I stand by my prediction that Christopher Hitchens will soon make a dramatic shift to the Church.
Too bad Lord Black is not currently in a position to accept such invitations to debate. Now that would have been greatly amusing and perhaps a bit more oratorially balanced in terms of skill sets on each side.But the outcome would have likely still been the same, more opposed than supporting the motion.
When a "charity" starts giving away their own money, or selling off their castles and other possessions to succor the poor instead of suckering them, then, maybe, they get some sympathy. The Cath-O-Lick church (along with most others) is very good at providing crumbs for the downtrodden (along with admonitions against birth control, co-habitation and asking questions) while reserving the meat and potatoes for the hierarchy. When I see the pope in a black cassock, walking the streets of Rio de Janeiro to minister to the poor--well, shit, a guy can dream, can't he?
If our own Ty-guy had been there to defend Holy Mother the Church, he would have learned them.
i love the idea of those debates. It's a pity that we don't sem to have them here in canada.as to this specific debate... not that i am defending the catholic church but their side really was outgunned(on purpose?) by the opposing side.Christopher Hitchens and Stephen Fry could win just about any debate simply by showing up!
i love the idea of those debates. It's a pity that we don't sem to have them here in canada.I've got a better idea. How about we set each other on fire instead?Hitchens only agrees to debates in which he knows he can win. You're not going to see him debate George Galloway again anytime soon.
"You're not going to see him debate George Galloway again anytime soon."think we'll see onaiyekan and widdecombe debate hitchens and fry again anytime soon?KEvron
Post a Comment