Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Religion
 Hitchens Vs Blair debate
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  

On fire for Christ
SFN Regular

Norway
1268 Posts

Posted - 11/28/2010 :  01:04:26  Show Profile Send On fire for Christ a Private Message  Reply with Quote
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11854429

I don't know if you can get the video outside of Britain.

Personally for a long time I didn't mind Blair, he seemed like a reasonable intelligent man, a welcome change from 20 years of Tory government. I wasn't one of the people shocked and appalled by the invasion of Iraq, although I didn't think it was a particularly good idea. Blair says his reasons for the invasion weren't religious, and I really think he's being honest there. I'm not one of the hysterical types who think he is in league with the devil and evil to his rotten core, he just made some bad decisions.
But what really gripes at me is his decision to convert to Roman Catholicism immediately after standing down as prime minister. That was pretty cowardly. I think he should explain why he chose to wait, it's like a public relations move, basically he's implying that the British people are intolerant of Catholics.

Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend

Sweden
9680 Posts

Posted - 11/28/2010 :  07:17:14   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Dr. Mabuse an ICQ Message Send Dr. Mabuse a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
Blair says his reasons for the invasion weren't religious, and I really think he's being honest there.
Me too. We all know now that it was for America's craving for more oil and no-bid military contract and they needed a partner. Blair was just too weak to say no. He should have listened to Robin Cook, he was a smart man.


I'm not one of the hysterical types who think he is in league with the devil and evil to his rotten core, he just made some bad decisions.
Like allying himself with the devil and a man evil to his rotten core. That was the really bad decision.

But what really gripes at me is his decision to convert to Roman Catholicism immediately after standing down as prime minister. That was pretty cowardly. I think he should explain why he chose to wait, it's like a public relations move, basically he's implying that the British people are intolerant of Catholics.
What is it they say about the stripes of a zebra?

Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3

"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse

Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder.
Go to Top of Page

Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend

Sweden
9680 Posts

Posted - 11/28/2010 :  10:42:49   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Dr. Mabuse an ICQ Message Send Dr. Mabuse a Private Message  Reply with Quote
From the link:
In a vote after the debate, the audience voted two-to-one in Mr Hitchens' favour.

Since this debate was televised in Canada, I'm betting Michael Coren will have something inane to say about this.
Expect a report from the ignored presently...

Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3

"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse

Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder.
Go to Top of Page

the_ignored
SFN Addict

2558 Posts

Posted - 11/28/2010 :  15:49:33   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send the_ignored a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Yep, you're right, Doc. Michael Coren does have his opinion on this:

Hitchens is bright and charismatic, but his arguments against religion are school-boy stuff. A good Christian apologist would rip the man and his flaccid arguments apart, but Blair doesn’t have the quality or the Christianity to do this. Such a shame that two better people could not be found. Well, they could – but this was celebrity rather than academy and that is all rather pathetic.


Once I read Doc's post, I knew to start looking.

Coren replies to a commentator's comment (look under the +++++signs):

Yes, read his books, worked with him at the New Statesman in the early 80s, debated him myself on television – wiped the floor with him. I like Chris, but his arguments against religion are as poor as his arguments for bombing innocent people in Iraq. Not sure what this “lefty playbook” is. I assume it’s similar to the “conservative playbook” that leftists talk about when trying to silence the right. Oh, and you could not logically defend atheism for more than a moment in a genuine, philosophical debate. You may doubt God, you may genuinely believe there is no God, you may hate the idea that there is a God; but if you think you can prove there is no God you have not thought this through. Nobody can prove the non-existence of God any more than they can prove His existence. Read the best of the God-deniers-Bertrand Russell -
- and then get back to me. By the way, most neo-cons I know are not believers; more the low morals, law taxes types.


I wonder how Coren would like Stephen Law?

>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.

What brought that on? this. Original posting here.

Another example of this guy's lunacy here.
Edited by - the_ignored on 11/28/2010 15:59:11
Go to Top of Page

the_ignored
SFN Addict

2558 Posts

Posted - 11/28/2010 :  16:23:51   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send the_ignored a Private Message  Reply with Quote
My reply:

So, Coren: If one can't disprove the existence of (your) God anymore than one can prove his existence, then where does that leave anyone? If you mock the side who tries to disprove god's existence you'd have to realize then that your side is not any better off.

Assuming of course that your idea is true. It isn't.

Since we all know that it's the xian god that you're talking about here, all one has to do to disprove his existence is to take the bible and examine it thoroughly for contradictions, scientific errors, and failed prophecies, especially messianic prophecies.

By the way, for an atheist philosopher, you may like reading Stephen Law.

>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.

What brought that on? this. Original posting here.

Another example of this guy's lunacy here.
Go to Top of Page

podcat
Skeptic Friend

435 Posts

Posted - 11/28/2010 :  16:57:24   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send podcat a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Just out of curiosity, can anyone show me at what time Coren debated Hitchens? I can't find anything on Google.

“In a modern...society, everybody has the absolute right to believe whatever they damn well please, but they don't have the same right to be taken seriously”.

-Barry Williams, co-founder, Australian Skeptics
Go to Top of Page

podcat
Skeptic Friend

435 Posts

Posted - 12/02/2010 :  21:42:49   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send podcat a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Results of this debate: http://us1.campaign-archive1.com/?u=75554b61c4eceb407e7bc5ac0&id=648aec87a3&e=966d78aedd

Could someone translate that third paragraph for me, please?

“In a modern...society, everybody has the absolute right to believe whatever they damn well please, but they don't have the same right to be taken seriously”.

-Barry Williams, co-founder, Australian Skeptics
Go to Top of Page
  Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.33 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000