NPR Honors Hitchens the Scabrous Nun-Basher As 'International Sensation' of Atheism
By Tim Graham | December 18, 2011 | 07:54
National Public Radio is a playground for all the factions of the liberal base, including the atheists. That was clear on Friday with the passing of atheist author Christopher Hitchens. NPR didn't shrink from noticing that Hitchens viciously bashed the globally beloved nun Mother Teresa of Calcutta. They even reran a quote saying "Here's how he trashed her right after she died." (Obviously, the words were a little different, but not the politeness).
Everyone who insists that the media's obituaries should be kind and generous never met the NPR people who wanted to make sure Hitchens was slinging mud from their taxpayer-supported mudpit at Mother Teresa when she died. From the Morning Edition profile by David Folkenflik:
DAVID FOLKENFLIK: Let's first pause simply to acknowledge the broad range of subjects that drew Christopher Hitchens's caustic attention over the years. The list includes Henry Kissinger, Prince Charles, Bob Hope, Michael Moore, the Dalai Lama, and oh yes, this one.
GRAYDON CARTER: If you're at Vanity Fair and you're talking about some of the things that Christopher has taken on, at the very top of the list is going to be Mother Teresa.
FOLKENFLIK: That's Graydon Carter, editor at Vanity Fair and a longtime friend. In 1994, Hitchens co-wrote and narrated a documentary on her called "Hell's Angel."
HITCHENS (from "Hell's Angel"): This profane marriage between tawdry media hype and medieval superstition gave birth to an icon, which few have since had the poor taste to question.
FOLKENFLIK: Hitchens wrote about her for the magazine too. Carter says it didn't go over so well.
CARTER: That's a tough subject to go after, and it was quite negative. And we had hundreds of subscription cancellations, including some from our own staff.
Notice that NPR will acknowledge that's an unpopular position, but they don't seek out anyone who's truly critical of Hitchens, and certainly no one as mean-spirited as he was. They sought out friends and colleagues. This means that Mother Teresa received much meaner treatment than her meanest critic. And in a sense, it is both right to remember his Mother-bashing as a prominent theme, and perverse that at his death, she gets trashed all over again as a profane fraud, while he does not.
On Friday's All Things Considered, religion reporter Barbara Bradley Hagerty's piece also cited his "Hell's Angel" documentary. (No one wonders if that title better applied to Hitchens than his prey.) Hagerty oddly dated Hitchens rhetorically savaging the Muslims to 1979 and the fatwa against Salman Rushdie, and left out all that recent criticism of al-Qaeda:
BARBARA BRADLEY HAGERTY: It was not merely Islamic fundamentalism that worried Hitchens. He viewed all believers as deluded at best and fanatical at worst, even the saints. And so in typical Hitchens fashion, his next target was an icon.
CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS (soundbite of "Hell's Angel"): What makes Teresa of Calcutta so divine?
BARBARA BRADLEY HAGERTY: In his documentary about Mother Teresa and his 1995 book entitled "Missionary Position," Hitchens reviled the diminutive nun as an ambitious self-promoter who took money from dictators and criminals. Here's how he described her to NPR shortly after her death.
CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS: Mother Teresa is a very important figure, it seemed to me, to expose as what she was: a fanatic, a fundamentalist and a fraud. She was someone whose net effect was to make more people more poor and more miserable and more wretched.
NPR thought this was funny, not worth balancing.
JEFFREY GOLDBERG: You know... (laughter) ...a lot of us were sort of like, yeah, Mother Teresa - it's Mother Teresa, leave her alone. What are you going to do?
BARBARA BRADLEY HAGERTY: Jeffrey Goldberg was a close friend and colleague.
JEFFREY GOLDBERG: When that Mother Teresa book came out, I thought, who next? The Dalai Lama, Martin Luther King, Abraham Lincoln, God?
BARBARA BRADLEY HAGERTY: Yes, God. With his 2007 book "God Is Not Great," Hitchens became a voice for a growing atheist movement. He delighted crowds like this one at a book signing in Washington, D.C., ridiculing believers for rejoicing in an omniscient, omnipotent God, when he said the reign of this supposed God is akin to North Korea.
CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS (archive): An absolutely impermeable dictatorship that couldn't even be criticized, let alone overthrown, that went on forever, that supervised and invigilated your every waking moment and would not stop torturing you even after you were dead. To wish this to be true is to wish to be a slave.
