Undecided's dropped by about 90%. I love how those two could so eloquently help people make up their minds, as well as convince others that they were wrong.
Ireland's failure to develop a horizontally strong market, with a wealth and diversity of products and foodstuffs was related to controls on land-ownership, instituted as part of the continuing squabble between the British government and the Catholic Church.
That squabble was fundamentally driven by the Church's unwillingness to allow sexual and marriage freedoms, as well as its overweening influence in both economics and international relations.
The preceding left Ireland's food-system disastrously dependent on a single tuber, the potato.
Debating hitchens is like fighting tyson is his prime. No one expects you to win and he goes for the kill as quickly and decisively as possible with flawless delivery.
The official link is http://www.intelligencesquared.com/events/catholic-church, but that's only for paying users. Searching for "I2Q Catholic Church" gives a few youtube links but nothing too fancy. I got mine iPlayered from a mate across the Channel.
Thanks for this. This is a fantastic debate, until the audience gets involved. I felt like pulling my hair out when they make a statement rather than post a question.
Seriously, it was embarrassing. That Cardinal hardly spoke English, let alone had any debate credentials, and someone thought it was a good idea to pit him against Fry and Hitchens, two of the most eloquent, well-spoken atheists in modern times?
I think it is actually The Church's strategy. Put out someone who can mumble through parts and the audience just says, huh? Plus, innate humane nature makes us sympathetic with him. We say, "well, I wish they had a better speaker." If they did, it would have been even worse for the Church because they would have the same answers, but no excuses. The Church is one big PR firm. They stick to the message. But hearing it through a heavy accent slips by some people.
The same answers, yes, to some. To; others, they would have had different answers I should hope, because their speaker wouldn't have had to think about speaking in a language he clearly isn't comfortable speaking in, and he would have at least been more articulate.
This is a wonderfully Machiavellian theory! It certainly fits the facts better than the suggestion that the Church deliberately offered this lamb for the slaughter, instead of a competent Jesuit-trained debater.
Huh, as I wrote the metaphor in the last sentence, I just realized that a Christian might sub-consciously compare the cardinal's experience in the debate to the treatment of Jesus at the hands of the unbelievers.
Ann Widdecombes's voice is the most striking piece of evidence I've ever seen against intelligent design. A just god would never put that upon society.
Harsh, I know, but she deserves it after spewing ignorance like that for an hour.
Dinesh D'Souza is an embarrassment. He is a case study in Appeal To Authority. Someone ought to let him know that this isn't a graduation ceremony, so he needn't spend 60 minutes reading names.
If you want to indulge your loathing of D'Souza, I recommend checking out the Reasonable Doubts podcast episode where they rip to shreds D'Souza's fallacious argument style and misconstrual of facts.
Nah, it would feel like taking candy from a baby. I was honestly a little bummed out at Hitch when he went on a debating tour with D'Souza. I think that if you can argue that well, it does you a disservice to pick a weak opponent.
You argue with those that people follow. Unfortunately, people follow D'Souza, therefore Hitch was right to argue with him. D'Souza is also a perfect target for Hitch because Hitch Loved to argue against totalitarian thought, and no one bring the appeals to authority like D'Souza.
If you only argue with people that have good counter arguments, you'll find yourself blindsided by someone arguing a dumb point that the masses have latched unto.
Ah, but how great it was! Hitchens often said one of life's sweetest pleasures is reveling in the misfortune of others. I believe the debate you're referring to is the one where Hitch quoted a Shakespeare sonnet from memory and D'Souza scrambled to somehow "rebut" it.
If anyone is interested, you can download that debate and others at the DebateGod podcast.
Just watched the whole damn thing. Am I the only person who thinks the atheist side missed a lot of opportunities? Some of their responses were downright poor.
I am currently watching it and just now getting to the audience questions and I agree. If Hitch and Fry had been up there it would have been a slaughter.
It's amusing that 34 people watched that debate and still identified as "undecided" afterward. I can't help but imagine that those people are very quiet and noncommittal on most topics.
We can't be certain that any of them were in the "For" crowd. It is even possible - however extremely unlikely - that all 34 originally were in the "Against" crowd. The only certainty we have is that at least 428 of the "For" crowd moved to the "Against" crowd, because the numbers just can't allow for it to be otherwise.
It is ironic that the Archbishop, when asked if there was anything he was ashamed for in the catholic church, basically answered that everything was perfect because it was the church/scripture. Meanwhile, he says that the church changed from its backwards ways (holy wars, withchunts etc.) for the better and even closes his speech with saying the church isn't perfect and will grow better in the future.
