|
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
 Posted - 11/28/2010 : 01:04:26
|
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
9688 Posts |
Posted - 11/28/2010 : 07:17:14 [Permalink]
|
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. |
 |
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 11/28/2010 : 10:42:49 [Permalink]
|
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. |
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 11/28/2010 : 15:49:33 [Permalink]
|
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 |
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
Posted - 11/28/2010 : 16:23:51 [Permalink]
|
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. |
|
|
|
podcat
Skeptic Friend
435 Posts |
Posted - 11/28/2010 : 16:57:24 [Permalink]
|
| 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 |
|
|
|
podcat
Skeptic Friend
435 Posts |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Hitchens Vs Blair debate
