Posted on 04/19/2010 4:43:57 AM PDT by Federalist Patriot
Here is video of Tony Perkins, of the Family Research Council, and atheist Christopher Hitchens debating the issue of whether it is appropriate for there to be a "National Day of Prayer" in the United States. Hitchens opposes the existence of such a day, even as he accused Tony Perkins of "intolerance." Watch the clip and see who you think is being intolerant here.
Yet, it is Hitchens who is opposed to all things religious. Perkins rightly and effectively pointed out repeatedly that the practice of having "National Days of Prayer" goes all the way back to George Washington and the other founders of our nation. No one is compelled to pray, nor is their any proscription as to what kind of prayer is to be offered. But it is a recognition of the role faith has played in the founding and preservation of our nation.
It is politically-correct in America today to be anti-Christian or anti-religious. That is not considered to be "intolerant." People like Hitchens ignore the fact that the First Amendment was primarily placed there to "protect the free exercise" of religion, and to keep the government from establishing a state church that would dominate and persecute all others.
Opponents of faith and religion today are trying to use the First Amendment to erase all vestiges of religion from our public life. That is clearly NOT what the founders intended by the First Amendment, as evidenced by their own public displays of faith and prayer.
(Excerpt) Read more at freedomslighthouse.com ...
If prohibition had not been repealed - Christopher Hitchins would be a devout Catholic for its old tyme Holy Communion Wine.
It’s a wonder he hasn’t changed his name.
A religion of the Devil.
You know his younger brother is a believer, happened several years ago. I believe because of that this man will change, he’s probably going to have to hit bottom first.
I just can’t stand to watch the video, but I have one question.... was Hitchens sober?
“You know his younger brother is a believer, happened several years ago. I believe because of that this man will change, he’s probably going to have to hit bottom first.”
He hits the bottom every night!!! Of the bottle that is.
Hard to tell. But he looks like a very unhappy man.
A Christian being called intolerant by an atheist is a badge of honor. It means said Christian is doing a a very good job in following Christ.
The funny thing of course is whenever any president reaches out to any other religious group, you never hear the atheists anti-Christian bigots whine about that.
The first thing to do when engaging an atheist who is claiming ‘intolerance” is to ask him by what moral measure does he judge “intolerance”. An atheist claims there is no God so there is no overarching fount from which moral authority is derived. If he claims societal “norms” or agreed upon “conventions”, ask him “what?,the norms as defined from Islam or perhaps Zimbabwe”?
The Atheist will use the term “intolerance” as a kind of verbal sneak attack on his opponent’s “Christian practise”, to in a sense freeze, polarize and embarrass the Christian but the atheist has no real settled moral ethos of his own by which he can legitimately attack the ethos of a Christian.
You want to fluster an Atheist...ask him if he sees himself as “tolerant as Christians understand the term” and if he says yes, you say “How can that be so, since a Christian derives his ethos on the belief of a living and triune God and as an atheist you cannot hold that position and sound rational in your assertions?
Hitchens is a fervent non-believer isn’t he? Why does a national day of prayer bother him so much? No one is making him pray.....
Good points!
OK:
Secular Fundamentalists and Other Simple People of Faith bttt
Still, he gets the better of most who debate him because he deals from the same deck that so many have. Challenging the notion that God is all loving, all caring, and completely benevolent. Folks to hold this up as the nature of God are quick work for Hitchens because he just trots out the horror of Man's inhumanity to men and the horrors of natural disaster to put a knife in that position. This normally leaves the opposition attempting to explain in complex terms how Hitchens is actually using a straw man argument but that never seems to quite cut it in the format these things are presented. So, Hitchens goes on to hate God another day.
I empathize with him quite a bit, I lived there for lots of years. Not so much hating, though, just not understanding why God allows horror to exist and tear through the lives of people who are clearly righteous. The biggest turning point comes when you quit asking what God can do for you. Chris isn't here yet. I wish him the best, but folks really don't have to get caught up in his stuff.
I always ask the atheist when they bring the ‘horror of war crap” up that as an atheist how can he judge what is horrible and what is not? Having no belief in an overarching being that defines morality for us, means that his arguements on morality and ethics are based on variably situational conditions. Perhaps in his point of view it is okay to be a bank robber if it enhances one’s self esteem. Whereas for the Christian it is never okay to be a robber, no matter what the situation.
And that is the key, static unchanging, spiritual principles promote stable societies whereas atheistic principles based on situational variables can promote no stable societies. These unstable societies soon break down to feudal orders held togather by those who can most ably concentrate coercive force by the gun and brute strength by numbers.
In short like Washington said,,,”It is the Religion and Morality, the two twin props by which our liberties are supported!
And that is the key, static unchanging, spiritual principles promote stable societies whereas atheistic principles based on situational variables can promote no stable societies. These unstable societies soon break down to feudal orders held togather by those who can most ably concentrate coercive force by the gun and brute strength by numbers.
In short like Washington said,,,”It is the Religion and Morality, the two twin props by which our liberties are supported!
You are right on the money my friend. Hitchens accepts Judeo-Christian values as the basis for morality even while arguing that the source of these values is the cause of all evil. He blames religion for the evil in men's hearts and deeds especially when those men cloak themselves in the zeal of Religious action. But, he forgets that the good that we have come to accept in the way of peace and prosperity comes from that very source as well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.