Mother Teresa a saint!

[smilodon]

Well done........ not.

[faust82]

Not the first time the catholic church rewrites history.

"Here's an ice cream, and remember; if you tell anyone about us Jesus will kill your parents."

[TeaLeaf]

Unfortunately it is not the Catholic Church who re-wrote that history.  It was Hitchens.

For the benefit of balance, it ought to be pointed out that the video has a severe self-serving bias.  It's presented as a balanced, BBC-type documentary, but:

The Youtube account is called 'Anti-Theist' - draw your own conclusions.    
Other popular presenters on the Youtube channel include Dr Daniel Dennett:

Dennett is an atheist and secularist, a member of the Secular Coalition for America advisory board, as well as an outspoken supporter of the Brights movement. Dennett is referred to as one of the "Four Horsemen of New Atheism", along with Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and the late Christopher Hitchens.

Another promoted video on the channel is entitled: "Jewish Rabbi - Why sucking a baby in circumcision is good".  Go figure, I won't be!

The main (not BBC) presenter Christopher Hitchens made (yeah, he's dead, so no heaven for him) a living with his actively confrontational or contrarian style and in particular his atheist and secular views.

He is an atheist, and a self-described antitheist, Hitchens viewed the concept of a god or a supreme being as a totalitarian belief that destroys individual freedom, and argued free expression and scientific discovery should replace religion as a means of teaching ethics and defining human civilisation. In 2007, Hitchens published his most popular book, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, which was a New York Times bestseller.

The other so-called expert was a relatively unsuccessful sports journalist who had a bigger interest in Bollywood and Cricket than expertise in theology.

So as much as the opposite opinion might also annoy me, I call bullshit on this video and send it to Room 101.

The type of gutter bullshit masquerading as balanced serious journalism in this video is typified by the accusations towards the end where Mother Theresa is shamefully exposed as being someone who laid a wreath on the grave of a dead person.   No ****, really?  A Catholic put flowers on the grave of someone and that someone happened to know  Mussolini?   OMG, whatever next, Pope-on-a-Rope Soap?   Sheesh. :frusty:

So whilst the Hitchens wins his fauxcumentary debate with  a globally lop-sided score, it's because he did not invite anyone to play against him.  Then he went and died, which voided any right of reply.    So it's all a bit of a shambles really and a complete waste of time.


Total Score:   1/10 (it only got the single point for managing to present in 480 resolution)
Worth your time:  No way!


Move along please, there's nothing to see here.  Literally.

And if you don't believe in God, the Force or Apple Pie & ice-cream that's fine, just don't bother making a ****ing useless video about it as nobody cares and everyone is entitled to believe whatever they want without having to suffer such inane babbling.

[faust82]

I enjoyed TL's reply more than I did the video

Mother Theresa was controversial when she was alive, and even more after her death.
Did she do a lot of good? I'm certain of it.
Is her halo a bit tarnished? No doubt.
Is it far too early to canonize her? Again yes, time hasn't had the chance to smooth things over yet.
Is the time of saints and miracles over? Also, I guess so. Too much documentation about everyone, gone are the days when the only ones who wrote things down and kept records was the church themselves.

Pope on a rope soap, isn't that already a thing?


Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[smilodon]

Likewise

I liked Hitchens for his confrontational approach, his passion and obvious intelligence. Even if I didn't always agree with him, I liked watching him. In contrast I find Professor Dawkins, probably a vastly more academic man and an expert in his field, to be a pompous, spiteful bully. Even when he is right about something, he still winds me up. I can imagine for someone of faith Dawkins must be like fingernails on a chalkboard. He's certainly no great champion of the Atheist movement. For me Hitchens was at least entertaining to watch.

 I do suspect the Mother Teresa was too much interesting in looking after people who were dying in poverty rather than doing something to actually alleviate that poverty. She did get millions donated to her church but people still died on mattresses bereft of painkillers or effective treatment. However I'm no expert and know Hitchens was sometimes as entrenched in his views as were the people he fought against.

I always thought Stephen Fry made a much better job or ripping the Catholic Church to bits in his famous Intelligence Squared debate. He made a careful point to attack the Official Catholic Church and not individual catholic believers, very much to his credit. Hitchens on the other hand didn't seem to be able to make the distinction and seemed to go for anyone who believed in a religion as well as the religion itself.

[Tutonic]

It's undoubtedly biased, and a good example of why you should approach any material like this with a critical mind.

That said, we could really do with some more Hitchen's in our media. Right or wrong, at least they were prepared to argue their case with an intelligent analysis.

[lionheart]

Firstly I should start by saying I am (was) a fan of Hitchens and his views on religion.

The video in the first post was an episode of "Without walls" from channel 4 in 1994. The following week the series "Right to reply" dealt with this episode and had Hitchens and various religious figures debating the program and Hitchens explains

why he pulled no punches in it.

Its HERE if you're interested. I particularly liked the nostalgia of seeing the adverts from 1994 in the middle.

I love my Android TV box, I've watched a lot of stuff like this on it fairly recently ( its got a massive  sub-section called " Science verses Faith") there's some great debates, and Yes I agree Smilo, Dawkins is a little "Smarmy" but watching him go up against someone like Ken Ham is still a joy to watch

[smilodon]

.....but watching him go up against someone like Ken Ham is still a joy to watch

Agreed, lot's of fun, although successfully debating a swivelly eyed loon like Ham couldn't have been much of a challenge for him. Still entertaining though..

[albert]

You guys are all too intelligent. I would still vote Trump 😝

Sent from my LG-H962 using Tapatalk