BARBARA BRADLEY HAGERTY: "God Is Not Great" became an instant bestseller and catapulted Hitchens from a highly regarded intellectual to an international sensation.'
So in a nutshell, this was NPR's Friday verdict. Hitchens, "highly regarded intellectual and international sensation." Mother Teresa, "a fanatic, a fundamentalist and a fraud." And God is Kim Jong-Il. Paid for with your tax dollars to your local NPR station.
It should be acknowledged that NPR would insist it's fair and balanced because it brought in his Christian debating partner, Dinesh D'Souza. But again notice how they did not bring D'Souza on NPR's air to do to Hitchens what he did to nuns. D'Souza is brought on as just another fan:
DINESH D'SOUZA: I would say that Hitchens became the most well-known atheist in America.
BARBARA BRADLEY HAGERTY: Dinesh D'Souza, president of the evangelical King's College in New York, was one of a few religious believers who dared to debate Hitchens. By all accounts, Hitchens was a devastating debater, seizing on logical weaknesses and often dominating the conversation with his words and his Oxford accent. Listen to this exchange at the University of Colorado in 2009, when D'Souza was trying to explain the difference between Christian and Islamic views of morality.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED DEBATE)
DINESH D'SOUZA: In Christianity, you have the idea, for example, that morality is intentional. If you've contemplated to sin, Christ says in a sense you've committed it.
CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS: Thoughtcrime.
DINESH D'SOUZA: One second. The (unintelligible)...
CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS: Thoughtcrime. Totalitarianism again. Thoughtcrime.
DINESH D'SOUZA: Oh. Whether it is or not...
CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS: We know what you're thinking, and we can punish you for it. Totalitarianism defined.
DINESH D'SOUZA: He was sort of a bomb thrower, and he relied, you know, in a sense on shoot-from-the-hip type of arguments.
BARBARA BRADLEY HAGERTY: But D'Souza says he's debated a lot of atheists, and Hitchens was his favorite.
DINESH D'SOUZA: His joie de vivre made him stand out among atheists. He was a happy atheist. So he was able somehow to communicate both that effervescence and at the same time to convey a certain depth that underneath it all he was a serious man.
If someone wants to insist that there was criticism in there -- that Hitchens shot from the hip -- then why would he be one's favorite foe? He had a way with a winning cheap shot? The NPR religion reporter ended by noting that Hitchens truly feared being turned into a fraud as he died: that someone would say he went soft and religious at death's door. So back we go to the buddies:
HITCHENS: Under no persuasion could I be made to believe that a human sacrifice several thousand years ago vicariously redeems me from sin. Nothing could persuade me that that was true - or moral, by the way. It's white noise to me.
HAGERTY: Jeffrey Goldberg says, as Hitchens' health failed, he made a preemptive strike against those who might claim he had a deathbed conversion.
GOLDBERG: One of the things he said to me and other people was: If I lose my faculties, defend my reputation as an atheist. Basically, he said, if - God forbid - I say something about believing in God, will you please go out there and say, look, this is the medication, this is dementia, this is not the Hitchens that we know?
BARBARA BRADLEY HAGERTY: The Hitchens he knew, Goldberg says, loved wine and friendship and debating the existential questions. As to his early death, Hitchens once said, I've been dealt a good hand by the cosmos, which doesn't know I'm here and won't know when I'm gone. Barbara Bradley Hagerty, NPR News.
NPR didn't go soft and air Rock of Ages at the obituary's end, as it did for radical feminist theologian Mary Daly. They also skipped "You're a Mean One, Mr. Grinch."
- Tim Graham's blog
- Login or register to post comments



















Comments
Unlike others
Submitted by IRQ Conflict on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 8:34am.
I won't bow down in front of and worship Hitchens. As funny as he was he had a serious hate on for those that love God. He had it a little more together than a lot of atheist blowhards. But that's about it.
Americas trend downhill does not surprise when even the right praises this hateful person.
"..the wicked strut about on every side when vileness is exalted among men." - somewhere in the Bible
Apt phrase
Submitted by Tim Graham on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 8:53am.
Psalm 12:8
http://bible.cc/psalms/12-8.htm
Excellent quote
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 9:02am.
But in another thread, we've got a poster imagining Hitchins, Mother Teresa, and Jesus, sipping tea together in heaven.
