Sad day for rational thinkers everywhere
Moderators: kiore, Blip, The_Metatron
Spearthrower wrote:I forgive him.
Agi Hammerthief wrote:Exi5tentialist wrote:To be honest I never heard much talk of religious freedom from Hitchens, nor does it emanate from the astounding intellect of Richard Dawkins, but then they were both a generation late to have witnessed the holocaust
when was the holocaust about religion?
Did it only hit people with funny hats, mutilated penises and curly sideburns?
Agi Hammerthief wrote:
you can have all the religious freedom you can carry, as soon as it stops being a big issue on public pollicies and lawmaking.
hackenslash wrote:Barry Cade wrote:Hitchens's support for the invasion of Iraq helped to sustain the ideological offensive launched by the US and its allies; it is not merely polemical to point out the reactionary consequences of this stance. While Hitchens was drunkenly lurching around the US lecture circuit, dazzling the gullible with his loquacity, the people of Fallujah were suffering and dying in their thousands.
If you want to get all sentimental about the recently deceased, I am sure Kim Jong-il's family would appreciate a Xmas card.
What a feeble pile of ignorant, festering fucking guff.
Just Wondering wrote:So that contrarians can rest their hearts that Hitch is being over hero-ized (it's a word, I said so):
http://www.salon.com/2011/12/20/hitchen ... of_genius/
It's nice to hear a balance of views.
And another from someone who, although they endured violence at Hitch's hands, called him a friend. Now this particular article puzzled me.
http://www.salon.com/2011/12/20/i_knew_ ... _than_you/
It was funny to read though.
Banzai! wrote:there was another tawdry opinion piece in tonight's London Evening Standard
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-24023231-atheists-are-at-odds-with-our-nations-history.do
Exi5tentialist wrote:<snip wall of text> While your petty-minded little anti-semitic outburst about 'funny hats, mutilated penises and curly sideburns' <snip wall of text>
Exi5tentialist wrote:or a wee bit less.
Exi5tentialist wrote:Surely religious freedom is for everybody, not just me
my point exactelyExi5tentialist wrote:Read Article 18. You'll notice, it says nothing about requiring people to stop religion being a big issue on public policies and lawmaking.
Exi5tentialist wrote:Did Hitchens argue that?
Agi Hammerthief wrote:
Sikh: towels on heads and funny beards (a friend of mine used to have those till he thought "fuck this silly outfit")
get the drift? or do I need to draw you a picture?
Agi Hammerthief wrote:my point exactely [/quoteExi5tentialist wrote:Read Article 18. You'll notice, it says nothing about requiring people to stop religion being a big issue on public policies and lawmaking.
So why are you introducing such a requirement? Do you support human rights or not?Agi Hammerthief wrote:
1948...
not much going on, on the lines of freedom from religion back then. Pre Scientology too.
The Universal Declaration guarantees religious freedom. It is a current document. What makes you say it was only relevant to 1948? Wishful thinking?Agi Hammerthief wrote:Exi5tentialist wrote:Did Hitchens argue that?
see this post for an answer:
THWOTH @ Christopher Hitchens dead (1949—2011)
Exi5tentialist wrote:Agi Hammerthief wrote:Exi5tentialist wrote:To be honest I never heard much talk of religious freedom from Hitchens, nor does it emanate from the astounding intellect of Richard Dawkins, but then they were both a generation late to have witnessed the holocaust
when was the holocaust about religion?
Did it only hit people with funny hats, mutilated penises and curly sideburns?
There are many facets to the identity of the Jews - including their ethnicity, their history, their language, their customs and their religion. It's easy to forget the last one, and just as easy to dismiss it, especially if you're anti-semitic. But the Holocaust, as you know, was about all of the things I listed, including religious persecution, a fact that did not go unnoticed in the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, signed in 1948, which guaranteed religious freedom to all. Leaving aside that the history of the holocaust is not particularly difficult to understand, even though for most of us it has drifted out of living memory, the right of everybody to worship whatever god they choose, in the way of their choosing, is surely a cornerstone of a sensitive, compassionate and strong democracy, is it not?
If Christopher Hitchens had ever said such a thing, I surely would have heard about it. And if he really did, and I just missed it, perhaps he should have said it more often, and more loudly, because all I ever heard was his blanket dismissiveness of all things religious. That, I think, is where he concentrated his volume.
While your petty-minded little anti-semitic outburst about 'funny hats, mutilated penises and curly sideburns' may raise a chortle in the reactionary circles Christopher Hitchens might have found the most attention in, I do think it was ill-advised given that we are talking about the extermination of a section of the human race. And before you repeat the indiscretion by arguing genitals at me (I would counter-argue that all circumcision of boys on non-medical grounds should be banned by law), I would ask you to calm down, reflect on human suffering and perhaps spare a thought for millions of human beings who were tortured and died in those times at the hands of people who were at least as uncaring of people's religious freedoms as many people today appear to be; and perhaps watch a few films about the period such as Au Revoir Les Enfants, that reflect the tenderness and solace that people gained in those times from religious observances close to their hearts, any display of which would result in summary transportation without the slightest recourse to any judicial authority or public forum.
In that light, what would be your argument to someone taken away to be killed through having been discovered secretly observing jewish religious ceremonies? That their death and that of their family was not about religion? I'd be interested to see how you construct it.
SafeAsMilk wrote:Way to spectacularly miss the point <snip>
SafeAsMilk wrote:Oh, please excuse Hitchens, he didn't know that it was his job to say what you want him to say, at the volume you want him to say it.
SafeAsMilk wrote:
Now, address the point of the question: are Jews the ONLY people who were persecuted by the Nazi's?
Exi5tentialist wrote:hackenslash wrote:Barry Cade wrote:Hitchens's support for the invasion of Iraq helped to sustain the ideological offensive launched by the US and its allies; it is not merely polemical to point out the reactionary consequences of this stance. While Hitchens was drunkenly lurching around the US lecture circuit, dazzling the gullible with his loquacity, the people of Fallujah were suffering and dying in their thousands.
If you want to get all sentimental about the recently deceased, I am sure Kim Jong-il's family would appreciate a Xmas card.
What a feeble pile of ignorant, festering fucking guff.
On the contrary, Barry Cade's paragraph above is insightful, eloquent, on-topic and wholly accurate, unlike your own. hackenslash, I do not know if there is a word for a sentence that describes itself, but I think you have produced one there.
Exi5tentialist wrote:I see nothing there but a laboured assault on the english language, filled with pomposity. The quote was entirely about secularism. My question was about religious freedom. Not one of Hitchens's strong points, I feel.
Exi5tentialist wrote:hackenslash wrote:Barry Cade wrote:Hitchens's support for the invasion of Iraq helped to sustain the ideological offensive launched by the US and its allies; it is not merely polemical to point out the reactionary consequences of this stance. While Hitchens was drunkenly lurching around the US lecture circuit, dazzling the gullible with his loquacity, the people of Fallujah were suffering and dying in their thousands.
If you want to get all sentimental about the recently deceased, I am sure Kim Jong-il's family would appreciate a Xmas card.
What a feeble pile of ignorant, festering fucking guff.
On the contrary, Barry Cade's paragraph above is insightful, eloquent, on-topic and wholly accurate, unlike your own. hackenslash, I do not know if there is a word for a sentence that describes itself, but I think you have produced one there.
Return to News, Politics & Current Affairs
Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest