robocrapz's channel

@BBSnape Loosen up. He just made fun of Jews (he is a Jew), Indians and his wife as well. The guy's not serious, and America needs a sense of humor.

What's next? Ban on body piercings, Tattoos, mohawks, gold teeth, teeth whitening, tooth braces, ear piercings, for the under-18? Nope. Liberals are too fond of those.

@LeftyHandedGuns Maybe because atheist Stalin (35 million) Pol pot (2 million) Mao (30 million, conservative), Kims of Korea (5 million) and all other non-believer dictators in the past century killed more people than all the religious wars of the past millenium.

Guys, there's rumor that Forrest Gump 2 will have this on the soundtrack. Can anyone confirm?

Growing up, Reagan was president. I still think those times were better than today and no one among his successors is better than he was.

Respect for Nissan.

@mavaddat Wow, your logic is disarming. Out of Hundreds of thousands of Catholic priests a few dozens molested children, maybe in the hundreds if not thousands, out of an entire membership of 1.2 billion. Then you make your sweeping generalization?

@loudman12 Then try broadening your mind and watch real Catholic apologists do their thing. Try Dinesh D'Souza for starters. On YouTube, there's an interesting Notre Dame debate between him and Hitchens. D'Souza would look like Lennox Lewis compared to the two lightweight Catholics in this debate.

Try Googling Dinesh D'Souza. On YouTube, there's an interesting Notre Dame debate between him and Hitchens.

@chazdoit

i said "most people." Obviously you're not "most people." You're smart. After all you're atheist right? Before I answer your question on killing babies, how do you define "baby" first. Most liberals, some of them atheists, believe a pregnant mother doesnt have a "baby" in her tummy. Th...

Atheism is a religion. And it's one of the most intolerant and preachiest ones at the moment. Don't kid yourselves. Cong. Giffords' shooter is an atheist.

A genuine debate would not pit two articulate Oxbridge men against a stammering recent convert and a cleric whose first language is not English and whose talent is preaching not debating. A real apologist or theologian would have gutted the other side. So it was a setup, even the audience was may...

A genuine debate would not pit two articulate Oxbridge men against a stammering recent convert and a cleric whose first language is not English and whose talent is preaching not debating. A real apologist or theologian would have gutted the other side. So it was a setup, even the audience was may...

A genuine debate would not pit two articulate Oxbridge men against a stammering recent convert and a cleric whose first language is not English and whose talent is preaching not debating. A real apologist or theologian would have gutted the other side. So it was a setup, even the audience was may...

@ThunderBroomPilot ATHEIST = INTELLIGENT. The greatest logical fallacy of our time.

A genuine debate would not pit two articulate Oxbridge men against a stammering recent convert and a cleric whose first language is not English and whose talent is preaching not debating. A real apologist or theologian would have gutted the other side. So it was a setup, even the audience was may...

@johnsammyanfal Completely agree. You should have been on that podium, had the producers not been too keen on an ambush.

A genuine debate would not pit two articulate Oxbridge men against a stammering recent convert and a cleric whose first language is not English and whose talent is preaching not debating. A real apologist or theologian would have gutted the other side. So it was a setup, even the audience was may...

A genuine debate would not pit two articulate Oxbridge men against a stammering recent convert and a cleric whose first language is not English and whose talent is preaching not debating. A real apologist or theologian would have gutted the other side. So it was a setup, even the audience was may...