Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Dale Headley on December 17, 2011 at 2:34pm

   The stirring eloquence with which Hitchens expounded on atheism should not cloud judgments on his moral failings.  Don't forget: Karl Rove is an atheist.  And Hitler was a Catholic. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Doug Reardon on December 17, 2011 at 3:38pm

And the pope was a Nazi

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Albert Bakker on December 17, 2011 at 3:42pm

Oh wait a minute, come on now, not officially..

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Unseen on December 17, 2011 at 4:37pm

Umm... card carrying member of the party? I doubt it. I think he was in the Hitler youth as a kid. I WAS a Christian in my youth. Do I have to carry that on my back the rest of my life?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Albert Bakker on December 17, 2011 at 5:16pm

Oh this pope, I thought Eugenio Pacelli.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Albert Bakker on December 17, 2011 at 5:35pm

Come to think of it, there is apparently in a real sense stability in the church. It remains over centuries at least with remarkable consistency an international organization of pedophiles with their own orphanages led by a mentally deteriorating geezer with fascist sympathies.

If this seems like a cheap shot, it is because I cannot make it look any more respectable than it is.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Reggie on December 17, 2011 at 6:09pm

I WAS a Christian in my youth

Oh, you weren't a REAL Christian.

;)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dallas the Phallus on December 17, 2011 at 6:27pm

I've only read some of his articles, and none of his books (yet). I'm not familiar with his pro-war views, but that is circumstantial, not intentional. I'm sure that if I were to read every word he'd ever written that I'd find some views I disagreed with. This is true of anything or anyone. We need not see eye to eye with another person in order to like, respect, or appreciate them. You won't see that kind of attitude in dogmatists and sycophants. To them, their idols can do no wrong. A reasonable person can understand that people have their faults and biases. We can't expect the people we admire to be perfect, nor should we denounce them for their human flaws. Who is without flaws?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Scott H on December 17, 2011 at 6:45pm

Condemning Hitchens' stance on the Iraq war from the comfort of one's home is easy. But Hitch himself travelled extensively in Iraq and saw Hussein's atrocities first hand. He had many Iraqi friends and heard their tales. You may choose to disagree with his conclusion, but his decision to support the war was not made in a vacuum. He had more direct personal information about the country than most of the US administration.

Like myself, I'm sure Hitch lamented how incompetently Bush and his team executed the occupation. But that doesn't negate the entirely reasonable conclusion that Saddam had to go.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Unseen on December 17, 2011 at 6:53pm

Also, he stated he didn't think waterboarding was really torture and volunteered to be waterboarded, then after experiencing it he changed his mind, so he could be intellectually dishonest. We need to stop condemning people merely because they disagree with our views. They may have their reasons for believing what they believe.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dallas the Phallus on December 17, 2011 at 7:11pm

His telling of that story is great. Very well-written:

Believe Me, It’s Torture
What more can be added to the debate over U.S. interrogation methods, and whether waterboarding is torture? Try firsthand experience. The author undergoes the controversial drowning technique, at the hands of men who once trained American soldiers to resist—not inflict—it.

Here is the most chilling way I can find of stating the matter. Until recently, “waterboarding” was something that Americans did to other Americans. It was inflicted, and endured, by those members of the Special Forces who underwent the advanced form of training known as sere (Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape). In these harsh exercises, brave men and women were introduced to the sorts of barbarism that they might expect to meet at the hands of a lawless foe who disregarded the Geneva Conventions. But it was something that Americans were being trained to resist, not to inflict.

Exploring this narrow but deep distinction, on a gorgeous day last May I found myself deep in the hill country of western North Carolina, preparing to be surprised by a team of extremely hardened veterans who had confronted their country’s enemies in highly arduous terrain all over the world. They knew about everything from unarmed combat to enhanced interrogation and, in exchange for anonymity, were going to show me as nearly as possible what real waterboarding might be like.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by 3equ3cp1fsw0n on December 18, 2011 at 11:13am

@ Dallas - That was a a fascinating and disturbing article (your Hitchens link). Thank you.

How on earth do Christians seem to accept that their supposedly existing, loving, just, all-powerful, all-knowing God, created/allowed (whatever term they like to use) this terrible world?

I know they say it is because of free will, but if that is the case, I wonder why it is, I do not recall this God of theirs ever asking me what my choice was about anything?

I don't know a whole lot about Hitchens' support for the war but I am going to read up on it. This thread has piqued my interest in the matter.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• …
• 7
• Next ›
• Page