| | Even though I live in Austin, I am going to miss this.
I heard Andrew Bernstein speak just a couple of years ago when I was still in Ann Arbor. He is a nice guy and all. Most of the regular posters here display just as deep an understanding of Objectivism as Bernstein. The regular posters here also place current events into context according to an objective standard; and they do so quite well. Bernstein is all right, too.
If you view any of the Hitchens/D'Souza Debates on YouTube such as this one at Aquinas College, you will see, as I did, that as much as we agree with Hitchens, D'Souza wins the debate on points. D'Souza's points are quite easy to make and very hard to refute.
If you add up all the deaths caused by Christianity, the witchhunts, the crusades, all of it, you might have one million or two million at most. If you look at the horrors committed by atheists Stalin and Mao (and their lesser copycats), you lose track in the tens of millions at about 50 millions. How can you deny that even at its worst, Christianity is better than atheism?
I figure that D'Souza is going to wipe the floor with Bernstein who is minor league compared to Christopher Hitchens.
Also, of course, this not like a boxing match or a baseball game where a winner will be determined. It is just a venue for fans to cheer for their side.
(Part One is the Introduction. Part Two starts here. D'Souza argues that the most important virtues of our civilization including those claimed by atheists are essentially Christian. Compassion was a vice to Aristotle. Christianity ended slavery in the late Roman world. And so on and so on. Again, lest anyone here question my Objectivism, I only say that D'Souza is a good debater.)
(Edited by Michael E. Marotta on 2/05, 5:44pm)
|
|