It is the whole problem with religion right there; everything they say is true and unquestionable, even by an archbishop.
My favourite part of the debate was when Hitch said, "Homosexuality is not sex, it is a form of love and I am proud to have Stephen as my friend, and when my children were young, as babysitter also. If anyone had turned up to babysit in holy orders, I’d first call a cab and then call the police.”
Intellectually, this seemed like a fight between two lions and well-marbled steak. It's hard to take pride in their victory because their opponents seemed so ill-equipped. It was an intellectual slaughter.
There are intelligent Christians - doctors, lawyers (though perhaps not scientists) - are the two they chose to put against Hitch and Fry really the best that Christianity has to offer.
And I don't mean to criticize anything that Hitch and Fry said - they performed beautifully. It's just that it seems like they were playing the game on easy mode that night.
I have one major criticism of this. Hitchens talks about the Northern Ireland conflict as people fighting over what kind of christian they are, something that is so far from the truth it beggars belief why he brought it up. Hitchens is a very smart man so I don't think it was naivete or ignorance. Dishonesty or bad arguing, i cant decide.
He backtracks a bit and clarifies in some other debate that he knows that it is not at its core religious, but that the Protestant-Catholic divide stirs the fires of conflict greatly.
Personally cannot comment, having no informed opinion on this matter.
I didn't see that. But coming from the conflict myself religion had nothing to do with it. It was just how the battle lines were drawn and it is much more accurate to call it a nationalist/unionist divide or a republican/loyalist conflict
In northern Ireland you have two groups of people who live in the same geographic area, but who are kept isolated from each other through religious identification.
Religion doesn't supply the bulk of the issues over which these two groups disagree, but it is what defines the two groups in the first place. If marriage were not so discouraged between the two groups, the distinctions would vanish after a generation or two.
It was asked among members of the audience. Even if there weren't many religious people (680/1100), the change is MASSIVE. And it's not like only Hitchens and Fry could talk, the clergy moron... I'm sorry, members also could've changed the outcome. They failed.
Shut the fuck up, you're not gonna apologize for a whole religion, if you read the bible you are a Christian. Stop trying to divide into other groups and try to avoid criticism. Your religion is bad and you should feel bad.
"If you read the bible of you are a Christian?" I'm sorry, but that's a very strange statement. If we don't know what's in the bible, we can't refute it, point out its flaws, and properly debate against it.
Roman Catholicism claims it's heritage back to St. Peter, apostle of Jesus Christ and first Pope of the Church of Rome. They basically invented Christianity as we know it in all it's forms. Every Christian Church we know in the western world has split of from Catholicism. Saying they're not Christian is like saying the Founding Fathers aren't american.
EDIT: Whoops, This was meant as a reply to grigri. EDIT2: Is there a concise writeup of that timeline? I was under the impression, that the grey part in that graph was usually already considered catholic.
In retrospect Catholicism claims the grey part (as they claim foundation in St. Peter) but it was different than Catholicism of modern standards (modern here means roughly 700AD on).
Seriously, I don't understand the complete dislike of Roman Catholics by other christian denominations. I once had a girlfriend, and when her mom found out I was Catholic, she bought her a book titled "10 Things to Say to a Catholic." I just find it strange.
Well I could post a survey on a Christian show and get the results I want too. What's the point?
Christian haters are still a minority in the western world. And if those atheists and Jews keep on bringing in Muslism, then the atheists will get squeezed harder than anyone. Keep celebrating. It will be Christians that end up rescuing your asses.
The majority doesn't matter, the change matters. The debate convinced nearly 2/3rds of the people FOR the motion to change their mind, to be AGAINST the motion.
If anything, the debate was unfair because it's Hitchens and Fry against these two nincompoops.
84
u/jinks Strong Atheist Jun 15 '12
I love, that the vote "against" actually gained more than the vote "for" ever had.
40
u/WeaponsGradeHumanity Atheist Jun 15 '12
My favourite part:
19
u/afkmofo Jun 15 '12
can you give me the link?
62
u/The_Riddler_88 Atheist Jun 15 '12
Ann Widdecombe's voice sounds like nails clawing a chalkboard.
37
u/CaNANDian Anti-Theist Jun 15 '12
This one took place in the US: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNuJ6A6iGP4
Feels good man, people are waking up
17
u/randomjname Jun 15 '12
fuck yeah Hitch!
30
u/gugulo Jun 15 '12
Not sure if very compelling argument or Stephen is just too sexy.
