Hitchens on the Hour - God Is Not Great

Strombolopolous... so annoying.. from the second he opens his mouth "Obviously, and, and, and, and"... "Obviously in the bible, ya know, there are, there are, ya know..." in a breathless delivery belying a false humility.

johnald128 says...

what's his agenda?
i agree with the atheism bit but he has some extreme views politically, perhaps he just knows more than me i dunno. he regurgitates a lot of info in his interviews though, and i'm not sure all of it's totally true...

johnald128 says...

... i appreciate his unique harshness on religion though (whereas most famous atheists are a bit too timid).

videosiftbannedme

says...

Agenda seems to be a buzz word being thrown around a lot lately. I believe the point he is trying to make is to "Keep Thy Religion To Thyself" (to borrow from George Carlin). Most religions make the assumption that they must "save" people from their own supposed ignorance in relation to that specific religion. They heap on things like morality and damnation to support their cause; blindly believing their religion to be the correct one. It is this affront to just allowing people to believe what they want to believe that is his main gripe. That, and the fact that these people who have no toleration for other worships, creeds, etc. currently have the means (or are trying to attain the means) of mass destruction and are willing to do so "in the name of God!" A better definition would be "in the name of their belief system!" Doesn't have the same ring though, does it?

More people have been mutilated, murdered, killed, raped, <insert your favorite here>, etc. because of the lack of tolerance when it comes to belief systems and paradigms.

Atheists just want to call attention to problems of religions, their ignorance and their inherent lack of tolerance; not to destroy any religion in particular (which to me would sound more like an agenda). Myself, I am not an atheist but a naturalistic pantheist. But I whole-heartedly agree with promoting the idea of tolerance. Is it really worth being upset over something you have absolutely no control over? Morals, gays, sex, take your pick. Or if you don't agree with the last statement, are you finally going to accept the fact that it is power over somebody else that you want? You do want others to bend to your views? I live by the dogma of "whatever floats your boat". As long as you don't physically or mentally harm anyone in the pursuit of your endeavors. If you want to dance naked around a fire and cover yourself in grape jelly, more power to you. But don't tell me I have to do it or you're going to kill me, chastise me, etc. Because then you are being the aggressor and will meet with my resistance.

quantumushroom

says...

There are plenty of religious people who hurt no one and shitbird atheists like Stalin, Mao, Hitler who worshiped only themselves while regarding everyone else's life as worthless.

There's nothing to admire about unhappy people who have nothing to be unhappy about.

ajkido

says...

"There are plenty of religious people who hurt no one and shitbird atheists like Stalin, Mao, Hitler"

Hitler wasn't an atheist.

And those people's horrible actions had nothing to do with their religious beliefs. You can't blame atheism for anything because it's simply the lack of belief in divine beings, it doesn't have anything to do with morals in life etc.

budzos

says...

There are plenty of religious people who hurt no one and shitbird atheists like Stalin, Mao, Hitler who worshiped only themselves while regarding everyone else's life as worthless.

Thanks for identifying yourself as a complete nitwit. What a worthless argument.

aaronfr

says...

it's qm after all, what can you really expect. he's just parroting what Bill O'Reilly did in his interview with Richard Dawkins. Not really thinking for himself as usual.