Video: Hitchens tries to convince atheists why they should be hawkish on Iraq and Iran
posted at 5:00 pm on October 20, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
With a surprising amount of success, judging from the applause. This comes from the same atheist gathering at which last week’s Ayaan Hirsi Ali video was taken; she’s obviously in the audience here per his affectionate comments at the very beginning of the first part. It’s an hour long and there’s some plenty of criticism of Christianity mixed in, of course, but he’s before them to talk about Islam and Islamism and he doesn’t disappoint. You’re watching for four segments: in the first clip, his remarks on the Mohammed cartoon fiasco at around -16:15, and in the second clip, his remarks on Iraq at -28:30, on the prospect of war with Iran at -11:30, and the can’t miss passage at -4:30 on why the west is to blame for the conflict. “It’s a matter of pride that they want to attack us,” he declares, while acknowledging at one point that there aren’t enough soldiers in the world to deal with the threat. What that means going forward is ominous, and unclear.
I’m surprised to see that he hasn’t given up on Iraq yet. He’s been moving in that direction.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
Mr. MB4,
You, sir, obviously have outwitted the lot of us.
Please, dear sir, share with the rest of us how you manage to be self-important, egotistical, and wrong to the third degree at least 94.6% of the time.
This must take a tremendous amount of time and skill.
hillbillyjim on October 20, 2007 at 11:54 PM
Yeah, that explains a lot. Are you serious?
Lighten up, hero.
hillbillyjim on October 20, 2007 at 11:57 PM
You guys had your moment(s) of glory in the 20th century. How many people did atheists kill?
JasonG on October 20, 2007 at 11:59 PM
MB4 on October 20, 2007 at 11:59 PM
MB4 Are you saying that John Adams was schizophrenic? He also said that “The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity” There are many quotes that speak of the influence of Christianity in the founding of this country. There are not many that state otherwise. The one you quote was said to appease a country we were trying to achieve a treaty with. A Muslim country.
Rose on October 21, 2007 at 12:00 AM
People tell me I am too thin now.
MB4 on October 21, 2007 at 12:01 AM
Don’t worry MB4, there’s a place for every absurd ridiculous statement somewhere under the rainbow.
Chimpanzees??? That’s all you’ve got??
See ya in the funny papers.
hillbillyjim on October 21, 2007 at 12:03 AM
I can’t do that. I have been sworn to secrecy. If I told you I would have to kill you.
MB4 on October 21, 2007 at 12:03 AM
I do perceive that you missed my point.
MB4 on October 21, 2007 at 12:05 AM
SSSsssshhhhhhhhhh!!!!!
Be vewwy vewwy quiet.
hillbillyjim on October 21, 2007 at 12:05 AM
See Thomas Jefferson, James Madison (and Abraham Lincoln).
MB4 on October 21, 2007 at 12:08 AM
I like you, MB4. You refuse to lose. Good policy.
hillbillyjim on October 21, 2007 at 12:09 AM
Is it the atheism that causes the consequences, or the fact that most atheists are obnoxious bitter douchebags who feel a need to incessantly antagonize everyone else around them?
Bad Candy on October 21, 2007 at 12:11 AM
Who is looking for us now? The Goauld or the Ori?
MB4 on October 21, 2007 at 12:11 AM
I still am not wavering from the position that you are an argumentative, confrontational assho1e, who would rather be wrong than lose.
But still, you have your charms.
I enjoy people who speak their mind.
hillbillyjim on October 21, 2007 at 12:13 AM
People who don’t like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn’t have such funny beliefs.
MB4 on October 21, 2007 at 12:13 AM
Anyone who would take a bullet or otherwise risk limb and life for Ayaan Hirsi Ali is OK in my book. I’d fight with him…, even if it meant having to argue for my faith throughout the breaks in the battles. He makes the arguments against the Jihadists that OUR guys should be making and he doesn’t even have their bully pulpit from which to do it. Well…, he didn’t anyway. I’m glad we have courageous, articulate people to argue our points, regardless their personal lack of faith in God. Without folks like him and Ali, no one would ever be able to get Liberals to think as opposed to emote.
Rugged Individual on October 21, 2007 at 12:14 AM
Rush,
I agree with MB4’s response to your question. I originally brought up Ho Chi Minh in response to a post on Vietnam’s importance to the Cold War.