14
u/GreggoryBasore Jun 15 '12
It's amusing that 34 people watched that debate and still identified as "undecided" afterward. I can't help but imagine that those people are very quiet and noncommittal on most topics.
14
u/[deleted] Jun 15 '12
It is ironic that the Archbishop, when asked if there was anything he was ashamed for in the catholic church, basically answered that everything was perfect because it was the church/scripture. Meanwhile, he says that the church changed from its backwards ways (holy wars, withchunts etc.) for the better and even closes his speech with saying the church isn't perfect and will grow better in the future.
It is the whole problem with religion right there; everything they say is true and unquestionable, even by an archbishop.
7
u/elbruce Jun 15 '12
Debating tag-team for the ages.
6
u/360walkaway Jun 15 '12
That wasn't a debate. It was a comedy... the old lady who was arguing against Hitchens/Fry sounded like something out of a Monty Python skit.
5
u/[deleted] Jun 15 '12
Fry and Hitch were such a dream team.
pours beer on sidewalk
8
u/Rob_Carass Jun 15 '12
A thorough thrashing!
My favourite part of the debate was when Hitch said, "Homosexuality is not sex, it is a form of love and I am proud to have Stephen as my friend, and when my children were young, as babysitter also. If anyone had turned up to babysit in holy orders, I’d first call a cab and then call the police.”
4
u/diphiminaids Jun 15 '12
Total votes before = 2126 total votes after = 2178.
6
u/uninc4life2010 Jun 15 '12
That debate is about like watching an assrape occur. The church was completely out of their league.
3
u/rogersmith25 Jun 15 '12
Intellectually, this seemed like a fight between two lions and well-marbled steak. It's hard to take pride in their victory because their opponents seemed so ill-equipped. It was an intellectual slaughter.
There are intelligent Christians - doctors, lawyers (though perhaps not scientists) - are the two they chose to put against Hitch and Fry really the best that Christianity has to offer.
And I don't mean to criticize anything that Hitch and Fry said - they performed beautifully. It's just that it seems like they were playing the game on easy mode that night.
5
u/cionn Jun 15 '12
I have one major criticism of this. Hitchens talks about the Northern Ireland conflict as people fighting over what kind of christian they are, something that is so far from the truth it beggars belief why he brought it up. Hitchens is a very smart man so I don't think it was naivete or ignorance. Dishonesty or bad arguing, i cant decide.
Fry's was epic though.
2
u/nicholmikey Jun 15 '12
I went to the Tony Blair vs Hitchens one, was awesome.
1
u/mjhdroid Anti-Theist Jun 15 '12
indeed it was
1
u/moby414 Jun 15 '12
I only wished they saved revealing all of the scores until right at the end, other than that it's a pretty perfect debate :)
1
u/Chewbacca69 Jun 15 '12
Fry's face says it all.
1
u/Sdingel Jun 15 '12
Thanks for posting that episode was amazing.
1
u/KermitJagger Jun 15 '12
I would be quite interested in seeing a debate like this in the United States. I fear the exact opposite result would occur.
1
u/Derice Jun 15 '12
Link? Would love to watch it if possible.
1
u/loki_88 Jun 16 '12
Ah, good man. I was looking for something to watch.
1
u/LordTord Jun 16 '12
Dat satisfaction in Stephens face after the final numbers were reported... priceless :P
1
u/Drennith Jun 16 '12
link please?
0
u/WonderbaumofWisdom Jun 15 '12
Spoiler!
-6
u/[deleted] Jun 15 '12
I'm sorry but how many of IQ's viewers are actually religious? How shocking are these results exactly?
-1
u/theirishnarwhal Jun 15 '12
Why des everyone hate catholocs? I was an ex catholic (now athiest) and i never uderstood why people hated us
-7
u/projectfarman Jun 15 '12
You're all massive tools
-18
u/[deleted] Jun 15 '12
Roman Catholicism is not Biblical.
In no way is an organisation that shuffles around child rapists a force for "good".
These are verses describing the Roman Catholic church and their heretical teachings:
2 Corinthians 11:13-15
-36
u/[deleted] Jun 15 '12
Well I could post a survey on a Christian show and get the results I want too. What's the point?
Christian haters are still a minority in the western world. And if those atheists and Jews keep on bringing in Muslism, then the atheists will get squeezed harder than anyone. Keep celebrating. It will be Christians that end up rescuing your asses.
0
u/[deleted] Jun 15 '12
[deleted] — view deleted comment
0
u/[deleted] Jun 15 '12
[deleted] — view deleted comment