Debate - Christopher Hitchens vs Marvin Olasky - Religion and Politics

Debate date: May 14, 2007
Hosted by: The Future Forum
Topic: Religion and Politics
Moderator: Evan Smith, Editor of Texas Monthly

Category:

Education

Tags:

• debate
• christopher
• hitchens
• marvin
• olasky
• religion
• and
• politics
• the
• future
• forum
• 2007
• christianity
• atheism
• atheist
• philosophy

[huwrj]

Olavsky's main argument is that Christianity is sometimes atrocious but also sometime benign and Christians sometimes do charitable things.... therefore Jesus is the Lord and the Bible is the word of God. PATHETIC

[MrCoachPeter]

Brilliant, Brilliant, Brilliant....Hitchens will not soon be replaced; if ever.

[hiph0pfiend]

I MISS HITCHENS! Why are all the cool people dying?!?

[netgear123456]

17:13 "are 1 billion Hindus all nutty? " This is the pathetic side to religion

A christian man would look at a Muslim mans faith and laugh at how crazy it is

A muslim man would look at a Christian mans faith and laugh at how crazy it is

A hindu would laugh at a Christians a buddist would laugh at a muslims ect

When you break them all down you find they all pretty much wind down to the same bullshit

I find it HILARIOUS when i see a Christian laugh at another religion.Epitome of the term hypocrisy

[ArchitectAeterna]

I believe that it is much more accurate to say that religion CAN poison anything instead of saying that religion DOES poison everything. Many people have been helped by religion and many people have been hurt by religion. My main beef with religion is arrogance; many of them are immensely proud of their humility. They do not accept anything except their own beliefs and immediately discard anything else without a second thought. This closed mindedness is extremely dangerous.

[MysteryoftheGods]

@TomFynn Agree to disagree? My quote was "No two Christians, Muslims, anything see God the exact same way." You said "Yes, people argue." I never said anything about evidence, proving the validity of God, all subjects which you brought in here to try and aid you in your fight against a theist..so..you are the one introducing principles that have shadowed my own beginning statement which is that people disagree, which even you have agreed on previously..

[TomFynn]

@MysteryoftheGods Yes I agree. To untangle this, I would need to go back though the comments, but frankly, I find I couldn't be bothered. So I would propose to agree to disagree.

[MysteryoftheGods]

@TomFynn Okay this is getting silly. Your first message to me was a quotation of what I said which started this "debate"..

[TomFynn]

@MysteryoftheGods To clarify: Science does *not* have holy books. Only to the ignorant they seem to be. And I did not quote you.

[MysteryoftheGods]

@TomFynn The hell? You quoted me as saying no two people see things the same way...how the everloving fuck am I ducking out of an argument when defend by saying that God doesn't exist?

[TomFynn]

@MysteryoftheGods And I said that without evidence there is no point in debating. Or arguing.

PS: Nice attempt at shifting the semantic goalpost. Won't work.

[MysteryoftheGods]

@TomFynn I am not arguing for the validity of religion. I said people argue, which you agreed on, so therefore I see no further point to debate it..