Wow
Submitted by mamabear on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 8:58am.
Didn't we learn in kindergarten that two wrongs don't make a right? I've been so impressed with how classily NB has handled Hitchens' passing, until this.
If it was wrong of him to bash Mother Theresa after her death, as I think we can all agree it was-- are you really proposing that NPR, of all places, should fix that inequity by bashing him after his death?
Five year-olds know better than that! Everywhere else on this site people have exemplified what they think Hitchens' should have been-- admiring his obvious intellect, skill at debate, and sense of humor, while acknowledging their fierce disagreements with him in respectful terms. People are even expressing the sincere hope that he's not having too hard a time of it in the afterlife, if indeed he turns out to have been wrong about it all.
So, I would like to say thank you, to MOST of the NB community, for treating someone I am very sad to see leave this world with the basic human decency that everyone deserves to be remembered with. It is the earnest desire to act right even towards others who don't do the same that makes this community special, and I honestly think, different than most places on the internet.
Seriously, mamabear?
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 9:13am.
If you can call him or her a "fetus" you couldn't care less if said mass of parasitic tissue is flushed forthwith down the sewer.
I don't get your point that those of us with some semblance of human decency should somehow equally praise the lives of Adolph Hitler and Mother Teresa after they're dead.
I disrespectfully disagree with such nonsense regardless of your status, either here, or hereafter.
Everyone?
Submitted by CobraMan on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 11:03am.
"So, I would like to say thank you, to MOST of the NB community, for treating someone I am very sad to see leave this world with the basic human decency that everyone deserves to be remembered with."
Not everyone "deserves" to be treated with decency, even after death. I would hardly claim that Hitler, for example, deserves to be treated with decency even after death. Some people deserve to be treated with derision and ridicule, especially after they die. This is so others don't act the same as someone who was as vile towards Faith as Hitchens yet who would be revered in death, thus perpetrating that kind of vile behavior by others who wish to be revered in death.
Let us not perpetuate the kinds of "humor" that Hitchens directed towards people of Faith by revering him in death. Let us ridicule him in death so that others may not wish to emulate him. Hitchens insulted and ridiculed the beliefs of over a billion people, sometimes even after they died, a decidedly indecent thing to do. Do Unto Others...
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
CobraMan, Yes, we must
Submitted by Liberallies on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 12:21pm.
CobraMan,
Yes, we must ridicule, but we must ridicule the actions of Mr. Hitchens, not the person.
No one person here can claim they knew exactly what was in Mr. Hitchens heart. Not one of us. Only God knows why Mr. Hitchens did what he did.
Let's remember Jesus', God's, greatest two commandments, "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength." The second is this, "Love your neighbor as yourself."
and do not forget the parable of the Good Samaritan.
God will judge each and everyone of us, exactly how we judge others. This is one of the many reasons why I will never claim to know why Hitchens did what he did. I rather be Merciful towards any one individual who is evil towards me, than pass judgement on the person since God will pass the same judgement against me.
His actions were horrific, but only God knows what was in his heart and why Hitches acted the way he did and said the deplorable things he said.
"Especially after they die?"
Submitted by mamabear on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 11:21pm.
Why on earth would you ever treat someone with more derision and scorn after they die than before? The only reason to treat someone worse in death than you did in life is if you were afraid to face up to them when they could fight back!
tru dat, mamabear
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 12:46am.
It's just like you think a dead baby is a putrid mass of flesh, (OR NOT), depending on what its mother's dreams for it were.
OK, I'll admit making fun of Hitchens in death isn't nearly as disgusting as the license you so often like to take against the wholly and completely innocent.
Do you stiill celebrate the feast of King Herod the Great? He had soldiers that could perform your sacrament on the spot.
If you can't take me on
Submitted by mamabear on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 7:54pm.
on the subject at hand, just say so. You don't have to keep deflecting to abortion to look tough, we're know you're a bad @$$.
Thank you mamabear
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 9:07am.
I only had to hit you with it a couple of times before you conceded point #2. Sorry for touching such a sensitive nerve.
So I'll be generous and answer your first question.
Why on earth would you ever treat someone with more derision and scorn after they die than before? - mamabear
Well, when others suddenly decide he should be lionized in death much more than he was worth in life? But rest assured, I'm not any more in love with Teddy Kennedy or Robert Byrd in death than I was with them in life, either.