Ho Chi Minh petitioned U.S. presidents from Woodrow Wilson onward to help him get rid of the French colonial rule. During WWII the OSS aided Ho when he fought the Japanese and Vichy occupiers of Vietnam. When the Japanese were defeated Ho proclaimed a declaration of independence that quoted Jefferson. He petitioned FDR and then Truman, but was turned down.
Ho was a revolutionary and after 1945 became increasingly brutal and more aligned with the Soviets and Red Chinese. When French fell , Ho saw the U.S. as the new colonial occupiers. After the U.S. withdrew the Vietnamese fought a brief war with the Chinese, who the Vietnamese distrusted for reasons including their thousand years of occupation during the first millennium.
I think Ho was a nationalist before he was a communist and would have cut almost any deal to achieve independence. Understanding that might have helped Wilson, FDR or Truman. Currently understanding if someone is foremost a Shi’a, a muslim, an Arab, Al Qaeda, or an Iraqi is critical.
dedalus on October 21, 2007 at 12:16 AM
Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.
- Barry Goldwater
MB4 on October 21, 2007 at 12:16 AM
Only the militant lefty obnoxious douchebag atheists. Atheists on the Right are good allies.
RushBaby on October 21, 2007 at 12:16 AM
LOL! Looks like pandering to the Muslims has been an age old presidential tradition.
angryoldfatman on October 21, 2007 at 12:17 AM
Cruelty is a virtue, not a vice. – de Sade
angryoldfatman on October 21, 2007 at 12:18 AM
People who are sneering obnoxious militant douchebags shouldn’t b*tch and moan when people reject them and push them to the fringes of society.
Bad Candy on October 21, 2007 at 12:19 AM
As to the second class of man’s duties, those which bind him to his fellows, the absurd Christian morality tells us to love our neighbour as ourselves- in defiance of all the laws of Nature. – de Sade
angryoldfatman on October 21, 2007 at 12:21 AM
Hey Hey We’re the Monkees!
—Davey Jones
The HELL you say.
—Hillbillyjim
hillbillyjim on October 21, 2007 at 12:21 AM
Is incest more dangerous? Hardly. It loosens family ties so that the citizen has that much more love to lavish on his country; the primary laws of Nature dictate it to us, our feelings vouch for the fact; and nothing is so enjoyable as an object we have coveted over the years. – de Sade
angryoldfatman on October 21, 2007 at 12:22 AM
As to sodomy, we wonder that savagery could ever reach the point where you condemn to death an unhappy person for the crime of not sharing your tastes. The greatest of men lean toward sodomy. – de Sade
angryoldfatman on October 21, 2007 at 12:23 AM
Rose,
Here is another quote from Adams, not addressed to a Muslim.
dedalus on October 21, 2007 at 12:23 AM
Is murder then a crime against society? What difference does it make to society, whether it have one member more, or less? Will its laws, its manners, its customs be vitiated? No, alas. – de Sade
angryoldfatman on October 21, 2007 at 12:24 AM
They didn’t have public schools back then. Prayers in private schools are legal.
If a theocratic regime takes over our country, which I hope doesn’t happen, (and I doubt Hitchens has any desire for a theocracy either), and the theocratic regime overturns the Constitution in order to force people to pray to their God(s), like Hitchens I’ll be hoping for a civil war, and I expect that a lot of patriotic American Christians will be fighting by my side. I’ll agree that the word “pleasure” was extreme, although not inappropriate. I don’t know how you would feel about it, but presented with the opportunity it would be a pleasure to kill Bin Laden. I wish I could kill him over and over again.
No, it doesn’t lead back to that at all. Earlier you said, “Hitchens = atheist Taliban”, which you have so far been unable to substantiate. You’ve also called him a “bloodthirsty psycho”. The other day you said that Ayaan Hirsi Ali was confrontational and useless. You are just throwing around a bunch of useless unsubstantiated extremist rhetoric.
FloatingRock on October 21, 2007 at 12:27 AM
Really? Cuz I’m not seeing it in most cases, I see plenty of obnoxious sneering and bitter unprovoked hatred from the Atheist camp on the Right too.
I’m not that way, I don’t hate people who are Atheist because they’re Atheists, I hate Atheists who feel a need to incessantly sneer, mock, and snipe at decent religious people with no provocation and at any opportunity. I’m not even that religious, but it f*cking irritates the hell out of me, and I’m growing damn sick of it.
