macarion (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

they didn't censor his comment on hannity and colmes at all!

fringefries (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Reason will lose in the end because the promise of eternity in the face of such overwhelming poverty and despair in the world is king.The discussions are important, but we're ultimately doomed because the world prefers it's delusions to it's enlightenment. The game is rigged and our insanity is the carnival barker who has put cotton in the miniature bowling balls so we can't knock down all of the pins at once no matter how hard we try. Our booby prize? A cross dressing pet rock with a lazy eye.

baronmorris (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

that D'nesh D'Souza sure is a deluded lisping gas bag with a stick up his ass.

haldor72 (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Despite all the evidence in its favor the theory of evolution still has some explaining to do. One is on the issue of house cats, which have no evolutionary record and may in fact be the spawn of Satan. Another is Ann Coulter, who may actually be Satan. A third puzzle for scientists is the existence of George W. Bush, which may prove that not only is there a God, but that he is a prick.

DETPower (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

People check out ProphetTv here on youtube...

roystonito (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

Hitchens is using Teresa as an example of the arrogant way people do deeds in the name of god, claiming they know his wishes. Her capacity to doubt and claim that she could not "bring herself" to recognise god in this world is a rejection of an interested, compassionate god that judaism (and other creeds) refers to. Maybe she still harboured a belief in some kind of energetic interconnectivity....who knows...Hitchens puts her on the stand because she is idolised and becuase she should not be

terrec (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

year def in your reading iam not trying to prove god to you. Iam refuting hitchens as misleading. I got enough reasons to challenge his credibility ( like i have mentioned). WTF are you even talking about anyways? "Out of a seemingly related phenomena" so your telling me if i got robbed at gunpoint, it would be stupid for the police to arrest the suspect because he doesnt have the gun anymore. Use logic use rational things repeat themselves.

gr0mithtimon (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

"If my second part.. ..were found?"I don't have to disprove assertions made out of thin air about seemingly unrelated phenomena. The burden is on you to show there is actually such a connection as you asserted. You do not win by default if i can't answer your every question.This is exactly what Hitchens means when he says we prefer a junk explanation to no explanation.I have no idea why he published the book now, my best guess would be that he had to write it before he could publish it.

terrec (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

If my second part has no connection can you tell me why he jumped on this specifically in the time in an american war several years after her death and even a further amount of time after the letters were found? he stood up and directly lied about the episcopal church and its congregation on cnn before. it may seem or is prejudice but this man has a history of presenting loose if not flase facts, and ill admit i dont know everything about the letters,the logical thing to do is challenge him.

terrec (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)

I have read the the letters i have read spent some time reading hitchens book i know what he says. theres severe differentiation between what he concludes and what she says. sure you can assume they mean the same thing but only if you have a conclusion you are trying to grab at and preplaned. iam accusing hitchensof beating on the bush on this one like he has before.