The Dignity Of Reason

"Well, I'm dying, since you asked," Hitchens replied. "So are you, but I'm doing it faster and in more rich and fecund detail."

Christopher Hitchens, on his battle with cancer. I recommend the whole article: Hitchens--even in his poisoned, withered state--is as sharp as always.

A dignified death is hard to come by, but we must all strive for it. My sci-fi hero did:

Hitchens And Maher On The Vatican

The Ten Commandments Are A Poor Substitute For A Moral Code

Whenever I hear Christians, even the more reasonable ones I work with, extol the virtues of the Ten Commandments, I end up having a rather heated and strange argument with otherwise sensible folk who ignorantly maintain that morality--and our democratic republican government--is based on them.

My arguments are not received well by these people. To quote Ayn Rand, "Reason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be conquered by it. " And any reasonable person can determine that virtually all of the first amendment to the constitution defies many of the Bible's top ten proscriptions.

Christopher Hitchens very deftly dissects the ten rules that will, in the end, purportedly determine whether any human is sent to an eternal torture chamber that makes Nazi concentration camps a comparative Disneyland. What is included, and what is left out, is telling of its origin. And nobody, and no court, and no governing body, needs them now.



Why has it never occurred to the religious that no society has made their Ten Commandments the law of the land and thrived or even survived?

Hitchens On Iran

No pleasing Mullahs, so why even try?

It is a mistake to assume that the ayatollahs, cynical and corrupt as they may be, are acting rationally. They are frequently in the grip of archaic beliefs and fears that would make a stupefied medieval European peasant seem mentally sturdy and resourceful by comparison.

A "Wretched" Critique

I caught some of "Wretched" radio today. During it, they replayed some of the Hitchens interview I posted earlier.

They seemed to think that Hitchens avoided their questions and was "snarky." Of course he did answer all of their questions; they just didn't like the answers. And Todd Friel calling someone snarky is foie-gras rich.

But here's the kicker: Todd admitted that his strategy for this interview was to ignore Hitchens' responses and "go right for the conscience." So he criticizes Hitchens for allegedly not answering the questions, answers that were going to be ignored regardless. So Hitchens was the "snarky" one?

The goal of this tactic is to make a person feel guilty and "wretched," so that they understand that they need Jesus to save them from their iniquities. It's transparently stupid, easily refutable, and as theologically debase as it is intellectually vapid. No thoughtful atheist is going to be impressed by, let alone "saved" by, such drivel. It's like asking Todd if he's afraid of the sticky wrath of the great species of Ju Ju Bees on Planet Good'N'Plenty for not thanking them daily at exactly 4:27 EST for providing the human race with all sugar products. Why should he be?

"Wretched" Slapped Down

I posted earlier of a conversation I heard on "Wretched Radio" on SiriusXM (I won't link to the actual site).

Christopher Hitchens actually agreed to an interview with this horrid-yet-intriguing show, and I stayed in my car to hear it.

If you want to fully understand the disconnect between fundamentalist evangelical Christians and rational atheists, listen in full to the following. The host, Todd Friel (who, in the spectrum of morondom, is of the lowest wavelength), proposes a "game" in which Hitchens has to answer "what if."

This tactic is a poor mutation of their common and banal proselytizing screed, and Hitchens handles it mightily. Hilariously, Friel doesn't know how to handle the (to him) inexplicable rationality from our favorite polemicist. Like all ridiculous, deluded fools, Friel keeps asserting the same nonsense in the hope of getting his favored response. Hitchens instead gives us the most hilarious pwn we could hope for.

Hitchens Being Hitchens

Interesting tidbit; I would have loved to have been at that party.

Hitchens on Election. As a "one issue" voter.

I used to call myself a single-issue voter on the essential question of defending civilization against its terrorist enemies and their totalitarian protectors, and on that "issue" I hope I can continue to expose and oppose any ambiguity. Obama is greatly overrated in my opinion, but the Obama-Biden ticket is not a capitulationist one, even if it does accept the support of the surrender faction, and it does show some signs of being able and willing to profit from experience. With McCain, the "experience" is subject to sharply diminishing returns, as is the rest of him, and with Palin the very word itself is a sick joke. One only wishes that the election could be over now and a proper and dignified verdict rendered, so as to spare democracy and civility the degradation to which they look like being subjected in the remaining days of a low, dishonest campaign.

Link to article

Hitchens on what we've become

link at gatetree blog.

Hitchens On Romney

Neil tried to sneak in the "you're an atheist, so..." argument. He failed.

It seems, perhaps, that no news is good news.

The distinct lack of news from Iraq and an apparently improving situation: 'Good News from Iraq' by our man Hitchens in Slate, It's true: Iraq is a quagmire (for Al-Qaida) is a really good piece. And it must be true that things are getting better because Newsweek and the NYT have chimed in.

May Hit Too Close To Home

From Hitchens' introduction:

...owners of dogs will have noticed that, if you provide them with food and water and shelter and affection, they will think you are a god. Whereas owners of cats are compelled to realize that, if you provide them with food and water and shelter and affection, they draw the conclusion that they are god. (Cats may sometimes share the cold entrails of a kill with you, but this is just what a god might do if he was [sic] in a good mood.)

We love you despite your solipsistic tendencies Mrs. Doyle! And no Horace, we are not gods.

And we respect and enjoy Mr. Hitchens' work despite his inability to get the subjunctive tense right in this case. Note to writer: fire your editor.

It's Out!

The Portable Atheist is on the shelves. The introduction by Hitchens is here. I especially liked the end, regarding the replacement of the study of religious texts with a study of literature:

And who, really, will turn away from George Eliot and James Joyce and Joseph Conrad in order to rescrutinize the bare and narrow and constipated and fearful world of Augustine, Aquinas, Luther, Calvin, and Osama bin Laden?

Brilliant!

Ed. note: I just acquired my copy, and what is printed in USA Today is, as I suspected, just a part of Mr. Hitchens' introduction. In addition, it does contain--to my delight--a letter from H.P. Lovecraft, our patron saint of horror/scifi geekdom.

Official Hitchens

buildupthatwall.com points to this, rumored on this blog earlier.

Not Enough Hitchens

His drunkeness's lengthy wikipedia article. We simply need more Hitchens.