Bad Candy on October 21, 2007 at 12:28 AM
JasonG, “I kind of curious what atheists believe about the nature of our rights and where they come from. If not from our Creator (as is in our DoI) from where do our rights come?”
From an intelligent human mind contemplating the conditions necessary, not just to stay alive, but to be masters of our own destiny so that each of us may seek our own happiness, and determine our own fate.
FierceGuppy on October 21, 2007 at 12:31 AM
“I do not think I could myself, be brought to support a man for office, whom I knew to be an open enemy of, and scoffer at, religion” Abraham Lincoln
Rose on October 21, 2007 at 12:31 AM
Exactly so!
hillbillyjim on October 21, 2007 at 12:32 AM
MB4,
I had been thinking about you along the same lines as hillbillyjim. Then he spelled it out before I did. I agree with you about 75% of the time but the twenty-five percent of disagreement exists wrt very serious topics. However, you are a welcome contrarian to HA simply because you reason your points out, you have a thick skin and I remember you going the ad hominem route only rarely. Additionally, your poems are hilarious. Funny is important.
So now you can go to bed with a huge, inflated ego. You’re welcome. :-)
baldilocks on October 21, 2007 at 12:32 AM
Yeah, this’ll be the excuse…watch for this one, it’ll be the rationale to start stepping on you little Jesus freaks’ throats someday. We have to stop the Christianists! We already hear this garbage from the lefty militant Atheists.
Bad Candy on October 21, 2007 at 12:33 AM
I agree 100% with everything you say regarding the sneering, mocking, and correctly described sniping, activist-types. I would submit to you that not all, in fact a tiny majority, of atheists on the right fall into that category.
RushBaby on October 21, 2007 at 12:35 AM
Well-reasoned case, thank you. I appreciate it most sincerely. The case for American nationalism is what I am after.
RushBaby on October 21, 2007 at 12:39 AM
My personal belief is that everyone has a choice (or a chance) to believe or not believe in a deity.
It is not my place, nor my intention, to belittle anyone else’s belief system (or lack thereof.)
That does not mean that I should stand idly by while someone who is uninformed about my beliefs to denigrate them without any factual foundation.
P.S. PPttttttthhhhhhhhhttttt!
hillbillyjim on October 21, 2007 at 12:40 AM
:)
hillbillyjim on October 21, 2007 at 12:42 AM
You are mistaking mirth for hatred.
MB4 on October 21, 2007 at 12:46 AM
You’re gonna need Blistex for that.
RushBaby on October 21, 2007 at 12:50 AM
Good, you get it. Its not Atheism itself, its the large militant/activist branch that pisses me off, and frankly unnerves me a bit.
The rhetoric from the left side of Atheism is borderline genocidal already, and I see more and more on the right starting to engage in the dehumanizing rhetoric of religious people I saw coming from the lefty Atheist activists a few years ago.
Bad Candy on October 21, 2007 at 12:50 AM
JasonG: “You guys had your moment(s) of glory in the 20th century. How many people did atheists kill?”
By the same token you guys have been killing and murdering for nearly two thousand years with the most recent case being when you flew a couple of jet airliners into the world trade center towers. You’re still murdering, raping, and blowing up civilians and still oppressing women around the world. See, that type of ludicrous argumentation can run both ways. All Communists are athiests is a true statement. All atheists are Communists is false statement. All Islamic jihadists are theists is a true statement. All theists are Islamic jihadists is a false statement. Case closed!
FierceGuppy on October 21, 2007 at 12:51 AM
We’re not all that way, but it seems that some are. To be honest, I’ve never run across one in my daily life. I’ve read about them in the news and on the Internet and heard them on the radio and TV, but I’ve never witnessed a confrontational atheist in real life. Have you?
FloatingRock on October 21, 2007 at 12:52 AM
Mirth based in hatred, dirtbag.
Bad Candy on October 21, 2007 at 12:52 AM
In 2000 Years of Disbelief by James A. Haught, Lincoln is mentioned on pages 125 through 127. From the material presented it would seem that Lincoln as a young man was an avid anti-christian and most likely an atheist. In his later years, he came to believe in God, but still was anti-religious in the sense that he rejected organized religion. Some selections from Haught: John T. Stuart, Lincoln’s first law partner: “He was an avowed and open infidel, and sometimes bordered on Atheism…He went further against Christian beliefs and doctrines and principles than any man I ever heard.”
