Hitchens Pwns Blair

[ECA]

BBC News - Tony Blair debates Christopher Hitchens on religion

Score for the good guys.

 

[Ch3tan]

And to think, we let him run the country.

 

[Exioce]

Yeah that creeps me out too, when politicians trumpet their faith like it's an asset.

Christopher Hitchens 1-0 Tony Blair | World news | guardian.co.uk

 

[ford prefect]

Not a big fan of organised religion personally, but to be fair to Blair - he did down play his faith during his premiership and didn't convert to catholocism until he finished.

 

[DaGaffer]

Not a big fan of organised religion personally, but to be fair to Blair - he did down play his faith during his premiership and didn't convert to catholocism until he finished.

You say that like its a good thing; he basically kept his left-footed-God-bothering tendancies under wraps because it was a potential vote loser; which isn't exactly the Christian thing to do. I may think most Christians are swivel-eyed loonies, but at least if their faith is honestly held I can respect that*
























*Nah, not really, but Blair's still a **** anyway.

 

[Turamber]

How do they decide who "wins" such a debate? Penalty shoot-out? Arm wrestle? And a "score for the good guys"? Since when does not believing something make somebody good?

 

[ECA]

How do they decide who "wins" such a debate? Penalty shoot-out? Arm wrestle? And a "score for the good guys"? Since when does not believing something make somebody good?

In the highly limited text under the video

Former UK PM Tony Blair has defended the role of religion in global affairs, in a televised debate in Canada with atheist columnist Christopher Hitchens

Mr Blair, a Catholic convert, said faith was a force for good and it was futile to attempt to drive it out.

But Mr Hitchens, who is terminally ill with cancer, argued religion forced people into doing terrible things.

In a vote after the debate, the audience voted two-to-one in Mr Hitchens' favour.

The BBC's Paul Adams reports from Toronto.

 

[Louster]

Hitchens can be a bit of a nut, too. Intelligent, eloquent debates like this are nice, though, regardless of what you think about religion. Much nicer than rabid, angry fanaticism.

Edit: the actual (beginning of the, post-intro) debate, should anyone be interested.

 

[Raven]

Since when does not believing something make somebody good?

I think the point is that people shouldn't allow religious belief to affect political thought and policy. To be fair to Blair (and I think he is simply scum) I don't think he did. It was his arrogance that fucked us.

 

[Cadelin]

How do they decide who "wins" such a debate? Penalty shoot-out? Arm wrestle? And a "score for the good guys"? Since when does not believing something make somebody good?

They had a poll at the end. 2/3 voted with Hitchen, 1/3 with Blair. However they did a poll before hand which had 57% supporting Hitchen and 22% supporting Blair with the rest being undecided. It looks like during the debate they both got ~10% of the undecided voters which kind of implies to me that actually everybody had pretty much made their mind up before hand and it was not down to the quality of the arguments put forward.

 

[Turamber]

In the highly limited text under the video

I think you missed my point, but nevermind By all accounts Blair was unprepared for the savaging he got. He probably made the rookie mistake of expecting an 'anti-God' scientist to be objective.

 

[Scouse]

Objective like any god-botherer on the planet?

By definition if you believe in a religion, any religion, your views are not objective.

 

[DaGaffer]

I think you missed my point, but nevermind By all accounts Blair was unprepared for the savaging he got. He probably made the rookie mistake of expecting an 'anti-God' scientist to be objective.

Just watched it all. Blair had no answers to Hitchens' arguments and basically ignored the fundamental premise of the debate anyway (he just kept saying "religious people aren't all bad" over and over, which isn't the point). Hitchens' was objective, and he clearly knows as much, or more, about religious doctrine than Blair.

 

[Scouse]

Watch it DaGaffer. Outrageous statements like that will get you on Turamber's ignore list, like me

 

[Maljonic]

Remote suburb of the Solar System my arse! Earth is the most happening place around these parts and he knows it, bloody Hitchens.

 

[ford prefect]

You say that like its a good thing; he basically kept his left-footed-God-bothering tendancies under wraps because it was a potential vote loser; which isn't exactly the Christian thing to do. I may think most Christians are swivel-eyed loonies, but at least if their faith is honestly held I can respect that*




*Nah, not really, but Blair's still a **** anyway.

As I understand it, he had been thinking about a conversion to catholocism before his premiership, but felt it wouldn't be appropriate as a priminister, who is a direct servent of the defender of the church of england.

I'm sure his faith did effect his premiership - probably a lot when it came to Iraq, however I think his middle of the road - semi right wing "embracing the middle classes" politics had a much bigger effect.

 

[Chilly]

Would you guys rather we didnt allow any religious people into positions of power?

 

[Turamber]

Would you guys rather we didnt allow any religious people into positions of power?

I think some of them would like them shot at dawn tbh.

 

[Krazeh]

Would you guys rather we didnt allow any religious people into positions of power?

I have no problem with religious people in positions of power as long as they're able to maintain a clear division between their official duties and their religious beliefs. The problems start when people in power allow their relgious beliefs to influence their decisions and how they perform in their role.

 

[nath]

I think some of them would like them shot at dawn tbh.

Don't be silly. Any time of day is fine with me.

 

[Chilly]

I have no problem with religious people in positions of power as long as they're able to maintain a clear division between their official duties and their religious beliefs. The problems start when people in power allow their relgious beliefs to influence their decisions and how they perform in their role.

Yeah, I'd really fucking hate it if a Christian decided to let their feelings of generosity and goodwill to their fellow man and generally better morals than most of us interfere with the tricky business of being a capitalist.

Lets be honest here, and practical. MOST of religion is absolutely fine. It's all about love and happiness and a few rules about not shagging your brothers wife.

I think TB probably did keep his faith seperate from the job, I dont recall any laws banning muslim schools or full face veils or turbans or anything.

 

[DaGaffer]

Would you guys rather we didnt allow any religious people into positions of power?

You're missing the point. Politicians do what they need to do to get elected. In the US, that means pretending to be religious when you're not, and in the UK that means pretending not to be religious (or rather, not too religious) when you are. If Blair had been honest about the depth of his religious leanings, he may have been less electable, so he downplayed it, which is actually a bit of a no-no for a genuine Christian (going back to all that St. Peter stuff about denying Christ).

Blair clearly put political opportunism ahead of faith, and while I have no problem with that, it clearly makes him less trustworthy (since it shows he can park his morals when it suits), but then we all knew that anyway.

 

[Raven]

This is Blair we are talking about... Not exactly a beacon for honesty.

 

[ford prefect]

Can I just point out that one of the roles of a Prime Minister in the UK is to advise the sovereign on the appointment of Bishops and Arch Bishops to the Church of England?

Given that role, it would be a bit strange if the PM had little or no knowledge/interest in Christianity or indeed faith. It may not be a legal prerequisite, but it is certainly expected.