Here’s a 12 minute debate with Sam Harris between Hugh Hewitt:
I love Hewitt’s final response: “You’re not that smart.” That means, “I’m out of decent arguments.”
I thought Harris did very well for them misconstruing his book as a polemic to persecute Christians. Christians have some kind of persecution complex — everything is a means to persecute them!
(via Atheist Media)
“you’re not that smart”??!! That is the best he can do?!
Silly fundies…always sherry-picking their truth.
Really, all Sam had to do to Hewitt was press him to provide concrete, irrefutable evidence of the existence of his Superfriend in the Sky.
God exists cause I said so sam!!!! Thats pretty much what I summarized out of his last few comments. What a putz!!
Oh, that was awesome. Sam Harris is my hero. I love how Hewitt said some really insulting, mistaken things about Sam’s book, but Sam remained completely calm the entire time. And he completely took Hewitt to task for his selective reading of the New Testament. It’s obvious that Hewitt felt so threatened he had to lash out and try to win the upper hand by insulting Harris’s character.
I thought Harris played the whole thing brilliantly. And, I must note that Strobel was quite fair, especially for a show called “Faith Under Fire”.
Hugh Hewit is an ass for JayZeuz
Money quote:
“That’s why God continues to involve himself in people’s lives, despite the best efforts of utopians.”
So, God continues to interfere in order to spite our efforts to build a better future and a better civilization?
Yay, God, if he existed.
Agreed. I kept looking at Harris’ face everytime Hewitt would attack his book or his character, and he stayed straightfaced and calm.
It drove me crazy how when the host would ask about a topic, Harris would address it, and Hewitt would respond with just a general attack on his book and his ideas without addressing the specific topic.
What does Sam mean when he says that it is sometimes ethical to kill people for their BELIEFS? (p.52-53 of TEOF)
Not actions, BELIEFS?
Just wondering.
Oh, and he also makes rationalizations for the pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons, torture, and for more war in the middle east.
Can you tell us if you support that?
If so, is he planning on enlisting or has he already served?
@Jim: I didn’t realize you had to agree with someone completely to think they make good points! How interesting!
Seriously though, I think he makes good points about that if you read it in context and not just a few quotes people throw out. If it comes down to striking first and living, or being stuck first and dying, I’ll take striking first. Any sane person would.
But I hope it never comes to that and fundamentalist Muslims grow up into at least the 17th century.
Anyone else tired of the Christian majority acting persecuted?
It’s annoying that Mr. Hewitt couldn’t answer any of Mr. Harris’s questions without a question itself, or the phrase, “you’re asking the wrong question.”
How about, “you’re giving the wrong answer (loser)”?
I always wonder how much longer people of faith are going to be able to watch arguments like these and not have doubts about their faith. Sam Harris brings up so many different points that are dismissed by Hewitt’s leaps of faith and “that doesn’t happen in my religion” arguments.
Parts of this dialogue are down-right terrifying.
When Hewitt is speaking about reformations he says they are best when coupled with political reformations and revolutions. What happened to the separation of church and state? Hugh Hewitt scares me in this interview, but it seems indicative of a growing sentiment, a sort of “playing-the-victim” on the part of many American protestants.