Can you imagine if nothing like youtube existed? Horrible thought. Hitch has been immortalized right here. His passion, courage, remarkable wit and brilliant ideas and for me, his rich baritone, keeps me watching these videos again and again...
Yes, I can imagine considering that UA-cam was founded in 2005, only nine years before you posted this. In today's world, half of everything posted on social media is untrue or grossly exaggerated. Hitchens was right on the subjects of religion and God, yet remained a conservative despite the glaring contradiction. One of his biggest contributions was one that isn't so obvious, reading enriches and clarifies one's understanding of the world, without education people are doomed to superstition and other forms of fuckery.
@@milonguerobillIn-spite of today’s (at your fingertips knowledge) people still cling to their quackery delusions, yes it was none other than Albert Einstein when talking about the human race …”The human race? Oh, dear, we are a sorry lot indeed”
one day youtube will go down and unless someone like you saved this video, it'll be gone. and who will remember hitchens, then? maybe some of his books will survive youtube being shut down by alphabet/google but make no mistake youtube can go away and with it, everything that looks "immortal" on youtube alone download videos you find valuable, and back them up
"Which of us is more moral? Which of us is more courageous? Which of us has bluer eyes and is more sexually attractive? Which of us has more charisma?" - didn't expect his rebuttal of Pascal's wager to go that way, and what a beautiful finale. Hitch was the man.
Yeh real genius. Died choking to death in Houston. Real genius whimpering to kid in his last appearance while withering to nothing, that she should keep love in her heart. Of course the kid was about 200 pounds of gluttony mumbling his souless blather. Even then the miserable soul knew it was over. Pathetic.
It's not nice looking back on old Hitchens videos seening him cough and knowing the struggles he had to come. He did great things on his way to the grave, knowing that there was nothing to come. What a great man.
Yes, I thought the same thing 😢 he was so brilliant and so pure of heart ❤ I often think his own goodness made religion redundant in his mind....if only he was still with us
Take A Moment My fellow Ape The Man of words and pictures in my mind. I have PTSD after 28yrs in the RAF Suicide attempt mountains don't notice. I walk with a limp 24/7 in an approved home. Thx gods I still live in fear every day. 20 drugs a day to stop me having another go. I live in my foxhole with many comrades, No gods in sight Just men dying all around the world post covid. Please my friend 🙏 Get Free Stay Silly Stay Safe and Stay Free
"My fellow Americans... thank you; I sometimes think you don't understand how lucky you are - yours is the country that has the only constitution ever written that absolutely insists on the separation of these ideas from the state."
I still love watching Hitchens’s debates. However, I take issue as an Australian with this statement. Section 116 of the Australian Constitution (1901) - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_116_of_the_Constitution_of_Australia?wprov=sfti1#
@Sailright21 His way with words blows my mind. I've watched every debate of his multiple times, and I am continually astounded at his ability to express ideas within these debates in such an aesthetically pleasing manner. I very much envy his arrangement of language.
I love Christopher Hitchens ,his mind ,his views,his voice especially .I can and have done listened to him all night so many times.He is so missed by this world and we need another just like him now .He was so prophetic as we can all see now his ideas of free speech ,good night dear prince RIP xxx
I agree and I think that Douglas Murray has the potential of filling these enormous shoes. He is a very smart British journalist who can debate very brightly with the same ethical believes.
+godot789 No one can be born at the same time and place with the same parents. We can only have one Christopher Eric Hitchens. At least he left us his books, these videos and audio books recorded with his own pleasing voice. He is not resting peacefully anywhere, but I generally share your sentiments while I too miss him dearly like a great friend I almost met.
Joseph Nordenbrock Absolutely agree. Watching his brother on question time recently, was heartbraking. His mannerisms reminded me so much of what we've lost. Such a shame that Peter doesn't posses his brother's vision or charisma. Christopher was his mothers son. Peter is much more staid, like his father.
Olasky spent all his time telling stories of people who do well because of religion, he could’ve spared us the rest the tales, his main claim that underlies all the examples he gave is all based on a non-sequitur: To believe that religion’s premises are true because people do good because of it
I take comfort from the knowledge that Hitchens accepted the risks of his behaviour whole-heartedly and would not have changed anything about it had he the chance. He lived his life exactly as he wished, to the fullest he could, and accomplished a huge amount. Definitely missed, and what he went through must have been miserable, and his life was inspirational to any who would live according to reason and evidence.
This debate , mainly everything that Mr.Hitchens mentions, completely unveiled reality , changed everything for me: ESP the part "resist this with every fiber of your being", thanks so much
How did Marvin Olasky ever get a PhD? Either his professors were afraid of his family, or they got paid off by his family, or they gave it to him just to get rid of him. This is why college degrees alone don't impress me.
"...This fighting - not just about religion but between the religious; this desire [to] have the freedom not just of religion but from religion - is enshrined in the founding documents of this country in a way that should make you very proud. And it should therefore put you very much on your guard that there are people who don't seem content with it, who seem always to wish to impose their own religious belief on this."
