Sharpton / Hitchens Debate - Can Morality Exist Without God? Free search and download videos

Sharpton / Hitchens Debate - Can Morality Exist Without God?

Posted in Videos on January 9th, 2009

Loading... IMPORTANT :: YOU MUST SAVE THE FILE AS ".FLV"
Change the file name from "get_video" to "video.flv"

Complete video at: http://fora.tv/fora/showthread.php?t=1007 Author Christopher Hitchens debates the Reverend Al Sharpton on the question of whether morality can exist in the absence of God. ----- A Debate: God Is Not Great with Al Sharpton and Christopher Hitchens. Taking on possibly the greatest issue of our time - the malignant force of religion in the world - Christopher Hitchens makes the ultimate case against religion through a close and learned reading of the major religious texts, citing numerous historical instances in which sexual repression and outrageous acts of violence have been committed in the name of God. He argues for a more secular life based on science and reason, in which hell is replaced by the Hubble telescope's awesome view of the universe, and Moses and the burning bush give way to the beauty and symmetry of the double helix. -- NYPL Christopher Hitchens is an author, journalist and literary critic. Now living in Washington, D.C., he has been a columnist at Vanity Fair, The Nation and Slate; additionally, he is an occasional contributor to many other publications. Al Sharpton Jr. is a Pentecostal minister, a political activist, civil rights activist and film actor. In recent years, Sharpton has also become a perennial candidate in his quest for the Democratic Party's nomination for President of the United States. Author of "Go and Tell Pharaoh: The Autobiography of the Reverend Al Sharpton."

Tags:

Comments to “Sharpton / Hitchens Debate - Can Morality Exist Without God?”