“The Bible is not my book nor Christianity my profession. I could never give assent to the long, complicated statements of Christian dogma.” Joseph Lewis quoting Lincoln in a 1924 speech in New York
“My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures have become clearer and stronger with advancing years, and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them.” Lincoln in a letter to Judge J.S. Wakefield, after the death of Willie Lincoln
As a young man Lincoln apparently wrote a manuscript that he planned to publish, which vehemently argued against the divine origin of the Bible and the Christian scheme of salvation. Samuel Hill, a friend and mentor, convinced him to drop it, considering the disastrous consequences it would have on his political career. William H Herndon, a former law partner, wrote a biography on Lincoln titled: “The true story of a great life”. In it Herndon discusses Lincoln’s religious views extensively. Gordon Leidner has collected some quotations from Lincoln’s later years in which he invokes God, and he makes the argument that Lincoln became a sincere believer. It seems to me he did come to believe in God, but he never accepted organized Christianity.
“You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.”
“It will not do to investigate the subject of religion too closely, as it is apt to lead to Infidelity.” Manford’s Magazine, quoted from The Religious Beliefs of Our Presidents by Franklin Steiner, p. 144.
MB4 on October 21, 2007 at 12:53 AM
Nah. Pepto-Bismol.
hillbillyjim on October 21, 2007 at 12:55 AM
Bless you, and I mean that with no irony. You and I are friends and allies. I would stand by you any day, and if anything ever happened to you, I would stand by your family in your absence.
RushBaby on October 21, 2007 at 12:58 AM
A few at college, but not much outside of it, but I’m in my early 20’s, so we’ll see in due time, Evangelical Atheism is a new movement after all, it may have much growth to do.
Most of the evangelical Atheists are online, that’s where they go, because for the most part, they’re smart enough to know if they were as incessantly hateful and obnoxious in public to people’s faces as they are online, their lives would be made hell.
Bad Candy on October 21, 2007 at 12:59 AM
If we were not all so interested in ourselves, life would be so uninteresting that none of us would be able to endure it.
- Schopenhauer
P.S. Actually, I would much prefer go to bed with Michelle Pfeiffer!!! But, oh well.
MB4 on October 21, 2007 at 1:01 AM
FierceGuppy—
Nicely done.
hillbillyjim on October 21, 2007 at 1:01 AM
RushBaby, I’m glad you get it, you’re cool with me, and with that, my eyes are fried from staring at this screen, I’m off.
Bad Candy on October 21, 2007 at 1:01 AM
There are quotes that support both sides. The Christian influence in the establishment of this country cannot be denied. Those who try to are rewriting history. I suspect you are young and have only been taught the revisionist versions. We are not a Christian nation in the sense that it is established as the national religion, something the founders did not want, but Christianity was never meant to be suppressed or denied to flourish as the ACLU has tried to do. It was to be practiced freely and it was.
Rose on October 21, 2007 at 1:03 AM
Irrefutable logic.
MB4 on October 21, 2007 at 1:07 AM
That is not a Christian attitude. Say 25 Hail Marys.
MB4 on October 21, 2007 at 1:09 AM
Be careful as you are getting precariously close to being a self parody.
MB4 on October 21, 2007 at 1:12 AM
FloatingRock
“We’re not all that way, but it seems that some are.”
I have encountered many of those creatures on UseNet forums and on IRC. For the most part they are rabid Lefties with anti-religious Bush/Cheney rage like you wouldn’t believe, with the rest being weak libertarians (almost anarchists) who have also swallowed various 9/11 troofer conspiracy theories.
FierceGuppy on October 21, 2007 at 1:14 AM
Agreed.
Well, as much as I disagree with you on other issues, you have impeccable taste in fantasies.
RushBaby on October 21, 2007 at 1:14 AM
F### the ACLU.
MB4 on October 21, 2007 at 1:15 AM
You are addressing someone who has clearly said goodnight.
RushBaby on October 21, 2007 at 1:16 AM
Heh, if you think I’m worried about the militant atheists kicking down my door tomorrow, I’m not. I’m looking at this from a longterm perspective, what happens in that movement 30, 50, 100 years down the road, and whether the poisonous rhetoric remain and coalesce into action in a sizeable movement, or will go by the wayside. I’m more worried about future generations than myself.