I don't understand why religious people seem to think that without their existence, there wouldn't be any people advocating for the assistance of those in need. If there weren't religious people, does anyone with a decent sense of reality think that we'd all just stand idly by and watch people suffer and die? I think the secular humanist movement would happily step in to take religion's place with the same kind of tenacity.
Please list the best secular humanist charity in our nation; how about in your city. Please tell us a civilization built in the foundation (primarily) of secular humanism. Contrast the most secular humanistic nations today with those most Christian and tell us which is more charitable.
@@legoking2372this is a dishonest response. Secular humanists were not allowed to exist in most of history due to your pretend moral religious people. It’s like saying racism is OK in the US because none of the founding fathers were Black.
Hitchens made the final minute even better than the whole discussion =D He was such an honest, moral, unbelievably brave, intelligent person, that I, as an agnostic, truly wish there was an afterlife, just because of people like him. He cannot be gone into nothingness. Forgive me Mr Hitchens for these faith-filled words =D
Hitch is The Man, no doubt. :) Marvin Olasky made a few good points, but nothing substantive, and nothing that invalidated anything that Hitchens said. He was pointing out minor exceptions to the rule of religion's toxic nature, and was acting like it was a big deal. As if the minor amount of good religion has done somehow outweighs all the mountains of harm it has caused. All in all, Hitchens clobbered him.
As good a performance as hitchins had, this is by far the best performance a hitchins' opponent has ever had in my opinion. A debate exceedingly worthy of an objective, open minded watch
I really like most of the people Hitchens debates. I appreciate christians who are open to discuss their beliefs rather than taking offense and hiding from nonbelievers.
Utterly brilliant! There really is no other way to describe Hitchens in this post, as an orator and clear thinking reasoned logician, he was quite literally miraculous.
Theres footage missing from this debate between the 39-40 minute mark. I don't know why it was cut because some of my favorite points made by Hitchens were in this section.
I've often heard this argument, but only from the third world or the states. Most of the rest of us in the industrialised world have decided that we do really want effective health care for all of our citizens, a welfare safety net that works, and a first class education for everyone. Yes, by US standards, that is pretty socialist. Any charity involving a faith based organisation, though, will always be the least moral because the need is not the first priority.
We need more people like Hitch if we hope to keep our liberties... If not we will lose the first amendment, it has been under attack for a long time by religious political incumbents ... For example, the national day of prayer THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING PEOPLE... if we let them win there it will only be a matter of time before the rest will go... STAND UP FOR THE 1ST AMENDMENT... Their is a reason it is the first one and the first sentence says very clearly; Congress shall make NO!!! law respecting an establishment of religion ... We have got to fight to keep religion out of our schools and our politics the more religious people we allow to be elected the weaker the 1st amendment gets... STOP VOTING FOR RELIGIOUS PEOPLE... Fellow atheists we are losing our rights to think freely more and more everyday thanks to politically motivated religious people... That being said it can no longer be beneath us to fight the battle of ideas with these people, that is to say we can longer afford to let these people perpetuate their backward ideologies amongst our youth. Make no mistake this is not a laughing matter we ARE losing this fight and will continue to lose if we do not take it seriously... PLEASE WAKE UP AND FIGHT!!!! (HITCH WOULD HAVE)
I've seen this again and again in these debates. The argument for religion always boils down to 1. There exist religious persons, and 2. A religious person once did a nice thing.
Mr Olasky might have considered that, the plural of anecdote is not evidence. But, the warm and fuzzy feelings from tales of adopted AIDS babies maybe lessened, if one were to consider how the wretched were placed into their position to begin with; "AIDS is bad, but not as bad as condoms!"
My apologies, uploader. You have done exactly as I requested - provide full provenance. I confused your video with another of the same event (I had them showing side by side) in which the uploader gave almost no information. Thank you for your efforts.
This debate exemplifies how much charisma helps one’s point. Hitchen’s opponent has valid points, but his presentation puts me to sleep. Humor, wittiness, sarcasm…..goes a long way to making an audience more receptive to listening to you.
Did Olansky really say "teaching atheism in class"? Not a subject.....You can tell Olansky doesn't know how to debate and was not up to date on the latest arguing points.
I'm impressed by that. I hope that sometime in the near future, the U.S realizes that anything a church can do (in terms of aiding the poor, etc.) can be done equally as well, if not better, by entirely secular organizations with no religious affiliation whatsoever.
That guy who said he never heard a response to Pascal’s Wager has never looked, obviously. It’s a crap argument and you shouldn’t need someone to even tell you that. Just read it. Terrible logic.
I know I am not going to live forever and neither are you, but until my furlough here on earth is revoked, I’d like to elbow aside the established pieties and raise my tumbler 🥃 of Johnnie Walker Black high above my head in honor of the brilliant intellect and oratory that was Christopher Hitchens, his thought provoking courageous ideas and opinions will enshrine him forever amongst the giants of reason. I sorely miss the gorgeous bastard.
Does anyone know of a debate on UA-cam where Mr Hitchens is properly challenged? He seems to quietly mop the floor with his opponents. Not that he isn't under pressure, but it would be interesting to watch him threatened intellectually.