Got it
Submitted by mamabear on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 10:41pm.
Which is kind of exactly what he was trying to do with Mother Theresa. So, while you obviously disagree on targets, you don't think there's anything wrong with attacking someone you think is being falsely praised after they die.
I agree, mamabear
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 11:25pm.
Certainly, I agree with you that Hitchens is being falsely praised in death.
You and Hitchens are just saying Mother Teresa was a dirtbag in life and is no less so in death.
I guess I wasn't aware you had a bone to pick with Mother Teresa.
That said, I'll let you and Liberallies get back to your lovefest at the Hitchens funeral.
Oh mamabear, please!!
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 12:35pm.
Nobody is attacking the man after death. His life left much to be mocked and scorned. Get off the damn high horse, and knock LL off while you're at it, and deal with the comments as presented.
I don't know if his character improved after his death, but I do know it didn't up to the moment of his death. I agreed with a few of his statements, regarding the war in Iraq, and the stupidity of maher and his audience come to mind, but that does not change the fact that he was a bona fide asshole in life.
Calling a spade a spade is all. Don't like it? Move on to another thread.
Restless1, Well, thank you
Submitted by Liberallies on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 3:37pm.
Restless1,
Well, thank you for your personal opinion on this matter. I am glad you have one.
if you don't like the fact that some of us disagree with you, why don't you follow your own advice and move on to another thread?
Merry Christmas.
You're more than welcome LL
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 11:36pm.
Hope you can hear me up there.
Merry Christmas to you as well.
My point
Submitted by mamabear on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 10:45pm.
is simply that he was doing the exact same thing with Mother Theresa. Obviously, you don't think she deserved that kind of treatment, but he did. And you think if someone deserves that treatment, there's nothing wrong with doing it. Just calling a spade a spade, and all that.
Ahh, false equivalence.
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 11:34pm.
I forgot how much idi...er liberals love that.
Hypocritical mamabear
Submitted by ThisnThat on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 1:40pm.
"Stop bashing Hitchens, you less than Kindergarten NBers" says mamabear as she bashes NBers.
__________
“Didn't win the Medal of Honor? Didn't even serve? Then lie about it. We'll support you." — 9th Circuit Court
Um...
Submitted by mamabear on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 11:16pm.
Unless you are reading this from beyond the grave, the two situations are slightly different.
mamabear,
Submitted by IRQ Conflict on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 9:33am.
I don't think this post is anything more than exposing NPR's taxpayer bias (what this site is set up to do). If you want to take it as Hitch bashing, your on your own.
As for my opinions they are not of NB. They are of me. Don't slight NB because of a post I made. If that's your intent.
Edit: As for sipping tea with Christ? Here is what Christ said:
1 Corinthians 6
9Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 10Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
Psalm 14
1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
IRQ
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 9:35am.
If/when Charles Manson dies, mamabear will speak lovingly, even respectfully, of the man's attempts to stem the tide of overpopulation.
Nobody is above criticism
Submitted by mamabear on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 11:25pm.
The issue is how you go about it. NPR mentioned the most controversial thing Hitchens ever did in their tribute to him, the thing that earned him the most hatred and scorn of all the crazy stuff he said. They weren't trying to pretend it didn't happen, and they even brought on someone who disagrees with him. They just didn't call him a horrible person while reporting his death. I think that's appropriate. If even people who disagreed with him liked the man, there isn't much NPR can do about that.
Yes arrow, I do tire
Submitted by IRQ Conflict on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 10:25am.
of people that want to do the politically correct thing and treat someone different in death than in life. The only thing that has changed is the rhythm in which the heart beats. Or doesn't. The person and his/her views is what I attack. Misconstrued as an personal attack. But it is not. That would be self righteous of me.
The reality is that the person is scrutinized because of their ideology. Hitchens clung to the spirit of anti-Christ. When one chooses to do that and the spirit of anti-Christ is attacked, don't be surprised or offended those clinging to evil get singed.
Does that mean I wish evil on Hitchens? Quite the contrary. Like Christ I would have wished that he would have repented and sinned no more. Then I would have rejoiced in his death. As it stands, I am saddened.
Wrong Word.
Submitted by Darasen on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 10:40am.
I really wish people would stop describing people like Hitchens as atheist. He was not an atheist he was an anti-theist. He was primarily anti-Christian at that. How much time did he ever spend bashing Islam?
