P6 - D'Souza vs. Hitchens - Freedom Fest 2008

http://www.tothesource.org 6yrs of free weekly emails.

tothesource has broadcasted over 300 weekly emails featuring informed opinion on current cultural issues. The articles address a variety of topics and the related moral and ethical issues they raise. Past tothesource articles are found on our archives page at http://www.tothesource.org/archives.php

Subscribe to tothesource free weekly emails at http://www.tothesource.org/subscribe.htm

Dinesh D'Souza and Christopher Hitchens go at it again at the 2008 Freedom Fest as the "Main Event".

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• D'Souza
• Hitchens
• God
• Atheism
• Christianity
• Freedom
• Fest
• Atheist
• Christian
• Debate

[gskowal]

"that was terrible Dinesh..." Hahaha, best part of the whole debate... it summarizes Dinesh and his dumb arguments.

[dojohansen123]

Bah. Do you really think anyone's going to fall for this? That just saying "He is the Light" is going to convince any thinking person of anything other than you being a desperate, gullible man?

Religion should be treated with the contempt and ridicule it deserves. It's high time to stop pretending that mythology and religion is not the same thing; it obviously is.

[gskowal]

@FinisReflectatOpus ,Hitchens words? List few of these examples you are talking about , where Hitch is using faith based statements as his arguments supporting his position?

[FinisReflectatOpus]

@gskowal Exactly, his own faith. Or maybe there has been some recent advance in symbolic logic that allows people to prove negatives? If so, kiddo, would you mind outlining that for me? Show me how logic and reason can compass these types of ideas and problems? One can only point out contradictions, red herrings, straw men, ad hominem, evasions, vitriol, rhetorical statements, etc. as being particularly onerous. I merely point out Hitchens words (and conspicuous dodges) ran thick with these.

[gskowal]

@FinisReflectatOpus , his own faith? lol ... ok kiddo...

[FinisReflectatOpus]

@gskowal sarcasm is the last recourse of intellectual poverty. The issue is not which of them is correct (I don't really have a dog in that race) it's more that one argued rationally and in earnest, the other seemed only to taunt and exaggerate. On one or two occasions Hitchens sought recourse to actual argument, and made sequenced points that held together. Hundreds of times, he just peddles his own faith, somewhat fanatically.

[Domzdream]

Dinesh comes on...

All you hear is- (slurp) (slurp) (slurp)

Like a lizard or which ever reptile you prefer.

[bcgonynor]

@Dgoosh1000 I was just using Shakespeare as a hypothetical example. I do believe he was real, but as I was saying it doesn't really matter. I love Shakespeare, and if he were just an alias for someone else I would love "Shakespeare" just as much, whether it was Mary Sidney or Marlowe or someone else.

[Dgoosh1000]

@bcgonynor Some people? I hope that doesn't include you. The rest of the argument is sound, Hitch-like, logic.

But seriously, Shakespeare was real. William Shakespeare born: 26 April 1564; died 23 April 1616

[GeneralJakass]

@MrSim1962 "He fabricates his own lies." Isn't that a double negative?

And please sight a source a quote where it proves Hitchens wrong.

[bcgonynor]

If you don't like the Socrates example, consider Shakespeare. Some people think that Shakespeare was a pen name or persona, and that his plays were truly written by Christopher Marlowe and/or one of several female candidates. If this could be proven, it would be interesting, but would in no way detract from one's enjoyment of Hamlet. But if there were a religion that worshiped Shakespeare, and taught that he was still alive and all-powerful, his fictionality would be a devastating blow to them.