Ian P Yeah there is one - Hitchens vs Rabbi David Wolpe. This rabbi does a much better job & has intellectual honesty & sharp thinking, unlike most others. Check it out. I'm an atheist Jew by the way.
Holy shit This was like Mike Tyson beating up a school boy…. Hitch TKO’d goofy beard young man in second round He misunderstood the whole focus of the debate
shocking really. Olasky's method of arguing by reading passages from Christopher's books demonstrates a profound lack of spontaneous intellect needed to debate one of the most influential and brilliant debater's known.
Quite the opposite. I think Hitchens needed to be confronted directly by the excesses of his rhetoric. The best way to do that is to quote it directly.
@@ihatespam2 Really!? You must be kidding me. Hitchen's whole mischaracterization of religion is a demagogic excess. Take the secondary title of his book on religion was excessive "How Religion Poisons Everything." Olasky kept coming back that cartoon claim, "everything?"
@@markrutledge5855 no, not kidding. Not exaggerating, that’s what you are doing. Take some topics; charity, ethics, community etc etc. Xtianity poisons them. Does that mean every person involved in them is corrupted? Obviously no, it doesn’t mean that. It means Xtianitys version of ethics is poisoned, because it trains you to do what you are told and not think for yourself. To pretend slavery was OK back then, but not now, etc. Charity, do you give because it is the right thing to do or because you are supposed to to get I heaven? Poisoned. Community, well, if you join, you are OK, they have special rules for their in group. They ostracize doubters. People are kicked out of families, like a cult. Poisoned. Does that mean every Xtian does it or every doubter is punished? NO.. It means every subject, topic issue, IS poisoned by its bad ethics, bad science, bad history. It’s vicarious redemption via scapegoating and blood sacrifice for sins I did not commit is a lie told to guilt you into subservience. It puts poison in the mind of all its believers. Do they all succumb? No But YES, it poisons EVERYTHING! You are either arguing with a strawman on purpose or or blinded by your faith to misconstrue what is being said.
@AstronomyGuru84 Not only that, all studies show that those that consider themselves atheistic donate a far greater percentage of both their time and money to charitable causes than those that identify as theists.
First, just to be clear, I'm with Hitch... but it seems to me that, Olasky did treat this as a logical statement; if he took the statement as a generalization his entire argument would be void since he agreed that some evil was produced by religion. That being said, I think Hitch didn't say "...poisons everything" lightly. I think he would also say that [Doing the right thing for the wrong reasons is still wrong] suggesting that even good actions which are done for religious reasons are tainted.
"There are a lot of ppl who spend their whole life looking at these things"..that does nothing for the validity of the tales. I'll spend my whole life looking at them and studying religion, I truly love studying it, but that doesn't make it true.
When I Wikipedia’d Marvin Olasky, I got a bit embarrassed as an admirer of Hitchens that he spent any time at all with microbial wot of Olasky. And yet Olasky had an outsized influence at the time. We all need to start somewhere, it seems.
Also I said “killing for no reason”. If you think this is justified, you do not know what justified means. The lack of suffering for humanity as a whole does not correspond to a mentally unwell person having instantaneous pleasure.
Boy, Hitch seemed a bit more sober on this night, possibly lol ..but he spoke so well for many of us who feel very similarly. To think, as the other side does, that you can't have compassion, do good deeds, love, nor would want to unless you had religion, is such a crock and never a good argument, though almost the only one religions take.
that religious dude has wasted so much time in his opening statement saying the same thing over and over hoping that shoveling that $*** enough will make us swallow it.
Is there anyone at all willing to transcribe Hitchens opening statement as a UA-cam comment? It was just so amazing and I can't find a transcription anywhere.
Love is generally understood as an abstract feeling that is forever and all-encompassing, unconditional with no limits. You ask for nothing in return. Love is also considered to be irrational, as people do illogical things because of it. It's because of these qualities that love cannot simply be reduced to something physical, and the romanticism of the emotion is lost on atheists as such a thing does not exist to them.
Olasky did a decent job trying to attack HItchens claim that religion poisons everything by pointing out religious charity. The most dangerous poisons are the ones that appear not to be poisons by having some positive attributes while destroying at the same time. Drugs, for example, make you feel amazing. So you assume you need them to feel good when in fact they are destroying your life.
Because for some unfathomable reason, one can receive a doctorate in hokum. If Olasky healed people through prayer, I confess I might give the title some credence.
“An argument against compassion for the weak may arise” - no, it doesn’t. Survival of the fittest does not mean we should kill the weak. The beautiful thing about the mind is that it can think and develop, which goes for our moral code. If anything, religion is responsible for most of the ancient evil practises like child sacrifice, that science could not yet counter.
The lack of free will does not mean we are not accountable. It someone commits a crime, they should locked up to keep them from harming others and/or to reflect on their actions to become better members of society.
Hitchens is in excellent form. I also kind of like Olasky as well, but he sets his debate objective low by taking the position that religion doesn't poison LITERALLY everything.