He was also rather contradictory, as anti-theist tend to be. He spent his time telling people what they should believe while telling evangelicals not to push their views on others.
Yep, thats what they do best
Submitted by Boudin on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 11:01am.
He spent his time telling people what they should believe while telling evangelicals not to push their views on others.
I tell this to atheist all the time, why do they believe their ideas should have prominent influence over the culture that is America? Oh, and where is the separation of State and Church in the Constitution or Bill of Rights?
Boudin
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 12:55am.
He spent his time telling people what they should believe while telling evangelicals not to push their views on others.
But now we've got a poster claiming he can pray Hitchens out of Hell. And you know that's got to have Vlad the Impaler all butthurt.
Seriously?
Submitted by StarAZ on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 11:28am.
Scabrous? The man is dead--and you want to pee all over him? He knows for sure about God now, which is more than any of us can say. Let it be. You know, sometimes Newsbusters really reaches to find some hate. Yick.
StarAZ, who's the hater?
Submitted by Tim Graham on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 12:08pm.
Why doesn't the word "scabrous" fit?
-- "DIFFICULT, KNOTTY, rough to the touch"
-- "dealing with suggest, indecent, suggestive, or scandalous themes" -- "see also SQUALID"
I'd say these words are appropriate. He described God as a North Korean dictator, and you expect "good humor" toasts in return?
As others have posted, he certainly made no attempt at politeness in obituaries and spared no one his rhetorical flamethrower. That can be pointed out without being compared to bodily excretions. Who's vulgar now?
I also agree with the poster who said this is about media bias -- that NPR was willing to go searching for the rudest rhetoric right after Mother Teresa died, but goes quite soft about the man who uttered all the rudeness.
I didn't agree with everything he said
Submitted by StarAZ on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 1:04pm.
He went over the top deliberately--and if he were alive, he could take any one of us apart. But it's safe now--he's dead--have at him if you think that accomplishes anything. I think it is unattractive and unproductive. And oh, yes, I am so vulgar--typical Newsbusters--attack the commenter. This site seems to be sort of devolving...my opinion.
It can accomplish a lot.
Submitted by CobraMan on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 1:35pm.
"But it's safe now--he's dead--have at him if you think that accomplishes anything. "
That can accomplish a lot. We need to learn the past so that we may not repeat mistakes in the future. This includes learning, and discussing, the ugly past of deceased people, and even ridiculing the things that dead people did while they were alive. For those who do not learn from the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them. Bashing the faith of millions and millions of people is a mistake, one that, I hope, others don't repeat. How can we avoid repeating those types of mistakes if we don't ridicule the mistakes of others simply because they are now dead?
We shouldn't whitewash the past indignation's of others simply because they are dead. For, if we do, we will never learn anything of value from their lives. We need to know of the mistakes and the accomplishments, the negative as well as the positive, of people in order to know, and understand, them, past or present. That is where knowledge comes from, and, from that knowledge, wisdom. You see, sometimes it is necessary to speak ill of the dead.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Oh...
Submitted by StarAZ on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 1:36pm.
You are teaching...right. Teaching people to disdain someone's views and think the way you do...well, as I said--go for it. I am done with this thread, though. I don't see it as something noble--though, ironically, Hitchens would probably love it.
"Bashing the faith of millions and millions of people is a mistake, one that, I hope, others don't repeat"
They probably will--and you probably will bash their beliefs--all in the name of teaching.
I never met Hitchens, but I had friends who were friends with him--and they were many and loyal. He wrote recently that the one advantage of "living dyingly" was his friends were by his side from DC to Houston. So I guess they didn't think he was so scabrous.
"I don't see" "probably will." "done wirh this thread."
Submitted by CobraMan on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 1:48pm.
You preaching, as you accuse me of teaching. You're making claims about me while lecturing others as to the inappropriateness of making claims about someone you admire simply because he's dead. Can you be any more hypocritical?
I understand why you're "done with this thread." I don't agree with you, so it's over.
Tell me this: shall we say nothing but the good things Hitler did, now that he's dead? If so, just what can we learn of Hitler and what he did while he was alive? If we never spoke ill of Hitler, who would know of the terrible, tyrannical things he did? As I said, it is sometimes necessary to 'speak ill of the dead" so that we may understand their life and their impact on others.
