I take back what I said about deists.

Well, I don't think anything would express admiration or respect for Hitch more than taking the time to call out this little sermon for exactly what it is. This rant is nothing less than scripted. It's a collection of canned remarks and a profession of articles of faith that has more to do with the beliefs of the writer than Christopher Hitchens. It may as well have may as well have opened with "It started to rain today and that very much reminded me of god." Christopher Hitchens death has been used as an excuse to repeat dogma. I think he'd have a few words to say about something like this.

I enjoyed his books, I think he was a much better speaker than writer. He had a very expressive presence on the podium, and that's impossible to put into words. Definitely a loss.

I borrowed a copy of "God is Not Great" and look forward to reading it. I've seen a few debates with him and they were entertaining. I hope the book is as well.

Rhythm, I can boil down Ryft's long-winded, back-handed "homage" much more succinctly:

"In his heart, Hitchens knew the truth but was enjoying his celebrity atheist status too much to admit it."

@rhizo his writing is even better than his chat.

Guys, leave it out yeah? We're not supposed to point out all the bullshit in Ryft's post we're supposed to just ignore it and say how much we'll miss Hitch.

I'll miss Hitch.

"Thanks for showing how mature you can be ElD." Rhizo said while rolling his eyes.

(December 20, 2011 at 1:48 pm)Voltair Wrote: Ryft there are some things you said in there that are appropriate. However you should also realize that there are a lot of people who have a great respect for Hitchens' life and legacy.

Of course I do realize that. After all, it is a little too obvious to miss. But perhaps more importantly, I am likewise one of those people. Although I did not place him on any sort of pedestal like a wide-eyed sycophantic fanboy, rather being quite open and honest about my criticisms of him, that does not detract from the respect I had for the man. I enjoyed tremendously his writing over the years—mostly his political views—and always found his speaking engagements captivating. (You do realize that he had been a prolific writer for decades before becoming an icon of antitheism after 2001, right? The latter arguably made him infamous, but I daresay his life and legacy is found in his political corpus.) Despite all the notable people who have passed away over the last few years, and all the Christian blogs that have had something to say about them (e.g., Steve Jobs), the death of Hitchens is the ONLY one that I have ever taken the time to acknowledge so publicly. I have nothing to say about those I care little about.

(December 20, 2011 at 1:48 pm)Voltair Wrote: Saying it is unfortunate he was a rebellious sinner who loved sin is not going to be tolerated by many people with regards to Hitchens.

I understand, but I could not care less what intolerant people happen to think. Let them run their mouth; that speaks for itself.

(December 20, 2011 at 1:48 pm)Voltair Wrote: The reason people have problems with your tribute isn't because you are a Christian but because you are inserting preaching into it and talking about Hitchens in a somewhat negative yet positive light.

Except that I did not insert any preaching into it. I simply offered my introspective on the passing of this iconic figure. It was informed and influenced by my theistic world view, obviously, but that does not qualify as "preaching" any more than someone offering an introspective that is informed and influenced by an atheistic world view. If I had turned from my personal reflections to instruct the reader, then it would be preaching. But it was simply my thoughts about Hitchens in the context of my world view. And as I indicated in my original post, and Summer later reminded people, it was written for the Aristophrenium and its audience. The only reason it appeared here is because Adrian requested me to post it here; and since he is a dear friend of mine, I consented—despite knowing what so many here would do to it.

(December 20, 2011 at 1:48 pm)Voltair Wrote: I know that you are simply stating what you believe but please be sensitive to people and the situation. Now is not the right time to start making remarks about how Hitchens is a sinner.

I do believe I was sensitive, not only because I was one of those who mourned but also because I likewise cautioned people against being insensitive. Moreover, it utterly escapes me how identifying Hitchens as a sinner could be considered inappropriate—especially on an atheist message board. Unless atheists here are remarkably inconsistent (and perhaps that is what is being displayed here), my remark should not be any more insensitive than saying Hitchens was a muggle. "How insensitive!" Really?

"But we know what follows identifying him as a sinner: that he is now roasting in hell," you might reply (given what that lady said to you). To this I would have three responses. First, nowhere in my original post can I be found demonstrating any enthusiasm about Hitchens finding himself in hell. In fact, I call such a fate "a sad and sober thing" and chastise in strong terms "the Westboro Baptist type" who would. Second, I do not believe that people go to hell (or heaven) immediately upon their death, so that is not something I would ever say in the first place. Hitchens is dead and will remain so until the resurrection. And finally, even if someone did gleefully proclaim that Hitchens is now roasting in hell, shouldn't atheists consider that incoherent and harmless woo? Why would the fiction of superstitious Bronze Age goat-herders upset rational 21st century atheists? Inconsistencies.

---

---

(December 20, 2011 at 1:55 pm)thesummerqueen Wrote: Guys, Adrian did ask him to repost it. Just so we're clear on that. The militant atheist creator of the site asked him to. Just sayin'.

(December 20, 2011 at 2:12 pm)thesummerqueen Wrote: Oh, and that's the other thing—it was reposted from a Christian website. ... This was never meant to be on this forum, but because Adrian shares an abiding friendship with Ryft he asked him to visit back again.

Thank you for that breath of rational fresh air, Summer... {hug}

---

---

(December 20, 2011 at 7:12 pm)ElDinero Wrote: Huh? Did I wake up and this isn't a discussion forum any more?

This is one single thread, ElDinero. Just because I don't want to see this particular thread hijacked for a debate about this or that Christian belief, it does not somehow follow that the overall web site is no longer a discussion forum. If someone wants to debate me on something, there are countless places all over this web site to do that. Constraining one single thread does not a conspiracy make.

Let's start here, since you revisited this so late:

"Although I did not place him on any sort of pedestal like a wide-eyed sycophantic fanboy ..."

You have your own brand of sycophancy, and its pedestal-topped hero for whom you are a wide-eyed sycophantic fanboy is mythological.


"I could not care less what intolerant people happen to think ..."

You have revealed in your "elegy" a brand of intolerance the nature of which is that creepy, insidious style, whereby you lament for a "sinner" while extolling his virtues. Bait and switch for the Hitch.

"... it utterly escapes me how identifying Hitchens as a sinner could be considered inappropriate—especially on an atheist message board."


Really? Wow.

"Hitchens is dead and will remain so [until the resurrection]."

Better when constrained by brackets.

"Constraining one single thread does not a conspiracy make."


But coming in a month later to post rejoinders helps encourage restraint, right?

(January 18, 2012 at 6:18 am)Ryft Wrote: This is one single thread, ElDinero. Just because I don't want to see this particular thread hijacked for a debate about this or that Christian belief, it does not somehow follow that the overall web site is no longer a discussion forum. If someone wants to debate me on something, there are countless places all over this web site to do that. Constraining one single thread does not a conspiracy make.

You're a dick. Who said anything whatsoever about a conspiracy? I was pointing out how absurd it was to say that people couldn't challenge your fuckheaded piece of prose on a discussion forum that exists solely for the purpose of discussion and debate.

You don't want to deal with it? Don't post such stupid horseshit, or close the thread, as I suggested. Easy.