Hitchens is one of the people i have gladly known who describes what it actually means to live under a dictatorship.you who have not experienced this might now hesitate and contemplate the idea a little more deeply.
First of all, if you don't do something to someone so that you hope no one does the same to you too, then you're doing it for the wrong reasons. You're not stealing from someone out of fear someone does it to you, and logically it's necessary for a society to function. This is not morality, because a moral action is one that is done because it's the right thing to do, not expecting anything, like good karma, to follow you in return. This is why the Greatest Commandment is to love one another.
Its first a hypothesis. Then its tested over, over and over again until its proven. THEN you can say its a scientific theory. Thats the highest achievment you can get in science. Evolution is a fact. Grow up, folks - for those who reject it.
This claim would be far more accurate if the words,"that it hasn't already destroyed",were added to the subtitle. If one wishes to eat the poisoned candy of religious generosity, let her do so. The reasonable mind will always wisely decline the offer. Poisoned candy will always be poison regardless of how enticing the candy or how desperate and needy the recipient.
You don't have to be religious or believe in a god to help people. Secularist and atheist also help people. I'm an atheist and I help people and donate to charity all the time. While religious people do help people they don't do it without an agenda.
Also "Secular Charity" in the form of foreign aid (paid for by taxes from religious folks) is used for political purposes which suit multinational corporation.
Yes, we actually care about sharing some of our wealth. But if you don't want to believe that, I can tell you that 4 out of the 5 biggest charity names in Norway are completely secular and doesn't have any faith-based reason for helping. I guess its the consequence of secular Norway having a people where the majority is non-believeing; thus more secular charities. You see? religion or not, it makes no difference, we are still humans with compassion!
hard to believe that a man of the caliber of intelligence of Christopher hitchens would believe that what we did in Iraq was a "noble undertaking" and for olasky to call the war in Iraq as a "necessary subset of the war on terror" shows his lack of understanding for the real motivations that were behind the invasion of Iraq and for the two of them to agree on such an illegal undertaking shows their lack of morality.
I enjoyed the debate, but it would have been much more interesting if Olasky would have moved on from Hitchens' written statement, "religion poisons everything." To disprove that statement, Olasky need only to provide a single counter example. If you want to disprove the statement, "This box contains only red paper" you need only to pull one piece of paper, that isn't red, out of the box; then the statement is no longer valid. We didn't need 25 minutes of non-red paper pulling.
""why should you feel bad about how another person is feeling?" - This is meant to show why if you look at empathy logically, and reasonably, there is no reason why you should care. You misread. I am not saying we need Jesus to love, and I am not using "Commandment" as if we are somehow being forced or coerced to love one another. We have a choice and know the consequences.
@MysteryoftheGods "I will give you clean water to drink and I will help you rebuild your home. By the way have you found Jesus." Religious people do help but not without a religious agenda. Thank you for your kind words.
Can you imagine if nothing like youtube existed? Horrible thought. Hitch has been immortalized right here. His passion, courage, remarkable wit and brilliant ideas and for me, his rich baritone, keeps me watching these videos again and again...
Yes, I can imagine considering that UA-cam was founded in 2005, only nine years before you posted this. In today's world, half of everything posted on social media is untrue or grossly exaggerated. Hitchens was right on the subjects of religion and God, yet remained a conservative despite the glaring contradiction. One of his biggest contributions was one that isn't so obvious, reading enriches and clarifies one's understanding of the world, without education people are doomed to superstition and other forms of fuckery.
Thank you for those beautiful words. Feelings are mutual.
@@milonguerobillIn-spite of today’s (at your fingertips knowledge) people still cling to their quackery delusions, yes it was none other than Albert Einstein when talking about the human race …”The human race? Oh, dear, we are a sorry lot indeed”
one day youtube will go down
and unless someone like you saved this video, it'll be gone.
and who will remember hitchens, then?
maybe some of his books will survive youtube being shut down by alphabet/google
but make no mistake
youtube can go away
and with it, everything that looks "immortal" on youtube alone
download videos you find valuable, and back them up
"Which of us is more moral? Which of us is more courageous? Which of us has bluer eyes and is more sexually attractive? Which of us has more charisma?" - didn't expect his rebuttal of Pascal's wager to go that way, and what a beautiful finale. Hitch was the man.
That was fourteen and a half minutes of pure gold at the beginning.
The Master at work.
ukrandr truly. The best opening I've heard him state yet!
Hitchens, simply put, is brilliant. Rest in peace for your legend lives on.
Yeh real genius. Died choking to death in Houston. Real genius whimpering to kid in his last appearance while withering to nothing, that she should keep love in her heart. Of course the kid was about 200 pounds of gluttony mumbling his souless blather. Even then the miserable soul knew it was over. Pathetic.
It's not nice looking back on old Hitchens videos seening him cough and knowing the struggles he had to come. He did great things on his way to the grave, knowing that there was nothing to come. What a great man.
