoAudioDisco09 1 year ago
Btw does this guy not understand the difference between precedent and law. The national day of prayer wasn't state sponsored until 1988. Just as serving 2 terms was a precedent set by washignton until it became law
legatoslide47 1 year ago
Treaty of tripoli-1797
legatoslide47 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,
legatoslide47 1 year ago
Yeah, that judge DOES know better than 230 years of history. And what is ur point?
Max10192 1 year ago
I love seeing Hitchens destroy slimey lying fucks like that. Hope he pulls through :)
ElectricG 1 year ago
Why do the right-wingers always pull this "judicial activism" card? The court system is in place to evaluate the constitutionality of laws, and as far as I can see it, that is all the judge did, so how is this activism?
And on the point about tradition, tradition or what the founders did does not determine constitutionality. All the founders owned slaves, does that make slavery constitutional?
ainefairygoddess 1 year ago
@ainefairygoddess whatever they can do for their agenda. it doesnt matter. get the media to go along with the buzz words and its a tactical victory.
adzug 1 year ago
Look what happened to Thomas Paine. He was a celebrity around the world UNTIL he wrote Age of Reason. He then was ignored and hated by the vast majority of people who once supported him. He died practically alone.
unsung1984 1 year ago
Haha... religionment.
radiomonkey20 1 year ago
Watching this makes me thrilled to not live in the US :)
alternativeinfo 1 year ago 2
Clearly unconstitutional, however I'm in favor of keeping it just because it's such a glaring badge of Christian hypocrisy... Not my opinion, but Jesus'. Read Matt 6 5-6. Jesus says public prayer is ignored by God and that you should pray in secret.
Never mind that all these Christians are misrepresenting what the founding fathers would have wanted... they can't even get what JESUS would stand for right!
cyxgun 1 year ago
@cyxgun jesus has nothing to do with this movement his philosophy was much closer to communism, sell all your things and follow me philosophy
adzug 1 year ago
The judge shouldn't be impeach. She was correct. How would you feel if the government made a "National Day for Chanting". You would feel the same way. Religion and Government should stay apart or we will all suffer another Witch Hunt panic.
AstroMen2911 1 year ago
"Judicial arrogance and ignorance." Does this guy even know how our federal judicial branch works? Impeachment? Really? For simply making a ruling that he disagrees with? Who is the arrogant one here, the judge who gave good reasoining for the ruling, or the douche bag arguing to have that judge removed from the bench for disagreeing with the Christians? Can Christians at least see why anti-theists like Hitchens, and myself despise them?
el100783 1 year ago
@el100783 Impeach that judge or heads will roll!! o.O
99minerkc 1 year ago
I don't think I can describe how bad I would like to wrap a 2x4" around this Family Research Council guy's head.
el100783 1 year ago
The same experts who claim that life evolved over millions of years also have a concensus opinion that an ELE occured about 70,000 years ago killing off about 95% of life on the planet. How do you expalin this? I don't believe that some dusty Babalonian God created life from a lump of clay, however I don't believe in the alternate theories either. Either way, faith in the explination of the unexplainable is required! No one has nailed it yet.
nonprogressive1 1 year ago
Pray if you want, people!! It's a free country! Dunno what this quarrel is about...
kadene2 1 year ago
@kadene2 Fine, if it's a free country then banish the national day of prayer and if people still want to pray on that day they can mark their calender.
99minerkc 1 year ago
@kadene2 The quarrel is about christianity seeping through the walls of a secular government like mold. When Relgious people can once again play judge, jurry, and executioner to the Constatution. Religion has already fucked up humanity in the past and now they're back to do it again. The National Day of Prayer is a small attempt to destroy our American Freedom...
AstroMen2911 1 year ago
WTF is this guy talking about? George Washington (who was still alive in 1952, I guess?)? Activist court (yes, how dare that judge uphold the Constitution!)? A judge thinking he had greater wisdom then all the presidents (despite that many presidents flat refused to establish a national day of prayer)? This guy is a seriously smarmy git. GO CHRIS! Take down these idiots.
cyranothe2nd 1 year ago
Just look at the faces involved in this debate!
One smiles at you with raised eyebrows, the other one looks like the angry, graven image of "contempt for stupidity" and exudes an ever so slight scent of good whiskey.
One of them is fake, can you spot it?
rickballance 1 year ago
Why do he keep saying, that this dates back to Washington? Wasn't the national day of prayer introduced in 1952?
brinchjdk 1 year ago
...tony, you are intellectually challenged, to place it mildly. Ridiculous.
faithisfiction 1 year ago
Christopher reduces everyone he debates to a grinning shithead.
ThePsychoReturns 1 year ago 21
Tony Perkins main point in this debate was that historical precedent should override and guide modern thought and laws, then as a Christian, he should be in support of slavery, rape, torture, scarifice of children, and the killing of nonbelivers. Doesn't the historical precedent of the Christian Bible and "God" require if not demand this?
yeti402 1 year ago 2