Thousands attend Boulder debate on atheism and religion

Boulder, CO, Jan 28, 2009 / 12:05 am (CNA).- Writers Dinesh D’Souza and Christopher Hitchens brought their polemics on religion and atheism to a debate Monday evening at the University of Colorado at Boulder before a sold-out crowd of 2,050 in the campus’ Macky Auditorium.

D’Souza, a Catholic and author of the book “What’s So Great about Christianity,” argued that Christianity is the foundation for many common values such as scientific inquiry and respect for the individual. Additionally, he asserted that Christianity proposes the best answer for bridging the chasm between man and God.

How ironic even a leading atheist gets it!

“Hitchens then explained that he finds it “extraordinarily objectionable” to exclude the “occupant of the womb” from the human family.”
—

He sure does.

Dinesh is a capable spokesman and I enjoy reading him and listening to him speak. Hitchens is a real contradiction to me. I admire his stance on some issues, deplore him for others, but there is no doubt he is one bright guy.

The thing that always gets me with Hitchens is that he always seems so unhappy, even when joking or smiling. It makes me think sometimes that his attacks against Christianity in particular and religion in general, are almost a challenge to God to prove Himself to exist.

Though this will usually draw a spirited objection from the atheist, I have always thought that an atheist who upholds the dignity of an unborn child is more than 50% of the way to believing in God.

Why? Because on a purely materialistic level, there can be no convincing argument that human embryos, who look somewhat similar to shrimp, shouldn't be marinated in Italian dressing, sauteed, and served on lettuce as an appetizer.

On a materialistic level, the easily accessible proof that embryos are "human" can be met with the all-purpose answer, "So what?"

On a materialistic level, nothing governs your thoughts and actions except the relentless and inescapable forces of heredity and environment, both of which were set in motion by the physical properties present at the beginning of the universe.

So for atheists, even polemical ones like Hitchens, it would make no sense to use words like "you ought to change your opinion because..." For them, there is no "because," except the absolutely irresistable cause-and-effect chains set in motion in the Expansion Phase governed by the Cosmoloical Constant, in the milliseconds after the beginning of Time, Space, Matter, and Energy.

One more point: If I had to be fetterd by manacles to someone at the Final Judgment, so as to share their eternal deserts, I would rather be shackled to an prolife atheist who was inexplicably loyal to the unborn child, than to a pro-abort Catholic who claimed loyalty to God.

I agree. We don’t know why Mr. Hitchens has not been touched by the Holy Spirit. I do believe that when atheists decide there is no God, it shows that they think about whether or not there is one. In my mind, this means that they care and want to know. Maybe one day, Mr. Hitchens will open the door to his heart and let the truth in.

Atheists seem to think that as Christians, we believe that they cannot be good people unless they believe. I know differently, but I always ask them why they think they should be a “good person”? What makes them even have that desire? The laws and love of God are written on every heart, some just try to deny who did the writing.

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.