Could be that you are good looking also. But at my age eatting an apple is somewhat difficult.
Ecclesiastes 3:18 I said in mine heart concerning the estate of the sons of men, that God might manifest them, and that they might see that they themselves are beasts.
Posts: 2188 | Location: Kingsford, MI USA | Registered: 06-13-02
This is a variant of an argument a former poster here named weeful used to make: Only religious believers can be moral. Of course, much depends on what is meant by moral; codes change. Burning herectics was once believed to be doing the person a favor. Same with forced conversions of Jews. The Roman Church has a miserable history as regards the morality of its adherents; particularly its hierarchy and officials. I'm hard-pressed to even find a moral god in the OT, given his antics.
Posts: 8296 | Location: On Vacation | Registered: 06-06-02
Originally posted by philalethist: But at my age eatting an apple is somewhat difficult.
I'm sure I could purée it for you, Phil, or you could just suck it.
Of course we can have morals without God. I was listening to Christopher Hitchens speak on the CBC yesterday. He was discussing the ten commandments and made some interesting comments. How moral is a god that commands us to love him and one another, but fear him, too? As Hitchens said, that smacks ( ) of a sadomasochistic relationship. I'm not a big fan of Hitchen's style, but he makes some good points. Christopher Hitchens on morality
It is written: that fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. So therefore if you understood what the fear of the lord really is you would sing and dance to a different tune.
But then one must know who God is to understand it fully. You see the fear of the Lord is that you will slip up and screw up your own life.
I could also give one a new perspective on the ten commandments that made sence.
Posts: 2188 | Location: Kingsford, MI USA | Registered: 06-13-02
As for your clip (URL) the first words out of his mouth were "If there be no God " , and if that be so then there is no him. Secondly if God be dead then so is he. Now you seen him on the vidio so let it be known that he is a bold face lier.
Posts: 2188 | Location: Kingsford, MI USA | Registered: 06-13-02
Liar or not, Hitchens has a point. He doesn't, it seems to me, to be lying as much as churchmen do in the course of their employment.
Morals? Humans have 'morals' for the same reason that ants have 'morals' or meerkats have 'morals'. It's of evolutionary benefit to have a code.It ensures survival and the best outcome for the group to which they belong and, ultimately, the species. Some humans don't like to think of behaviour in that way. Religion is no more than an ancillary device for bringing unity to the tribe and dissuading individuals from not conforming.As such, it may itself be a by-product of evolution. We've lost our tails and most of our body hair but we've kept religions.We may eventually shed those, too.
I have always gotten a kick out of Hitchens, as has he. He did screw up in saying there wasn't a Roman census...there was in 6 CE, but it did not affect the Galilee, so Joseph had no reason to go to Bethlehem, except to validate Luke's story. He also seems to imply all the Gospels have a Nativity story.
On a tangential note, I think Sharpton should give up debate and stick to chasing race cards.
Posts: 8296 | Location: On Vacation | Registered: 06-06-02
Is Hitchens British or English? Gosh! How presumptuous of him to affect so. He's never sounded English (or British, whatever accent that might require) to me .
Sorry to say, but you aren't part of the equation. Hitchens is giving his spiel to American audiences, whom he believes--and with some justification--are impressed by an intellectually sounding British accent. This conveniently relieves him of the responsibility of checking his "facts."
Posts: 8296 | Location: On Vacation | Registered: 06-06-02
'Hitchens was educated at the independent The Leys School, Cambridge, his mother arguing , "If there is going to be an upper class in this country, then Christopher is going to be in it"[12], and Balliol College, Oxford, where he read philosophy, politics, and economics...
...After emigrating to the United States in 1981, Hitchens wrote for The Nation.'wikipedia
Hitchins moved to the US in his thirties. If his accent doesn't sound authentically English, it's maybe because he's putting on an American one. Or did he never quite get the hang of an Oxbridge accent?
Or did he never quite get the hang of an Oxbridge accent?
Ask Fred.
I've never heard of an 'Oxbridge accent'.His accent is affected and rather odd. It has the air of an actor trying to sound like a squire from the Shires of fifty years ago. But, if that's what plays well in the States....
His history , as given in wikipedia, tells a Briton a lot. He was born in Portsmouth, a naval town on the South West coast.If his family were living there, it was a strange decision to send him right across to the other side of the country to board at an obscure minor Public School in Cambridge.His mother's argument " If there's to be an upper class in Britain, Christopher is going to be in it" says a) she is a social climber b) she is deluded if she thinks The Leys bespeaks 'upper class'.It's not Harrow or Winchester c) she could get her boy into The Leys, which is,at least a Public School, and that was a first step on the ladder. I don't think Winchester , Harrow or Eton, all much nearer than Cambridge, were on the menu !
