*promote

Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Sunday, March 20th, 2011 1:21am PDT - promote requested by lavoll.

It does sound a bit like he's avoiding the question about morality the other guy wants to ask.

Of course, I believe that morality must come from the bible, which is why I think virgin women who are raped must be sold to their attackers for marriage as they're now no use to other men (Deuteronomy 22:28). Those who say otherwise are disgusting monsters.

Wow, that was a royal shellacking.

Hipster Hitler was a humanist before it was cool.

>> ^Quboid:

It does sound a bit like he's avoiding the question about morality the other guy wants to ask.
Of course, I believe that morality must come from the bible, which is why I think virgin women who are raped must be sold to their attackers for marriage as they're now no use to other men (Deuteronomy 22:28). Those who say otherwise are disgusting monsters.


He isn't avoiding anything, he's simply not letting the ridiculous (and yet so often used) Hitler "argument" slide by unnoticed.



BTW, I also get my morals from the Bible, which is why I stone horoscope writers in my freetime... with rocks!

[redacted]

I believe that's why it's called stoning...>> ^hpqp:

>> ^Quboid:.

[...]which is why I stone horoscope writers in my freetime... with rocks!

I watched this debate some months ago. At some point, Mr. Turek actually said - and repeated - the question "how much does justice weigh?". I had to stop and just... breathe for a while.

Hitchens' subtext: "Let me just wet the tip of my hooha and slide it into your religious bumhole."

There are a select few individuals, Christopher amongst them, with whom arguing is a bad idea. You could be on the side of arguing that 1+1 is 2, and Christopher is still likely to win the debate.

Massive minus credits for repeatedly talking over the guy's reply. Clearly withholding a reply, waiting to speak over him, as well.

>> ^dannym3141:
Massive minus credits for repeatedly talking over the guy's reply. Clearly withholding a reply, waiting to speak over him, as well.


no, when he did speak, he switched his avenue of debate... because Hitchens was beating him to the punch... because the moron playbook is very predictable and simple

if you want to debate with someone like Hitchens, have a little more tactical thinking ready than simply repeating the rhetoric you've already bought into... unfortunately, thats the rub... if you start thinking rationally about it, you dismiss the rhetoric

and in matters of faith, "I don't know" = non-believer

>> ^packo:

>> ^dannym3141:
Massive minus credits for repeatedly talking over the guy's reply. Clearly withholding a reply, waiting to speak over him, as well.

no, when he did speak, he switched his avenue of debate... because Hitchens was beating him to the punch... because the moron playbook is very predictable and simple
if you want to debate with someone like Hitchens, have a little more tactical thinking ready than simply repeating the rhetoric you've already bought into... unfortunately, thats the rub... if you start thinking rationally about it, you dismiss the rhetoric
and in matters of faith, "I don't know" = non-believer


"no" what? He did, whether you like it or not, speak over the guy 3 or 4 times. I don't like that, and i will exercise my to do so!

For those of you who can't get the British accent quite right, here is what Hitchens said "Oh, I'm sorry, here is your (_|_) back"

Hitler : Catholicism :: Ward Churchill : Cherokee Indians

That god-botherer seemed all over the place. At the end saying "I'm not asking a sociological question". I doubt he even could.

Side note, what the fuck is wrong with that guys face??

>> ^Asmo:

Side note, what the fuck is wrong with that guys face??


My guess is that it is a side effect of his cancer treatment.

*dead

This video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by kulpims.