Zadie, on January 9th, 2009 at 06:51:21 Said:
Other than fanatics who kill in the name of God, are there not any people (like the Rogue leader in the Warriors) who kill for no reason - they just like...doing...things...like...that?
Braw)eigh, on January 9th, 2009 at 07:14:20 Said:
This question always depresses me. Do you really think people are too hopeless to decide these things for themselves?
WARE, on January 9th, 2009 at 07:37:19 Said:
never moral.
Younique, on January 9th, 2009 at 08:00:18 Said:
Exactly, which brings up a very important point. Yes good things can be taught by religions, such as treating others the way you'd want to be treated. But immoral things come from it as well, and in many cases the immoral things outweight the moral things that are taught. Yet the people of the relgious sect believe that the immoral things are moral, and will even kill other people because they think/thought it was the moral thing to do. When it should be obvious that things like killing are...
Fitz, on January 9th, 2009 at 08:23:17 Said:
I'm an atheist and I have no problem at all defining what is good and what is evil. Murder is evil. Rape is evil. Deception is evil. It goes on and on. It doesn't take a logical, sane person very long at all to figure out the difference between good and evil. If you need a god to tell you, then you're a mindless sheep.
ALFONSINE, on January 9th, 2009 at 08:46:16 Said:
Like I said, morals are based on what any sane persons knows what is good or wrong. Just like a human knows how to breath, walk, eat, etc. And based on your god's "morals" there should still be slaves, we should be stoning homosexuals, etc.
Etenia, on January 9th, 2009 at 09:09:15 Said:
Pathetic? No. Correct? Yes. There is no way to measure what is evil right or wrong without a standard or final authority. What are morals based on, if there is no God? What says or who decides whats evil? What is the source of this thinking form the atheist point of view.
AEAEA, on January 9th, 2009 at 09:32:14 Said:
Your right, Christ's story and life is the same as many other myths 100s and 1000s of years before his supposed birth. Christ is no different.
Mab, on January 9th, 2009 at 09:55:13 Said:
Really? You are quite pathetic you think that. Any sane person who is brought up right will know evil. Any sane person will know the likes of Hitler is evil. You fail to realize that the morals written in religious texts, were there before they were written down in the first place.
Arturo, on January 9th, 2009 at 10:18:12 Said:
How does an atheist define whats evil if there is no God?
May, on January 9th, 2009 at 10:41:11 Said:
Why is Hitchens so calm and non-insulting? :D
Bridget, on January 9th, 2009 at 11:04:10 Said:
Oh and just incase you can't already tell, I've done extensive reserch into several different religions. A few examples of my studies are Christianity, Shintoism, Buddhism, Ancient Egyptian religion, etc.
Eithna, on January 9th, 2009 at 11:27:09 Said:
faith are quoted saying things like "We know what we claim about our savior is known to be true for Jupiter.", and they clearly acknowlaged that Yeshua was identical to many Gods who existed before him. It doesn't disprove his existance 100%, but it does bring reasonable doubt to the table as to what Christianitiy is passing off as their God.
Raynord, on January 9th, 2009 at 11:50:08 Said:
Can you give proof of your claim other than religious texts? Can you explain why Yeshua-Christo(We refer to him as Jesus-Christ. Christ/Christo is simply a title meaning "anointed one") is identical to Horus-KRST and other sun gods who existed hundreds of years before him. Or the fact that out of all of the historians of Yeshua's(Jesus') time, none of them mention him and the closest mention there would be is the mention of a Christo. Or even the fact that early defenders of the Christian...
Camdyn, on January 9th, 2009 at 12:13:07 Said:
Yao, Are we supposed to think that is a profound statement? It is based on false premis. God already defeated evil when he paid the price for all the evil we will commit.God only allows free will and has given authority to humans on earth. Thats where the evil comes from our free will. But you see God doesnt offer true love to us unless he allows our free will to take place. Now evil will ultimately be done away with in time but until then more people need to get the opp to receive salvation.
NUDAR, on January 9th, 2009 at 12:36:06 Said:
Morals have been observed in nature, especially in other primates. Humans just take it one step farther, which is a good thing. Sharpton is a fool who fails to realize this, morals are benefical to society, humans are pack animals. Murdering and stealing, from each other, etc isn't helpful in the big picture. So they can be send to come from evolution.
Aniko, on January 9th, 2009 at 12:59:05 Said:
Have to agree with that quote. Which is why I'm a atheist. That and there is no evidence of a god.
DARELLE, on January 9th, 2009 at 13:22:04 Said:
There's one more thing I want to say though, a quote by Epicurus. Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able, and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? ~Epicurus 33A.D.
TAMARA, on January 9th, 2009 at 13:45:03 Said:
have empathy, a conscience, or emotions. With empathy you understand why others feel what they feel, with a conscience you try to not make people feel bad, and with emotions you can understand what it feels like to be happy, sad, angry, etc. With those in mind, what reason is there to say that there is no morality without belief in a higher power? To say that, is to say that emotion, empathy, your conscience, etc. doesn't mean anything. Because a God is what makes you moral.
GALLOWAY, on January 9th, 2009 at 14:08:02 Said:
There is morality without a higher being, and this is why.(I'm Agnostic and believe that there is a possibility of a God, so don't assume I'm Athiest.) Here's my explination as to why I feel that way, we have what is called a "conscience" which usually makes it so that we feel bad when we've hurt others, or have done something wrong. We have emotions,(e.g. anger, sadness, happyness, etc.) and with empathy we can understand other peoples feelings. You don't need to belive in a higher being to...
BADRIYYAH, on January 9th, 2009 at 14:31:01 Said:
Brilliant? Sharpton is not a true defender of the faith. Hitchen just babbles and says nothing.
Niall, on January 9th, 2009 at 14:54:00 Said:
He didn't do good against Dinesh. As a matter of fact Dinesh destroyed him. Craig will destroy also probably even worst.
Kelsi, on January 9th, 2009 at 15:16:59 Said:
I don't care either way but from watching this I would say that Sharpton has no business debating Hitchens.
Kuwanyauma, on January 9th, 2009 at 15:39:58 Said:
hahaha... yeah spot on there... lol.. these religious 'intellectuals' dont stand a chance against hitchens haha
BATT, on January 9th, 2009 at 16:02:57 Said:
I like Sharpton`s panache however he is just that panache. Hitchen, is as usual, brilliant.