Christopher Hitchens, R.I.P.

I have seen somewhere that there are scientific explanations ... you know about the god helmet?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_helmet

probably some of the same factors are operating in these accounts of near death experiences (and remember - they ARE "near death" - not actually returning from the dead)

 

and thank all the gods for that!

looking at the likes of who will be populating the ever ever lands that would be hell!

 

yes.

that is the nature of this forum.

possibly more so in discussions touching on religion than in any other.

especially when the subject of the thread is a man so much reviled by the so called christians on this forum.

 

OverDrive and I aren't really discussing that. He seems to be complaining about my use of the term "R.I.P".

See?

But I didnt say "rest in peace with god", did I?

I just hope his mind was content when he died. I hope he left nothing undone, or nothing unsaid, so that he could go to his death with peace.

The use of the term goes back, what? Well over a thousand years? Thats more than enough time for it to go from "something Catholics say" to "something people say".

As far as I'm concerned, he is just dead. That's not really the point.

I'm not sorry that I stole a Catholic phrase of respect to the dead. I intend to do it again next time someone dies. You can stop trying to argue now.

I don't care. I'm sure he wouldn't either.

If you insist on having an argument about my use of the term "R.I.P", that's your business. I don't need to know anything about your personal feelings towards the man.

I'm not trolling, son. I just don't think its appropriate to try to start an agument in a thread about a man's death. Call me crazy.

This goes for people discussing Mother Teresa.

If you want to argue this stuff, just create new threads.

 

are you not well?

 

Cass, that line is really getting old!

But one wont see Hitler, Stalin, et al there...so do you want to join them?? You dont like ppl who are honest & blunt, which come across to YOU as being hard; because you are an unrealistic dreamer of the "Visualize World Peace" utopians who live in their La La Land and are but enablers of the faithless who put all their trust in self & false spirituality.

 

I hope he feels silly now. Not for any malicious reasons. But just because I hope he sees things now that he didn't see in life.

 

The white-washng of this person is a sad attempt of giving him honor of which he does not deserve as the pied piper of many to perdition....sorry if this disturbs your fuzzy world....again, Cass, just calling a spade a spade and being "real!"

 

not as old as all the relgious claptrap!

how would that work if there is no afterlife?

look OD, there are many people who claim they are being honest and blunt, or whatever else they like to call it, when all they are demonstrating is an inflexibility of thought/rigid thinking that is symptomatic of being mentally unwell.

 

Some pretty harsh words for a Goodie 2-shoes!!!

And so I'll leave you to your pink, fuzzy world to continue "Visualizing World Peace"....lollipops and teddy bears to you, Goodnight!

 

who is white washing him?

he was a human being. he had faults, he's dead.

he was well known, and whether you agreed with him or not (and I most certainly didn't on many issues) he contributed to our world.

 

So did Ted Bundy. Are you going to offer him equal praise? After all, he was a human being, he had faults, he's dead.

 

How many people did Christopher Hitchens kill?

 

Who said he killed anyone? All I stated was that Bundy met the qualifications established by :

Now if you have a problem with those criteria to offer praise to someone, then do so, but don't jump me because when I show that others who meet a particular set of criteria are plentiful in this world.

 

But it would require white washing to respect Ted Bundy. It doesn't require white washing to respect Christopher Hitchens - he is respectible enough on his own merits.

 

Did the qualifications say anything about 'respect' as being a part of those qualifications? No? Why? Because the qualifications were being used to establish that 'respect'. Learn to read comprehensively and learn to follow a thought (stay focused).

 

My favorite Chris Hitchens video segment.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HECI4QK_mXA&feature=player_embedded"]Hitchens flips off Maher's morons - YouTube[/ame]

 

And the subject at hand would be? Hitchens death. I find it rather sad to see great thinkers, of any faith or belief system die.

Again - I understand as a person of faith you believe you claim to have the fundemental answers to life, and death, that so many people long for. I find it beyond silly to even debate such nonsense as that which you propose, as debating said topic carries as much weight with me as any other orginized religious belief. I have just as much of a chance proving, or disproving, the existence of flying unicorns in such a nonsensical discussion.

 

"Christopher Hitchens, RIP" makes no sense, no matter what you believe.

If the atheists are right, there is no Christopher Hitchens. He has ceased to exist.

If Christians are right, Hitchens is not "at peace."

 

I think it is you who has the problm.


Chrstopher Hitchens, regardless of whether you agree with him or not, was an admirable human being in many ways.

Personally, I didn't agree with his "hard line" atheism, and I was extremely critical of him for his support for the invasion of Iraq, however I am not blid to the fact that he contributed a great deal to debate about many important issues, and based on what I have read of him, he was a pretty decent human being.

Ted Bundy was a murderer whose existence when free posed a threat to other human beings, and you trying to link Christopher Hitchen's value to society with that of Bundy is an insult to the intelligence of posters on this forum, and further evidence that you are best placed on ignore.

 

atheists are human beings. they are not automatons.

 

Mixed emotions huh? His "support for the invasion of Iraq" did in fact contribute to this world. In that particular scenario, he contributed to the needless killing of otherwise innocent women and children who were not active aggressors. So, thank you for praising someone who, you admit, contributed to the killing of innocent women and children.

 

you seriously have issues.

its not about "mixed emotions" - its about the fact that I did not agree with everything he said.

I don't need to goose step in line with people or reject everything they say completely.

do you?

WRT Iraq - I dn't think his support for that makes him a bad person any more than I think George Bush is a bad person because of that. Both believed it was right. it doesn't meake it right, but it doesn't make either bad people because they believed that.

Bundy on the other hand deliberately set out to pick out innocent victims and murder them.

 

Actually it is you that has the problem:

You stated "he was a human being. he had faults, he's dead.

he was well known, and whether you agreed with him or not (and I most certainly didn't on many issues) he contributed to our world."

No where in that point of issue did you make reference to "good" or "bad" person; neither was there any mention of his beliefs, nor of his criminal record. You established a set of criteria by which you proclaimed you used in determining that Hitchens was praise-worthy. I merely pointed out that other people meet those same criteria, and one that is from the opposite end of the spectrum (with regard to criminal activities). Now, that you are caught with words flowing from your mouth that are seemingly incriminating, you desire to change the goal posts that you previously established. That changing of the goal posts is a form of rationalization (making of excuses). To add to the problem, you start throwing stones at me by saying that I "have serious problems". Are you a qualified psychologist, or sociologist, or psychiatrist, wherein your opinion would hold even a drop of water (integrity) within this secular society? But of course, you are entitled to express your OPINION. . . For what it is worth.

 

You've just set up a false dichotomy.