I never knew of this man's anti-religious fervor until this thread arrived. Now that I know of them, I understand him better, include how negative, how insulting, his ideals and opinions were, and still are, to some people. Is that knowledge really such a bad thing?
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Now Hitchens is akin to Hitler and Stalin
Submitted by StarAZ on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 4:02pm.
I can't respond to this level of thinking--my brain just says, whaaaa.
"I never knew of this man's anti-religious fervor until this thread arrived."
So...in other words...you are not too knowledgeable about Hitchens and his contrarian bent. Why not just admit that. Preferably before you lard on the scorn and judgment. Oh, well...I can't say any more.
⇒ Nobody made that comparison
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 6:51pm.
There is a logical extreme (Hitler) by which arguments can be measured. Nobody equated Hitchens with Hitler, but rather Hitchens is a point on the continuum from perfection to depravity.
Alright people, knock it off!
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 12:46am.
No more condemning the dead. Kim Jung-Il is now dead too. Sorry, should have got you potshots on him yesterday. Gacy? Nope. Dahmer? Ya gotta be kiddn'.
The person may be dead, but the body of work remains. Sorry Star, but we are allowed to comment on it.
(Sheesh, what is it around here these days? There's more high horses around here lately than in a stable of Clydesdales.)
You can comment--just tells me more about you
Submitted by StarAZ on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 9:57am.
These comments tell me more about the commenter than the person at issue. And it ain't pretty. Oh, well--that's NB these days.
You're right, Star
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 10:10am.
It tells you we're just not that into deifying Christopher Hitchens just because he's dead.
I was far more disgusted when Obama and Clinton acted like they were going to hug the casket of Robert Byrd, going so far as to agree that Byrd's recruiting people to kill Blacks was just what Democrats do to get elected.
Nope, Hitchens doesn't quite sink to that level with me, but I'm not going to act like I miss him either.
Restless1, Condemn or praise
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 1:51pm.
Restless1,
Condemn or praise the actions that the dead carried out while living, but to condemn the dead, what was in their heart and why they did what they did belongs to God.
I have zero problem telling anyone and everyone, as I often done here on NB, other forums and face to face, that Kim Jung-Il's actions were inhumane, horrific, terrifying, a monstrocity, as evil as human actions can get. But only God can Judge his heart since only God knows why he did what he did.
I have zero problem, as I often have and did just yesterday when I talk to indivdiuals who worship the ground Hitchens walked on, that Hitchens words and actions were terrible, horrific. But I have zero idea why he thought like he did, I have zero idea what was in his heart. Only God knows this.
Men must judge the actions, but only God can judge the heart, mind and soul of humans.
God will show each and everyone of us the same Mercy we have shown towards the living and the dead. He will Judge us with the same measuring stick that we Judge others.
So then you agree with Hitchens
Submitted by mamabear on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 11:30pm.
"We need to learn the past so that we may not repeat mistakes in the future. This includes learning, and discussing, the ugly past of deceased people, and even ridiculing the things that dead people did while they were alive. For those who do not learn from the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them. Bashing the faith of millions and millions of people is a mistake, one that, I hope, others don't repeat. How can we avoid repeating those types of mistakes if we don't ridicule the mistakes of others simply because they are now dead?"
If this is really how you feel, than you must not have minded his comments about Mother Theresa. After all, agree with him or disagree, he was expressing his opinion that we mistakenly put her on a pedestal when really she was a force for evil in the world. He's trying to learn from the past to avoid mistakes in the future, using ridicule as the tool.
Either both you and Hitchins are right to criticize the dead, or both of you are wrong.
I think it safe to say
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 2:36am.
the context in which the term appears in the headline was intended to comport with the latter definition [indecent, scandalous, and squalid] rather than the former [difficult, knotty, rough to the touch], although the usage employed is by no means inappropriate.
What I do believe to be, if not entirely inappropriate, at least a curiosity is the decision by the NewsBusters editorial staff to publish John Nolte's warm and fuzzy personal remembrance of "Hitch", a man whose politics and philosophy on nearly every subject save one were completely inimical to those of the vast majority who inhabit this website. If the memoir had been presented as part of a pro and con, point/counterpoint 'The Hitchens Legacy' debate and discussion, its inclusion would have been far more understandable, even important. As it was, Nolte's piece seemed odd and misplaced, notwithstanding the singular moment of joy evoked by the memory of Hitch flipping off Maher's audience.