He said he wouldn't have taken back smoking if he had the option to
Yes, I thought the same thing 😢 he was so brilliant and so pure of heart ❤ I often think his own goodness made religion redundant in his mind....if only he was still with us
Take A Moment
My fellow Ape
The Man of words and pictures in my mind.
I have PTSD after 28yrs in the RAF
Suicide attempt mountains don't notice.
I walk with a limp
24/7 in an approved home.
Thx gods
I still live in fear every day.
20 drugs a day to stop me having another go.
I live in my foxhole with many comrades,
No gods in sight
Just men dying all around the world post covid.
Please my friend 🙏
Get Free
Stay Silly
Stay Safe and Stay Free
I think Christopher is the only person who I never met who I miss so much.
Oliver, the man,, the idea, the philosophy never will die. Chris would appreciate it.
"My fellow Americans... thank you; I sometimes think you don't understand how lucky you are - yours is the country that has the only constitution ever written that absolutely insists on the separation of these ideas from the state."
I still love watching Hitchens’s debates. However, I take issue as an Australian with this statement. Section 116 of the Australian Constitution (1901) - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_116_of_the_Constitution_of_Australia?wprov=sfti1#
@Sailright21 His way with words blows my mind. I've watched every debate of his multiple times, and I am continually astounded at his ability to express ideas within these debates in such an aesthetically pleasing manner. I very much envy his arrangement of language.
Such an eloquent, wonderfully articulate speaker, his words are almost poetic.
Hitchens: There is no evidence for religion
Olasky: Yeah but it doesn't poison Everything (x10)
I wish this religious debate would end forever....religion belongs in a museum.
I love Christopher Hitchens ,his mind ,his views,his voice especially .I can and have done listened to him all night so many times.He is so missed by this world and we need another just like him now .He was so prophetic as we can all see now his ideas of free speech ,good night dear prince RIP xxx
I agree and I think that Douglas Murray has the potential of filling these enormous shoes. He is a very smart British journalist who can debate very brightly with the same ethical believes.
godot789 Well said.
+godot789 No one can be born at the same time and place with the same parents. We can only have one Christopher Eric Hitchens. At least he left us his books, these videos and audio books recorded with his own pleasing voice. He is not resting peacefully anywhere, but I generally share your sentiments while I too miss him dearly like a great friend I almost met.
Joseph Nordenbrock Absolutely agree. Watching his brother on question time recently, was heartbraking. His mannerisms reminded me so much of what we've lost. Such a shame that Peter doesn't posses his brother's vision or charisma. Christopher was his mothers son. Peter is much more staid, like his father.
try spending those nights listening to yourself. that is the only way to learn.
You wouldn't need faith if you had facts and evidence!!
Olasky spent all his time telling stories of people who do well because of religion, he could’ve spared us the rest the tales, his main claim that underlies all the examples he gave is all based on a non-sequitur: To believe that religion’s premises are true because people do good because of it
I take comfort from the knowledge that Hitchens accepted the risks of his behaviour whole-heartedly and would not have changed anything about it had he the chance.
He lived his life exactly as he wished, to the fullest he could, and accomplished a huge amount.
Definitely missed, and what he went through must have been miserable, and his life was inspirational to any who would live according to reason and evidence.
Indeed. During his life, I was very concerned that a radical Christian or Muslim would murder him simply for voicing words that scared them.
This debate , mainly everything that Mr.Hitchens mentions, completely unveiled reality , changed everything for me: ESP the part "resist this with every fiber of your being", thanks so much
This Olasky guy had no idea that he'd already crossed the event horizon out in the parking lot and would never escape.
Hitch nailed it....again
Absolute pleasure to listen the Christopher Hitchens…
christopher hitchens wiped the floor with him...
So well said sir. Thank you for being somewhere out there.
How did Marvin Olasky ever get a PhD? Either his professors were afraid of his family, or they got paid off by his family, or they gave it to him just to get rid of him. This is why college degrees alone don't impress me.
"...which of us has the bluest eye and is the most sexually attractive...?"lol
We need more Hitchens!!!!!
Douglas murray...a man of great intelligence...but nobody will ever replace Christopher hitchens
I love olaskey's opening...it's clear he either didn't read the book or didn't understand it.
"...This fighting - not just about religion but between the religious; this desire [to] have the freedom not just of religion but from religion - is enshrined in the founding documents of this country in a way that should make you very proud. And it should therefore put you very much on your guard that there are people who don't seem content with it, who seem always to wish to impose their own religious belief on this."
And he doubtless turned up without rehearsing, without notes and with a couple of whiskeys on board. Gotta love the Hitch.
I don't understand why religious people seem to think that without their existence, there wouldn't be any people advocating for the assistance of those in need. If there weren't religious people, does anyone with a decent sense of reality think that we'd all just stand idly by and watch people suffer and die? I think the secular humanist movement would happily step in to take religion's place with the same kind of tenacity.
Please list the best secular humanist charity in our nation; how about in your city.
Please tell us a civilization built in the foundation (primarily) of secular humanism.
Contrast the most secular humanistic nations today with those most Christian and tell us which is more charitable.
