the best religious nutcases were always atheists. The best satanist were always the extremely pious. As a certain man once said - you have to truly believe to be a blasphemer.

^ lol.

Jesus! Hitchen's speech is a bloody house of Horrors!

better to think how you might be able to change your life or live to deal with it properly - rather than thinking you've been given a bum deal for a reason and just sit on it.

That was the definition of pwnage!

Basement Dad! He's got a twitter!

Holy shit, I almost felt sorry for the questioner BEFORE Hitchens started his answer.

The whole talk is here: http://www.videosift.com/video/Hitchens-Versus-the-Four-Christian-Apologists

>> ^BicycleRepairMan:
Holy shit, I almost felt sorry for the questioner BEFORE Hitchens started his answer.

I know...he says Hitchens philosophy of anti-theism is a philosophy for the strong, intelligent, and well connected and that Christianity has something for people who are not strong, who are not intelligent. It seems to me his argument in favor of religion is that it has something to offer the weak and the stupid.

*quality stuff, very poignant, very visual

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by radx.

*doublepromote *talks

Double-Promoting this video back to the front page; last published Wednesday, April 8th, 2009 4:21pm PDT - doublepromote requested by gwiz665.

Adding video to channels (Talks) - requested by gwiz665.

*british

Adding video to channels (British) - requested by Zifnab.

Since when has the Catholic church been weak, poor and unconnected?

How can he be "damn sure" that he will outlive his children? Obviously most father's would desire to see their children live beyond them. How does this somehow invalidate the Christian understanding of an eternal God. Is the argument that only a true loving Father would euthanize himself before seeing one of his children die? What if the child dies unjustly (i.e. is ruthlessly murdered for no reason)? Would the loving father's obligation be to end his own life? Or would a loving father seek justice for his son's meaningless death? If I have misunderstood Hitchens' point here, please explain.

On the matter of the Austrian incestuous and deplorable father, I believe Hitchens' appraisal of the actual crime and situation is well put and accurate. It is nothing short of a heinous and grotesque injustice. Words fail to grasp the depravity. Hitchens' goes on to seem to suggest that Christianity would overlook the injustice of the crime, and that a Christian's response is "that's alright." I believe this reveals a grave misunderstanding by Hitchens of Christianity. Christianity takes justice very seriously, an understanding of the Biblical teaching on evil and sacrifice cannot deny that. The Bible also does not encourage inactivity to injustice. In this lifetime Christians are required to "promote justice" (Micah 6:8). I honestly cannot understand how one can criticize the Bible for taking evil of this nature (or any nature for that matter) lightly. And yet that is exactly what Hitchens appears to be doing.

Tyranny (a tyrannical God) is a logical conclusion to a perception of the Gospel message that is absent of righteousness (to make something right; to right a wrong; to seek justice).

>> ^dbarry3: Tyranny (a tyrannical God) is a logical conclusion to a perception of the Gospel message that is absent of righteousness (to make something right; to right a wrong; to seek justice).


Tyranny is tyranny, whatever the intentions of the ruler or the results of their actions. Even the most just despot remains a despot, someone exercising power over others who have no way to free themselves. In human society, of course, there is always some chance at liberty, however slim or dangerous, but an omnipotent god would be the ultimate tyrant, against whom no revolt is possible.

Now, this whole question of what a philosophy offers in terms of comfort is odd, because it doesn't deal with the veracity of any statements made. That said, personally I prefer the tyranny of the laws of nature to that of a personified deity. I can live with having to watch my body grow old and decay, I can live with having my potential limited by the blind chance of genetics and circumstance, but the idea of some sky-father having authority over me, in my lifetime and beyond, with no way out? Repulsive in the extreme. It's a good thing I see no reason to think such a thing exists, or I would likely die of an excess of bile.

*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 radx.