Bad Candy on October 21, 2007 at 1:16 AM
Michelle says Meow!
MB4 on October 21, 2007 at 1:19 AM
Heh? Ok fine. Weren’t you supposed to be in bed by now?
RushBaby on October 21, 2007 at 1:20 AM
Yeah, I couldn’t resist and came back.
What, you the pastor now? You’re about as obnoxious as him.
Turnabout is fair game.
Bad Candy on October 21, 2007 at 1:20 AM
Thanks, Grease II is all I need.
RushBaby on October 21, 2007 at 1:24 AM
Alright, now I’m off…
Bad Candy on October 21, 2007 at 1:27 AM
Freedom of religion—-Freedom from religion—blah blah blah—
…we’re likely to have neither if we don’t get our sh*t together and oppose the HUGE threat that Islam poses to our very civilizational foundations.
Let’s us save our collective
assesworld first, then squabble about how to run what’s left.hillbillyjim on October 21, 2007 at 1:28 AM
I know–Let’s us–Bad Grammar
hillbillyjim on October 21, 2007 at 1:29 AM
Now there’s a comment that “gets it”.
Although…if you don’t mind my saying, Jim? It’s interesting, stimulating, and informative to read the controversial threads on HA. Speaking for myself, I learn a great deal, develop affection for perfect strangers, and find myself contemplating points of view that I had no idea even existed before.
All of us are going to get spanked here, because it’s a tough room. Why is it tough? Because we hold each other to a standard of honesty.
All of us are going to be exposed to a truth here, in its billions of ways that are as unique as every individual living yesterday, today, and tomorrow.
The modern day miracle is being able to converse, anonymously, on a blog. Once again, with gratitude, I thank our hosts, and
Most humble thanks to algore for inventing the internet.
RushBaby on October 21, 2007 at 1:43 AM
This is something that I posted more than a year ago on another blog (I may have posted it here once also?):
I see a certain “paradox” here. The more like Christ a Christian is the better person he likely is. The more like Mohammad a Muslim is the worse person he likely is. So I guess we should all want Christians to be good at being Christians and Muslims to be poor at being Muslims. Frankly the best Muslims seem to be those who are not very good at being Muslims.
MB4 on October 21, 2007 at 1:44 AM
See now, I don’t have any problem with this.
RushBaby on October 21, 2007 at 1:51 AM
I, for one, am glad to have Hitchens intellect brought to the fore in the battle against radical Islam.
This is a battle which, humbly, Christians, Jews, agnostics, atheists, Buddhists, Zoroastrians (you get the idea)should be pulling the proverbial oars together.
I am saddened by the automatic sniping that seems to occur between atheists and Christians.
Personally, I don’t care what one believes (or not). I have friends – that are good people – with a wide range of beliefs.
What I see more and more, however, is an almost evangelical zeal by some atheists to attack Christians – or vice versa – and off topic the thread shall go.
As hillbillyjim said – we had better pull together, for there are formidable institutional forces standing in the way of our opposition to a misogynistic, violent, dark age ideology.
TruthSeeker on October 21, 2007 at 1:54 AM
Good points
dedalus on October 21, 2007 at 1:57 AM
Hitchens is especially devastating to radical/political Islam. That is precisely why I listen to him with such rapt interest.
RushBaby on October 21, 2007 at 2:07 AM
Right on. I’m an atheist but I’m an American first and I would fight alongside those fighting to protect their peaceful religious beliefs as likely as to protect people from religious beliefs being imposed upon them. Note: violent stone-aged religions are exempt from that statement. :)
Absolutely. As a conservative I probably disagree with Hitchens on practically everything but Islam, yet Islam is the biggest threat we face presently and many people, especially on the left, refuse to acknowledge it. Hitchens is one of the best spokesmen we currently have to introduce the left to reality, or at least those (few) willing to listen. The more unity we have the stronger we are. I only wish that we had more spokespeople of every persuasion to the extent necessary to sufficiently unite this country and win this war before it’s resolution becomes infinitely more costly.
FloatingRock on October 21, 2007 at 2:23 AM
Religions vary. Some are more noble than others. Some are more sound than others.
Being religious always involves many sound moral principles.