He went to Oxford. There he read 'modern greats' for his degree.He got a third class degree. Nobody at Oxford fails the degree, the University being too tactful for that, they award a third.It means that you must have fallen far below the academic standard or been performing quite exceptionally poorly in your years there. Candidates for the Bar would not, normally, be accepted with a third. We understand it as the code for 'failed'.The standard degree is a second class, divided into two grades. 2(1) for is a good student who has performed very well. 2(2) is for everyone else. A First is for geniuses !)
He chose a career as a journalist. (Well, that proves it! )
It's a modern tragedy; in childhood Hitchins would have had to switch between his 'real' accent when with his peers from Portsmouth, and the posher one of his not-quite-good-enough public school. Going to Oxford, he'd have discovered that what he thought was his posh accent didn't quite cut it with the snobs there, who'd all been to proper public schools.
Then, in his Socialist Worker years, Hitchin would have probably had to try to resurrect his plebeian accent - maybe attempting that fake, generic 'Estuary accent' of upper class politicians and entertainers looking for the common touch. No doubt everyone was sniggering behind his back.
Finally, he escapes to America, where he fondly believes accents won't matter, and finds out that everyone wants him to sound 'British'.
Originally posted by newnickname: It's a modern tragedy; in childhood Hitchins would have had to switch between his 'real' accent when with his peers from Portsmouth, and the posher one of his not-quite-good-enough public school. Going to Oxford, he'd have discovered that what he thought was his posh accent didn't quite cut it with the snobs there, who'd all been to proper public schools.
Not quite so, NNN. He would have lost his local accent, or that of his parents, on going to The Leys.
At The Leys his peers would all, each and every one, have spoken with a perfectly accepted accent, Received Pronunciation, 'posh' , call it what you will, which was perfectly fine for Cambridge or Oxford and would pass without comment.It's a Public School accent. It would certainly 'cut it' there.His teachers at The Leys would speak it. Other boys' parents would speak it and they themselves would speak it. Those whose parents did not speak it soon had a boy of 14 who did ! That was one 'benefit' in sending the boy there.Children do speak a common language, and fit in with their peers.At best they do so naturally. At worst, a child from Stoke-on-Trent would be teased for saying 'coop' for 'cup' and promptly start saying 'kupp' like the others did.
He would never feel inferior on that account. There are subtleties between the vocabularies and accent in some Public Schools; our daughter ( Hill House, Roedean, and St Mary's, Calne) claims to tell Eton from Harrow and both from Winchester and Rugby, but I sense her real distinction lies elsewhere. With 'old' people I can spot Harrow but the real and obvious difference is not in Professor Higgins 'street from street' but the ethos and attitude of the finished product. Harrovians have an air of the raffish about them from day one to the day they die! And Wykehamists all have a caring air in everything they do.[ The Harrovian offers a chair to the visiting lady, the Wykehamist fetches it and the Etonian promptly sits on it!] The Leys has no 'house style' that I know of, not in product or specialty (St Paul's is for brilliant brains, Gordonstoun is for outdoor toughies, Winchester for artistic types and so on).However, a Leysian would not feel inferior on that account and though he might be irritated by the arrogant stupidity, and wealth, of some Etonians there; most of them are not like that.Once he was a Balliol man he was an Oxford man for life, with all the benefits that entailed (even with a 3rd!). Think of the contacts, let alone the image!
Another benefit of Public School was ease of entry to Oxbridge. Hitchens' mother would know that, too. The Schools used to have closed scholarships, places at Oxbridge reserved for boys from their School. State schools are still under represented there to this day. The Public Schools have the time, the resources, and the habit of educating boys widely with a strong emphasis on building self-confidence and calmness and an ability to speak in public and conduct conversation of a high level with anyone on anything. State schools do not, and in an Oxbridge interview those attributes count for a lot.You need the A grades in exams now but these skills may well swing a decision
I suspect Hitchens has reinvented himself for an American audience. He has a stage persona, plays up and exaggerates imperiousness and opinionated arrogance, complete with a barking accent and delivery.Here we'd wonder what had gone wrong! He is, to that extent not English but a creation of his own which plays as English to Americans. I doubt whether he uses those mainstays of British speech (and Britishness) understatement, self-deprecation and irony much !
PS He wouldn't have adopted Estuary English when being a Trotskyist. Our finest communists have been Public School types.The working class didn't, in truth, have much to do with it. Now Anthony Wedgwood Benn, is a fine example of the old Labour left. He is and always was as posh as they come. Michael Foot, another far lefty,and once leader of the Labour Party was always the same. All the best commies in Britain were Oxbridge men. They were the intellectual leaders of the working class and would never have attempted to speak like them. That is a modern development in some politicians (Sarkozy in France does it, Blair here did it, somewhat. When Harold Wilson did it, that didn't count. That was how he did speak, as a boy. He was working class, for all his Oxbridge refined Northern accent !)
) of a sadomasochistic relationship.
Gosh! How presumptuous of him to affect so. He's never sounded English (or British, whatever accent that might require) to me .