Jer
Yeah, what Jer said.
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 4:39am.
IOW, maybe he didn't believe in G-d, but he believed in guns.
Stalin is dead too
Submitted by CobraMan on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 12:15pm.
Stalin is dead too. Does that mean we have to stop saying bad things about him? How about Benedict Arnold. Should we stop referring to him as a traitor simply because he's dead?
Death, in and of itself, doesn't absolve people from their past actions. It is just as appropriate to comment on people's past actions when they are dead as when they are alive. Nero fiddled as Rome burned, remember?
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
That's what they did
Submitted by mamabear on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 11:31pm.
NPR did comment on his past actions. They brought up the worst thing he ever said (I think). They just weren't mean enough about it for your tastes!
Ignorant
Submitted by red-sox-rudy on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 2:51pm.
The fact that you could actually say "How much time did he ever spend bashing Islam" shows you have not made even the slightest effort to know what Mr. Hitchens actually wrote or said about Islam. There was no more fierce critic of radical Islam in particular or Islam in general. So when you spout off on things without even a basic knowledge of relevant facts it reveals an magnificent level of ignorance.
Secondly he was not really contradictory about his anti-theism. The only reason he so adamantly took on religious beliefs is because of it's encroachment into areas of society where it has no business to be. There are people who believe in astrology, but unless they tried to teach it alongside astronomy he left them alone. When people try to teach unscientific rubbish like so called "intelligent design" along side actual science, then yes you are damn right, he had an opinion on what evangelicals believe. His belief was if people want to believe any of the various superstitious fairy tales without pushing it on society....knock yourselves out. Just don't try to teach that nonsense in our schools.
In he Gospels Jesus demanded
Submitted by Liberallies on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 12:09pm.
In he Gospels Jesus demanded that we pray for our enemies. Jesus explained that what makes his followers different from the rest of the world is that they not only pray for our children, as everyone thus, but that they also pray for good things to come to their enemies.
Hitchens was no friend of Christianity and he was very disrespectufl. In fact, every time I heard him speak about Christianity he was quite hateful toward it. Yes, as an Roman Catholic, I found his deplorable and digusting attacks on Mother Theresa beyond ridiculous.
However, having read Mother Theresa's word, seeing her work and her devotion to Christ, I can assure you that she would be the first one, as I have not doubt she did since she was alive when Hitchens attacked her, to forgive Mr. Hitchens and to pray a lot for him so he could enter Heaven upon his death.
Jesus never demanded anything
Submitted by CobraMan on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 12:22pm.
Jesus never demanded anything. He, like God, believed that each and every one of us has free will. He asks us to act a certain way, but never once demanded it. Only tyrants demand things, and Jesus wasn't a tyrant.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
CobraMan, God gave us all
Submitted by Liberallies on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 12:26pm.
CobraMan,
God gave us all Free Will, you are correct. But Jesus clearly states that if we do not pray for our enemies, as His followers should, we are as wicked as everyone else and we aren't any different than the wicked. Thus, part of not being wicked, is to pray for our enemies.
Should, or must?
Submitted by CobraMan on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 12:54pm.
Did Jesus say we should follow his teachings, or must follow his teachings? A "must" would be a demand, would it not? "Should," on the other hand, is advice.
Jesus didn't demand adherence to his teachings, he suggested it and gave examples of why those suggestions should be followed. But, above all, he left the decisions to us, not to him. He never demanded we do anything.
And, as for forgiveness, the only one who we need to have forgive us is God. For it is God's judgement that will decide our future, not man's. We ask GOD to forgive our "trespasses," and the "trespasses' of others, remember? One of those "trespasses" we ask forgiveness for is being, shall we say, not so lenient to the trespasses of others.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
Well, when I pray the Lord's
Submitted by Liberallies on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 2:31pm.
Well, when I pray the Lord's Pray, I pray, "...and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us..."
we must ask forgiveness from God, forgive those who trespass against us, for God will forgive us as we forgive others. He will judge us as we judge others.
And God is a very demanding God, Who gave us the Free Will to meet His demands or not.
I'm not sure I'd consider Hitchens...
Submitted by stage9 on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 12:33pm.
an "enemy" would you?
Self-deceiving and foolish perhaps, but "enemy" is not a word I would use.