@@legoking2372this is a dishonest response. Secular humanists were not allowed to exist in most of history due to your pretend moral religious people. It’s like saying racism is OK in the US because none of the founding fathers were Black.
You can only say that someone has done something good because of religion if you can show that they wouldn't have done good without religion.
Great thought!
Hitchens made the final minute even better than the whole discussion =D
He was such an honest, moral, unbelievably brave, intelligent person, that I, as an agnostic, truly wish there was an afterlife, just because of people like him. He cannot be gone into nothingness. Forgive me Mr Hitchens for these faith-filled words =D
I wonder if Olasky actually thinks that religious people who do good things wouldn't do good things without religion.
Olasky cites the fact that Diane Sawyer once said the phrase, “Oh my god,” as though that makes some kind of point. Oooof. 🤨🙄
Hitch is The Man, no doubt. :)
Marvin Olasky made a few good points, but nothing substantive, and nothing that invalidated anything that Hitchens said. He was pointing out minor exceptions to the rule of religion's toxic nature, and was acting like it was a big deal. As if the minor amount of good religion has done somehow outweighs all the mountains of harm it has caused.
All in all, Hitchens clobbered him.
Christopher is a great speaker.
Obviously Hitch is pulling his punches here because Olavsky seems a nice man but still wipes the floor with religion.
Humanity misses you Hitchens!
It makes me sad to hear Hitchens coughing
He actually said they are equally evil but not equally violent at this time
As good a performance as hitchins had, this is by far the best performance a hitchins' opponent has ever had in my opinion. A debate exceedingly worthy of an objective, open minded watch
Brilliant! Thank you for sharing.
Best thing I can say about religion (apart from how deadly it can get around the world) is that it's boring in the information age.
I really like most of the people Hitchens debates. I appreciate christians who are open to discuss their beliefs rather than taking offense and hiding from nonbelievers.
Utterly brilliant! There really is no other way to describe Hitchens in this post, as an orator and clear thinking reasoned logician, he was quite literally miraculous.
Theres footage missing from this debate between the 39-40 minute mark. I don't know why it was cut because some of my favorite points made by Hitchens were in this section.
...spread his words fellow humans!
I've often heard this argument, but only from the third world or the states. Most of the rest of us in the industrialised world have decided that we do really want effective health care for all of our citizens, a welfare safety net that works, and a first class education for everyone. Yes, by US standards, that is pretty socialist. Any charity involving a faith based organisation, though, will always be the least moral because the need is not the first priority.
We need more people like Hitch if we hope to keep our liberties... If not we will lose the first amendment, it has been under attack for a long time by religious political incumbents ... For example, the national day of prayer THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING PEOPLE... if we let them win there it will only be a matter of time before the rest will go... STAND UP FOR THE 1ST AMENDMENT... Their is a reason it is the first one and the first sentence says very clearly; Congress shall make NO!!! law respecting an establishment of religion ... We have got to fight to keep religion out of our schools and our politics the more religious people we allow to be elected the weaker the 1st amendment gets... STOP VOTING FOR RELIGIOUS PEOPLE... Fellow atheists we are losing our rights to think freely more and more everyday thanks to politically motivated religious people... That being said it can no longer be beneath us to fight the battle of ideas with these people, that is to say we can longer afford to let these people perpetuate their backward ideologies amongst our youth. Make no mistake this is not a laughing matter we ARE losing this fight and will continue to lose if we do not take it seriously... PLEASE WAKE UP AND FIGHT!!!! (HITCH WOULD HAVE)
I've seen this again and again in these debates. The argument for religion always boils down to 1. There exist religious persons, and 2. A religious person once did a nice thing.
Mr Olasky might have considered that, the plural of anecdote is not evidence. But, the warm and fuzzy feelings from tales of adopted AIDS babies maybe lessened, if one were to consider how the wretched were placed into their position to begin with; "AIDS is bad, but not as bad as condoms!"
My apologies, uploader. You have done exactly as I requested - provide full provenance. I confused your video with another of the same event (I had them showing side by side) in which the uploader gave almost no information.
Thank you for your efforts.
This debate exemplifies how much charisma helps one’s point. Hitchen’s opponent has valid points, but his presentation puts me to sleep.
Humor, wittiness, sarcasm…..goes a long way to making an audience more receptive to listening to you.
Did Olansky really say "teaching atheism in class"? Not a subject.....You can tell Olansky doesn't know how to debate and was not up to date on the latest arguing points.
I'm impressed by that. I hope that sometime in the near future, the U.S realizes that anything a church can do (in terms of aiding the poor, etc.) can be done equally as well, if not better, by entirely secular organizations with no religious affiliation whatsoever.
That guy who said he never heard a response to Pascal’s Wager has never looked, obviously. It’s a crap argument and you shouldn’t need someone to even tell you that. Just read it. Terrible logic.
No one knows. No one says they know except for religion.
I still can't believe hitchens is gone, forever.
1:12:40 to see Christopher Hitchens do a Bertrand Russell impersonation!!!
