namelesstavern.net

Kind of a bummer I enjoyed god is not great and he was always an entertaining guest when he was on real time. I didnt even know he was sick

He's with Jesus now.

Just saw this on Wiki. I have no idea who he is!

positively brilliant man, really. sorry to lose him.

the onion had a great headline about him... priceless. i just loved how evangelicals would lose their bowels when talking about him.

Guess God had the last word in that argument.

Ganzo wrote:Guess God had the last word in that argument.

What?

He generally does, G.

I'll miss Hitchens writings, but if you live hard you generally die young. His positions on so many political things pretty much mirrors my own. A

Tossica wrote:

Ganzo wrote:Guess God had the last word in that argument.

What?

if you accept God killed Hitchens then you must also accept that He made most of His followers smug assholes

not sure which is the more laughable proposition

brinstar wrote:

Tossica wrote:

Ganzo wrote:Guess God had the last word in that argument.

What?

if you accept God killed Hitchens then you must also accept that He made most of His followers smug assholes

not sure which is the more laughable proposition

This is not my position, just a joke. As far as my opinion on Hitchens, I never had any respect for people who build their fame and fortune on criticizing and belittling others; but I guess tearing down is easier than creating. This goes for everyone, regardless of their political or religious stand.

fair point

I dont think its a fair point and i guess we will have to agree to disagree. I think some things need to be torn down. Religion has been causing strife and getting away with atrocities for a very long time now and it deserves to be called out on it. For an example do you think any other large group could get away with the sexual abuses of the catholic church? next time a teacher fucks a kid lets just transfer them to another school instead. Im not just talking about people who follow the jesus either. Take a show like south park for example they can harp on any group but islam cuz those crazies might kill a nigga. Those are just 2 examples of the shit that religion gets away with right off the top of my head and I can list more if you would like.

People use religion to justify or hide behind when it comes to all kinds of bullshit and Im pretty sick of it.

in all fairness, as far as Hitchens goes he was a very respectful speaker when arguing his point. Many religious leaders were happy to debate with him because he was engaging and detailed in his discussions and didn't resort to "lol you're stupid." We're not talking about someone like, say, Bill Maher who I enjoy watching, but can certainly understand why so many people dislike him because he's a condescending asshole when addressing issues he disagrees with.

I don't particularly see how his career is any different than any type of public evangelical figure who makes their living preaching the word of god and basically telling people if they don't accept it as the truth then they're going to hell. Sure, they put it in a prettier package to spin it as a positive and it's a more widely accepted belief, but if you take away the public stigma of Atheism, Hitchens simply preached his own word no different than any religious entertainer for lack of a better word.

Spazz wrote:I dont think its a fair point and i guess we will have to agree to disagree. I think some things need to be torn down. Religion has been causing strife and getting away with atrocities for a very long time now and it deserves to be called out on it. For an example do you think any other large group could get away with the sexual abuses of the catholic church? next time a teacher fucks a kid lets just transfer them to another school instead. Im not just talking about people who follow the jesus either. Take a show like south park for example they can harp on any group but islam cuz those crazies might kill a nigga. Those are just 2 examples of the shit that religion gets away with right off the top of my head and I can list more if you would like.

People use religion to justify or hide behind when it comes to all kinds of bullshit and Im pretty sick of it.

You are attributing actions of people who use faith to justify their means to the religion as an institution. You can do this to every institution in the world, but it does not mean they should be torn down. If a teacher fucks a kid as you've stated, should we get rid of schools? And I did not say that criticizing something is bad, I said that turning this criticism into an occupation does not win my respect; this is my personal opinion though and not associated with any political or religious affiliation.

Gypsiyee wrote:in all fairness, as far as Hitchens goes he was a very respectful speaker when arguing his point. Many religious leaders were happy to debate with him because he was engaging and detailed in his discussions and didn't resort to "lol you're stupid." We're not talking about someone like, say, Bill Maher who I enjoy watching, but can certainly understand why so many people dislike him because he's a condescending asshole when addressing issues he disagrees with.

I don't particularly see how his career is any different than any type of public evangelical figure who makes their living preaching the word of god and basically telling people if they don't accept it as the truth then they're going to hell. Sure, they put it in a prettier package to spin it as a positive and it's a more widely accepted belief, but if you take away the public stigma of Atheism, Hitchens simply preached his own word no different than any religious entertainer for lack of a better word.

I don't see how addressing it politely changes anything, and he had many not so respectful jabs, like calling Mother Teresa a supporter of poverty. He knew very well what he was doing and used same shock practice as any other entertainer, in order to increase the sales of his books.
You are correct though, this is no different from evangelists on TV and I have even less respect for them, as they are nothing but a glorified salesmen.

Glorified salesmen? Preaching positive messages about faith and family and living a moral life is just being a glorified salesman? Wow, mkay.

Narrock wrote:Glorified salesmen? Preaching positive messages about faith and family and living a moral life is just being a glorified salesman? Wow, mkay.

lol right

you know, if they could do that without attaching so much xenophobia and bigotry i bet they'd be surprised at how many new converts they'd get

of course you of all people wouldn't notice any of that xenophobia or bigotry because it's perfectly natural to you

I know, right? Labels, labels, labels... Anyway, I love listening to Joel Osteen's audio books. His messages make me feel good when I'm down.

Ganzo wrote:I don't see how addressing it politely changes anything, and he had many not so respectful jabs, like calling Mother Teresa a supporter of poverty. He knew very well what he was doing and used same shock practice as any other entertainer, in order to increase the sales of his books.
You are correct though, this is no different from evangelists on TV and I have even less respect for them, as they are nothing but a glorified salesmen.

well, I guess I don't see public discourse or debate--even when it's controversial--as necessarily a negative thing. it allows for fresh perspectives landing somewhere in the middle.

You specifically mentioned making a career out of belittling people, and I never viewed him that way. to me, Maher makes a career out of belittling people, as does Hannity, Beck, etc. those are figures that aim for shock value and pissing people off. Hitchens was a much different type of commentator, imo, and he frequently refused to go down the path of simply being snarky even when he was goaded to do so. you can even see that in the interview with Maher. he had a much more level headed approach.

His statements about Mother Theresa were his own opinions, which he's entitled to..if you look at his full statements, he approached it from a logical perspective with somewhat understandable points; not necessarily ones I agreed with, but expressions that you could see how he would draw that conclusion. it was an explanatory response mostly to why he disagreed with her sainthood.

certainly, he had some shock value appeal--he's a writer, and in that career path you don't succeed if you don't sell. but for the most part, he was a consistent and staunch believer in the things that he said and wanted to preserve that even after death. it's not necessarily an easy road to make a career off of something that's widely unpopular and offensive to the masses, but that's what he did. if he was in it for sales alone, he would've appealed to a much wider audience had he gone the path of faith.