"If God is dead, somebody is going to have to take his place. It will be megalomania or erotomania, the drive for power or the drive for pleasure, the clenched fist or the phallus, Hitler or Hugh Hefner." — Malcolm Muggeridge
I wouldn't, stage9
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 1:02am.
I wouldn't consider him an enemy unless his rotting corpse was polluting my well.
Oh, is Liberallies Roman Catholic?
Submitted by The Vet on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 1:18am.
Why, that is the first time we heard that...
....today.
Shocking, Vet!
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 12/19/2011 - 1:43am.
I was surprised to read it also.
Continuing in the vein of "kind and generous"....
Submitted by stage9 on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 12:23pm.
One of my fondest memories of Hitchens is his debate with Christian Apologist William Lane Craig at Biola University in 2009. By the third round of debates, Hitchens' mundane arguments had devolved into his usual railings that God was no more than an angry dictator who robs us of our freedom.
As one atheist blogger later recounted:
“Hitchens was rambling and incoherent, with the occasional rhetorical jab. Frankly, Craig spanked Hitchens like a foolish child.”
And so that evening one of the four horsemen of the "New Atheists" was exposed, not as some ominous rider inflicting wrath and judgment upon the ignorant ovis, but as a charlatan Don Quixote of philosophical thought.
Ahhh..the good ole' days.
William Lane Craig vs Christopher Hitchens - Does God Exist?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KBx4vvlbZ8
"If God is dead, somebody is going to have to take his place. It will be megalomania or erotomania, the drive for power or the drive for pleasure, the clenched fist or the phallus, Hitler or Hugh Hefner." — Malcolm Muggeridge
Rest in
Submitted by griv on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 1:32pm.
Hell, Hitch. You deserve it. :)
That was
Submitted by IRQ Conflict on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 6:28pm.
totally uncalled for.
⇒ Self-serving pap!
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 6:45pm.
Nothing short of tedious, those who puff themselves up with "Oh, I'm such a forgiving person, now that he's dead, I just absolutely adore Christopher Hitchens. In fact, there is a lovely grotto in my back yard where I've erected a statue of him. He's going to replace Thomas as the patron saint of doubters."
Get a grip! Assessing Hitchens' status in the hereafter, the best one can do is ask, as King David did of Abner, "Did [Hitchens] die as a fool dies?"
oh... a minefield, and here me without body armor
Submitted by Mark81150 on Sun, 12/18/2011 - 7:38pm.
My father always told me, he hated folks who shed crocodile tears at funerals for people whom they detested in life. I agree with that, to point out, Hitch was a hateful cad when Mother Teresa died, isn't an attack on his character, he damaged that himself multiple times. It's just speaking truth about who he was, the good and bad.
Besides,.. as I said, I liked him at times, at others, I would have loved to have stepped outside with him for a quick instruction on how he could fall down, often. He didn't just challenge peoples faith, he called them stupid and crazy, that's hard to walk back as him just being lovable old Hitch.
His friends, almost all worked with him, or drank with him, fair enough, it's easy to see a guys better qualities that way.
To us and millions of others, we know him by what he wrote, by what he said, and by what he called us. To suggest that he should get a pass on the nasty hateful things he's done, because you personally liked him..I think you miss the point anyway about Hitch, he ENJOYED getting folks he disagreed with to get angry, or hate him, he revelled in it.
It's academic anyway, God has already answered Hitch's challenges, (I hope he asked forgiveness), so he can't hear any of this.. it all boils down to folks who laughed when he ridiculed people of faith, getting bent because it's being pointed out he was particularly hateful in doing so.
That is being called an attack on Hitch, disrespectful.... as if he ever cared about respect when he was against you in an argument. As if his defenders now, cared when he was doing it.
Hitch was Hitch, he was right on a few things, dead wrong on others, and through it all, a keyboard in one hand, a drink in the other. He was at once a good friend, and a viciously cruel commentater, angel and devil.. so how about we just say what was true about him, and let it go at that,..
I do hope, he found forgiveness,.. I don't wish Hell on anyone.
Scabrous Nuns!
Submitted by Ylooshi on Tue, 01/24/2012 - 12:03am.
I should think that a scabrous nun would always deserve "bashing."
Thank you, Christopher Hitchens, for having the courage to do so. And thank you, Tim Graham, showing him correct thus far. You are clearly put-off by criticism of the scabrous nun, mother Theresa, but you omit any legitimate counter-critique of "The Missionary Position" or "Hell's Angel."