I know I am not going to live forever and neither are you, but until my furlough here on earth is revoked, I’d like to elbow aside the established pieties and raise my tumbler 🥃 of Johnnie Walker Black high above my head in honor of the brilliant intellect and oratory that was Christopher Hitchens, his thought provoking courageous ideas and opinions will enshrine him forever amongst the giants of reason. I sorely miss the gorgeous bastard.
Does anyone know of a debate on UA-cam where Mr Hitchens is properly challenged? He seems to quietly mop the floor with his opponents. Not that he isn't under pressure, but it would be interesting to watch him threatened intellectually.
I suppose. I spotted one or two old debates on 'the media' and what-not, and he seemed to thrive in those also.
Ian P some say william Lang Craig gave him a hard time. its alright in my opinion.
Thanks.
Hitchens Vs D’Souza are my favorite. He is by far the best opponent Hitchens ever faced.
Ian P Yeah there is one - Hitchens vs Rabbi David Wolpe. This rabbi does a much better job & has intellectual honesty & sharp thinking, unlike most others. Check it out. I'm an atheist Jew by the way.
Holy shit
This was like Mike Tyson beating up a school boy….
Hitch TKO’d goofy beard young man in second round
He misunderstood the whole focus of the debate
shocking really. Olasky's method of arguing by reading passages from Christopher's books demonstrates a profound lack of spontaneous intellect needed to debate one of the most influential and brilliant debater's known.
Quite the opposite. I think Hitchens needed to be confronted directly by the excesses of his rhetoric. The best way to do that is to quote it directly.
@@markrutledge5855what excess?
@@ihatespam2 Really!? You must be kidding me. Hitchen's whole mischaracterization of religion is a demagogic excess. Take the secondary title of his book on religion was excessive "How Religion Poisons Everything." Olasky kept coming back that cartoon claim, "everything?"
@@markrutledge5855 no, not kidding. Not exaggerating, that’s what you are doing.
Take some topics; charity, ethics, community etc etc.
Xtianity poisons them. Does that mean every person involved in them is corrupted? Obviously no, it doesn’t mean that.
It means Xtianitys version of ethics is poisoned, because it trains you to do what you are told and not think for yourself. To pretend slavery was OK back then, but not now, etc.
Charity, do you give because it is the right thing to do or because you are supposed to to get I heaven? Poisoned.
Community, well, if you join, you are OK, they have special rules for their in group. They ostracize doubters. People are kicked out of families, like a cult. Poisoned.
Does that mean every Xtian does it or every doubter is punished? NO..
It means every subject, topic issue, IS poisoned by its bad ethics, bad science, bad history. It’s vicarious redemption via scapegoating and blood sacrifice for sins I did not commit is a lie told to guilt you into subservience. It puts poison in the mind of all its believers. Do they all succumb? No
But YES, it poisons EVERYTHING!
You are either arguing with a strawman on purpose or or blinded by your faith to misconstrue what is being said.
Even the English are impressed by what he says in that awesome accent.
Happy birthday Christopher Hitchens, he would have been 69 today.
@AstronomyGuru84 Not only that, all studies show that those that consider themselves atheistic donate a far greater percentage of both their time and money to charitable causes than those that identify as theists.
Everyone needs to try and vote more often!
Has Hitchens ever found someone with something interesting to say to debate?
My St Christopher.....Christopher Hitchens. RIP.
First, just to be clear, I'm with Hitch... but it seems to me that, Olasky did treat this as a logical statement; if he took the statement as a generalization his entire argument would be void since he agreed that some evil was produced by religion.
That being said, I think Hitch didn't say "...poisons everything" lightly. I think he would also say that [Doing the right thing for the wrong reasons is still wrong] suggesting that even good actions which are done for religious reasons are tainted.
"There are a lot of ppl who spend their whole life looking at these things"..that does nothing for the validity of the tales. I'll spend my whole life looking at them and studying religion, I truly love studying it, but that doesn't make it true.
Olasky presents standard inadequate defenses of religion. Hitchens owns yet again.
When I Wikipedia’d Marvin Olasky, I got a bit embarrassed as an admirer of Hitchens that he spent any time at all with microbial wot of Olasky. And yet Olasky had an outsized influence at the time. We all need to start somewhere, it seems.
Also I said “killing for no reason”. If you think this is justified, you do not know what justified means. The lack of suffering for humanity as a whole does not correspond to a mentally unwell person having instantaneous pleasure.
are you associated with the future forum ? were you there? why is the copyright restricted to the youtube standard license on this video?
Boy, Hitch seemed a bit more sober on this night, possibly lol ..but he spoke so well for many of us who feel very similarly. To think, as the other side does, that you can't have compassion, do good deeds, love, nor would want to unless you had religion, is such a crock and never a good argument, though almost the only one religions take.
that religious dude has wasted so much time in his opening statement saying the same thing over and over hoping that shoveling that $*** enough will make us swallow it.
Wasn't he a wonderful man. Does anyone know of a person nearly as good as a speaker please?
Yes, Richard Burton is number one speaker ever, and Christopher Hitchens is number 2!
@@seanscully4347Stephen Fry also Have you watched the Dawkins/Hitch/Fry one?