Sadly, being religious also involves a belief in (or at least a tacit acceptance of) silly fairy tales, ridiculously archaic & defunct ideas about nature, a hypocritical acceptance of violence in God’s name, superstition and fear of a pain-filled afterlife.
Religion hinges on faith in ideas that, when looked at without the safety nets of “faith” and “respect” patently absurd.
Hitch’s great talent lies in his eloquent, simple deconstruction of these religious beliefs. He lays the stupidity and barbarity bare. He serves it up with a sound calm logic that can not be reciprocated by the religious party in debate.
This is also the reason he gets abuse. It’s easier to call him a drunk or a bigot than to form a scientific, logical argument that Mohammed flew to heaven on a magic horse (or any of the supernatural claptrap in other religions).
uptight on October 21, 2007 at 2:39 AM
Making the West disappear By Diana West
Sounds like “some students” believe that the freedoms existing here — which don’t exist in Islam — are somehow voided by “negative” Western aspects. Or maybe that the negatives, which apparently loom larger than any Islamic threat, simply invalidate any positive conception of the West, and maybe any conception of the West as an identifiable, defensible culture, period. Little wonder the Yale newspaper used quotation marks to set off the West as “The West.” It’s good; it’s bad — whatever.
MB4 on October 21, 2007 at 5:12 AM
Don’t fool yourselves, neither radical Muslims nor the American left is going to listen to Hitchens about the threat posed by radical Islam. Where’s the headline? “Man who views all religion except atheism as a threat feels same way about Islam”. Face it, the left crucified “Socialist Joe” Lieberman, the man they ran for VP in 2004, because he shares that same view so they’re not going to suddenly wake up to reality because a Christian hater tells them the same thing.
Personally I see Hitchens as the short left jab used as a counterpoint to the strong right hook Islam is delivering to our nation and way of life. I have clearly heard radical atheists and radical Islam deliver their submit or die messages and I don’t intend to lay down, roll over, give up for either of them.
Buzzy on October 21, 2007 at 7:53 AM
For those interested in just Hitch’s analysis on the War on Terror can confine themselves to just the second video:
-30:00 to -26:00 and -12:12 to 00:00.
The rest is just smug atheists who as far as I can tell are just as annoying as their bible thumping cousins.
RobCon on October 21, 2007 at 8:16 AM
Hitch’s take on Iran is very different from what it was two years ago. I asked him in person about Iran and he was avocating a Nixon to China solution with Iran and now he says he lives to fight people like that.
RobCon on October 21, 2007 at 8:29 AM
Boy, talk about an irony-free zone.
student on October 21, 2007 at 8:57 AM
In some preindustrial tribe in the distant past a medicine man discovers a plant extract that cures a common and often fatal ailment. Having no education in science his explanation for the cure is superstitious mumbo jumbo.
Thousands of years later two scientists learn of the now traditional cure from descendants of the tribe. The first scientist says “The explanation for this cure is obviously superstitious mumbo jumbo so further investigation is a waste of time and effort”.
The second scientist says “This plant extract appears to work and despite an unscientific oral history should be researched to determine efficacy and develop a scientific understanding of it’s properties.”
IMO the first “scientist” is an arrogant buffoon.
When it comes to morality athiests start at third base and like to pretend their “reason” produced a home run.
boris on October 21, 2007 at 10:32 AM
You are correct, Rose. Even Hitchens acknowledges that. MB4 continues to repeat it even though he has been given that information before.
And, as always, MB4 refuse to respond when challenged. The only response he ever gives is a list of more quotes with no context.
Connie on October 21, 2007 at 10:32 AM
I would pay to be trapped on a plane, sitting between Hitchens and Ayaan Hisri,
On the tarmac for 12 hours,
They are in my mind equal to the likes of;
Ben Franklin
Thomas Jefferson
Albert Einstein
Steve Hawking
John Adams. etc
TheSitRep on October 21, 2007 at 11:58 AM
You too can be a quotesmith!
JiangxiDad on October 21, 2007 at 1:03 PM
Bad Candy, you are very young. What you are calling “evangelical Atheists” have been around for a very, very, long time. We don’t allow prayer in public schools in the United States anymore because of a woman named Madalyn Murray O’Hare, and that court decision was made before you were born.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madalyn_Murray_O%27Hair
But to get back to Hitch’s points, and the points made by many of the comments here, we all need to stop fighting each other over religion and start uniting to fight that which is the real threat to all of us equally: Islam. Because if we don’t, if we keep caring more about the divisions we have amongst ourselves (which are really nothing more than intellectual arguments) we’ll keep ignoring that shark until it swims up and bites us on the ass.
