As I have said before, the problem with this debate was that there was no clear resolution to be for or against. So both debaters could erect their own straw men and flog them to death with stock phrases and well worn arguments. In my opinion, Dinesh D'Souza proved that he could do this better than Hitchens in front of an audience that was overwhelmingly sympathetic to his chauvinistic point of view.
This would have been a genuine debate, and much more interesting and worthwhile, if, for example, these political pundits were asked to debate any of the following resolutions: 1. Resolved: Belief in God, or especially my God, is essential to human progress and/or survival of the human civilization. 2. Resolved: A lack of belief in God will be essential to continued human progress and/or the ultimate survival of the human civilization. 3. Resolved: Faith is essential to human progress and/or survival of the human civilization. 4. Resolved: Morality is derived entirely from religious teachings and revelation. 5. Resolved: Christianity is responsible for originating the principles of equality, democracy and brotherly love. 6. Resolved: Belief in God(s) or in a particular type of God(s) is irrational. 7. Resolved: A lack of belief in God(s) is irrational. 8. Resolved: Religious thinking in general, or Christian theology, in particular, led to scientific discoveries and progress. 9. Resolved: Eradication of religion, or a particular religion, would lead to a peaceful society and to human progress. 10. Resolved: Religion (or especially, my religion) and Science are not in conflict. 11. Resolved: Explanations and justifications derived from religion (or especially, my religion) should play an important role in science, public education, political decisions and legislation. 12. Resolved: Modern scientific knowledge is a recapitulation of the wisdom contained in sacred revealed texts of my religion. Cheers, Santosh --- "Frederick [FN] Noron ha * फà¥à¤°à¥à¤¡ रिठन à¥à¤°à¥à¤à¤¯à¤¾" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dinesh D'Souza is talking through his hat > ...Christopher HItchins > scores in this debate, IMO http://tinyurl.com/3detdy > (... inspite of > the organisers of the debate trying to skew things > by overstating the > case Hitchins has to defend) FN >