Is there anyone at all willing to transcribe Hitchens opening statement as a UA-cam comment? It was just so amazing and I can't find a transcription anywhere.
Critical thinking. Punishable by death.
Ned Flanders vs Christopher Hirchins
😁👍 brilliant debate 🌹♥️🌹
Love is generally understood as an abstract feeling that is forever and all-encompassing, unconditional with no limits. You ask for nothing in return. Love is also considered to be irrational, as people do illogical things because of it. It's because of these qualities that love cannot simply be reduced to something physical, and the romanticism of the emotion is lost on atheists as such a thing does not exist to them.
Olasky did a decent job trying to attack HItchens claim that religion poisons everything by pointing out religious charity. The most dangerous poisons are the ones that appear not to be poisons by having some positive attributes while destroying at the same time.
Drugs, for example, make you feel amazing. So you assume you need them to feel good when in fact they are destroying your life.
He was in favour of the intervention in Iraq since Saddams genocide, it doesn't matter if it supports christians or not it was the right thing to do
Because for some unfathomable reason, one can receive a doctorate in hokum. If Olasky healed people through prayer, I confess I might give the title some credence.
“An argument against compassion for the weak may arise” - no, it doesn’t. Survival of the fittest does not mean we should kill the weak. The beautiful thing about the mind is that it can think and develop, which goes for our moral code. If anything, religion is responsible for most of the ancient evil practises like child sacrifice, that science could not yet counter.
The lack of free will does not mean we are not accountable. It someone commits a crime, they should locked up to keep them from harming others and/or to reflect on their actions to become better members of society.
Rewatching all of hitch vids again. Can't help it you don't know me.😁
Hitchens is in excellent form. I also kind of like Olasky as well, but he sets his debate objective low by taking the position that religion doesn't poison LITERALLY everything.
He strawmans the point and wastes our time with anecdotes.
Hitchens is one of the people i have gladly known who describes what it actually means to live under a dictatorship.you who have not experienced this might now hesitate and contemplate the idea a little more deeply.
Yes, a conclusion is valid. It doesn't mean it's "absolutely true" otherwise no one would question it, which is not science.
@norwegin Not many people Hitchens debated in his entire career EVER had even a slight chance of coming out looking intelligent afterward.
wow there was no coming back from Hitchens first verse
First of all, if you don't do something to someone so that you hope no one does the same to you too, then you're doing it for the wrong reasons. You're not stealing from someone out of fear someone does it to you, and logically it's necessary for a society to function. This is not morality, because a moral action is one that is done because it's the right thing to do, not expecting anything, like good karma, to follow you in return. This is why the Greatest Commandment is to love one another.
Its first a hypothesis. Then its tested over, over and over again until its proven.
THEN you can say its a scientific theory. Thats the highest achievment you can get in science.
Evolution is a fact. Grow up, folks - for those who reject it.
It’s fairly simple, not sure why people seem to not get it.
This claim would be far more accurate if the words,"that it hasn't already destroyed",were added to the subtitle. If one wishes to eat the poisoned candy of religious generosity, let her do so. The reasonable mind will always wisely decline the offer. Poisoned candy will always be poison regardless of how enticing the candy or how desperate and needy the recipient.
You don't have to be religious or believe in a god to help people. Secularist and atheist also help people. I'm an atheist and I help people and donate to charity all the time. While religious people do help people they don't do it without an agenda.
Also "Secular Charity" in the form of foreign aid (paid for by taxes from religious folks) is used for political purposes which suit multinational corporation.
Yes, we actually care about sharing some of our wealth. But if you don't want to believe that, I can tell you that 4 out of the 5 biggest charity names in Norway are completely secular and doesn't have any faith-based reason for helping. I guess its the consequence of secular Norway having a people where the majority is non-believeing; thus more secular charities. You see? religion or not, it makes no difference, we are still humans with compassion!
hard to believe that a man of the caliber of intelligence of Christopher hitchens would believe that what we did in Iraq was a "noble undertaking" and for olasky to call the war in Iraq as a "necessary subset of the war on terror" shows his lack of understanding for the real motivations that were behind the invasion of Iraq and for the two of them to agree on such an illegal undertaking shows their lack of morality.
I enjoyed the debate, but it would have been much more interesting if Olasky would have moved on from Hitchens' written statement, "religion poisons everything."
To disprove that statement, Olasky need only to provide a single counter example. If you want to disprove the statement, "This box contains only red paper" you need only to pull one piece of paper, that isn't red, out of the box; then the statement is no longer valid. We didn't need 25 minutes of non-red paper pulling.
""why should you feel bad about how another person is feeling?" - This is meant to show why if you look at empathy logically, and reasonably, there is no reason why you should care. You misread. I am not saying we need Jesus to love, and I am not using "Commandment" as if we are somehow being forced or coerced to love one another. We have a choice and know the consequences.
@MysteryoftheGods "I will give you clean water to drink and I will help you rebuild your home. By the way have you found Jesus." Religious people do help but not without a religious agenda. Thank you for your kind words.