Jaynie59 on October 21, 2007 at 1:11 PM
lmao! Thanks for the laugh. Heading out to help a grandson celebrate his 9th birthday.
And Jaynie59 is right about our common enemy. Focus, people, focus!
Connie on October 21, 2007 at 1:20 PM
Fine. But for those raised with no God and no religion, and with no familial/communal ties to either, what avenue of inquiry can be used?
Also, I don’t really hear believers explain what they feel the consequences would be of no God. Would their personal conduct suffer?
JiangxiDad on October 21, 2007 at 1:24 PM
Interesting take on that but I’ve noticed that all the while Hitchens is still taking shots at Christianity even as he’s saying it. So you’re saying I should ignore the barracuda already biting my arm to watch the shark swimming around which might bite my ass? There seems to be very little difference in tolerance between radical atheism and radical islam these days and I am old enough to remember praying in public schools.
Buzzy on October 21, 2007 at 1:58 PM
See MB4 on October 20, 2007 at 10:27 PM
See dedalus on October 21, 2007 at 12:23 AM
See MB4 on October 21, 2007 at 12:53 AM
MB4 on October 21, 2007 at 2:03 PM
What barracuda is biting on your arm?
I don’t know how to talk to people like you, Buzzy. I really don’t.
If you can’t tell the difference between someone who calls you stupid, and someone who will hunt you down and kill you, your kids, your mother, and then mutilate your bodies, hang them from a bridge, and cheer, then I can’t help you.
Jaynie59 on October 21, 2007 at 2:04 PM
Roll eyes! Roll eyes! Roll eyes!
MB4 on October 21, 2007 at 2:06 PM
Perhaps his God will help him.
MB4 on October 21, 2007 at 2:07 PM
We can only hope.
Maybe he’ll figure out he’s on the internet and will discover he can actually read about it.
There’s this great website called HotAir I hear is really good…..
Jaynie59 on October 21, 2007 at 2:13 PM
Nope, very little difference at all, really. Well, other than that where one employes death and suffering to further their agenda, the other utilizes ideas and speech. But other than that…
FloatingRock on October 21, 2007 at 2:14 PM
Jaynie59 on October 21, 2007 at 2:04 PM etal.
Notice the term TOLERANCE. While yes there is a huge difference in the methods that radical atheists and Islamofascists employ to achieve what they want there is very little difference in their ability to tolerate a persons beliefs if it is different from theirs. Both would shut down my religion if given the chance while I have fought and bled to ensure that they both have the right to follow their own beliefs freely.
And to be honest I don’t know how to talk to people like you either. If you don’t understand that there are grave risks from both sides then you must be blind.
Buzzy on October 21, 2007 at 2:50 PM
The first prayer offered in Congress:
http://www.whitfieldassembly.org/prayer_congress.htm
Rose on October 21, 2007 at 3:02 PM
Valid point.
boris on October 21, 2007 at 3:03 PM
That seems to be the problem with religious people. You can’t separate an idea you believe in from your life. To you it’s the same thing. You also can’t seem to tell the difference between a belief and a fact. Because to you your belief is a fact.
Liberals are exactly the same. If they believe something is true, then it is true, and anyone who contradicts that belief is not only wrong, but a liar.
I’ve had many arguments over the years with religious people about prayer in public schools and they all, without exception, use the same analogy: “they teach geometry, don’t they?”
See? You religious people simply can’t tell the difference between your religion and a subject like geometry. Luckily, I can always come back with Wicca and Satanism when it comes to religion being in the public schools. Jews and Christians have been tip toeing around each other for so long that they both now pretend to respect the other when it comes to public endorsement of religion. Have a priest and a rabbi at a school graduation and everyone is happy.
Ooh, but don’t even think about having a Wiccan or a Satanist. That’s different. What I find comical with religious people is that you seem to have more contempt for someone who thinks you’re dumb than you do for someone who wants you dead.
When it comes to Islam, we’re talking about a religion and a political philosophy and way of life that is much more than intolerant.
The worst I’ll do, as an atheist, is call you stupid. They’ll cut off your head.
Jaynie59 on October 21, 2007 at 3:29 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »