Friday, April 13, 2012

It's Christopher Hitchens Day. However, Who Is The Anti-Hitchens?

Today, April 13th, is the birthday of Christopher Hitchens (13 April 1949 – 15 December 2011), and being recognized by some atheists as Christopher Hitchens Day. I went down to my public library yesterday and picked up Arguably Essays By Christopher Hitchens. After reading a few pieces I received an education on the history of George Orwell's Animal Farm (did you know that American soldiers gave copies of the book to the Russians immediately after WW2 so that the Soviets could burn them?), and that John Brown, often depicted as that madman who attacked Harper's Ferry just before the US Civil War, was more crazy like a fox than simply crazy? And of course, Hitchens' prose was as a joy to consume.

But one question burns in my mind.

Who is the anti-Hitchens?

What public figure would be the negative image of Hitch?

I posed this question last night on Facebook and Twitter and got a few suggestions. Here are a few of them in no particular order.

Pat Robertson

This man, if nothing else, is able to bundle together Bronze Age mentality in a suite and tie.  I was on Atheist Revolution yesterday and saw this compilation of Robertson's inspired pearls of wisdom.

Darth Ratzinger

Otherwise known by his other name: Pope Benedict XVI. The man runs a worldwide criminal organization that disseminates lies, protects pedophiles, undermines democracy and considers itself moral enough to tell you not to use birth control because it is an abomination to a God that doesn't exist. This is the man who said that the native population of South America were secretly longing for the Christianity brought to them by European colonizers.

Anjem Choudhary

I'll be honest when this name was mentioned I had no idea who he was. Now I do. Mr. Chopudhary, well, I think I'll let his work speak for him.
The shariah4hind project has over the last few weeks taken the call for shari’ah across India, reminding Muslims and putting on notice non-Muslims that authority belongs to Muslims and sovereignty solely to Allah (SWT) Alhamdulillah (Praise be to Allah). - from  THE SHARIAH 4 HIND CAMPAIGN WILL CONTINUE UNTIL ISLAM RULES INDIA!
Note the use of caps. Impressive.

Here is what the man has to say about himself.

I am a Muslim and I am a follower of Ahl us-Sunnah wal Jamma’ah i.e. those Muslims who follow the Qur’an and the Sunnah (i.e. the sayings, actions and consent of the Messenger Muhammad (saw)) according to the understanding of the Sahabah (i.e. his companions). 
I believe that Islam is something that we must believe in (Tawheed), live by (Shari’ah) and be willing to call for and sacrifice for (by way of Daw’ah and Jihad). 

As a Muslim I believe that Islam is superior and will never be surpassed by any other belief or ideology in every aspect of life. There is no better way of life for mankind than that of Al-Islam. Indeed Islam has a solution to every single problem that mankind faces or could face from the time of the Messenger Muhammad (saw) until the day of judgement.  
I believe that one day Britain and indeed every part of the world (including the rest of Europe, USA, China and Russia etc…) will be governed by and under the authority of the Muslims implementing Islamic Law. This is something that I believe in and strive to see Insha’Allah.

 William Lane Craig (WLC)

William Lane Craig,  an many of you probably know, is the Christian apologist and debater. Here is part one of his debate with Sam Harris from 2011.You can say one thing about WLC is that the man can at least wrap genocide in a neat little package. Here is what this Christian had to say about the slaughter of women and children by ancient Israelites.

I think that a good start at this problem is to enunciate our ethical theory that underlies our moral judgements. According to the version of divine command ethics which I’ve defended, our moral duties are constituted by the commands of a holy and loving God. Since God doesn’t issue commands to Himself, He has no moral duties to fulfill. He is certainly not subject to the same moral obligations and prohibitions that we are. For example, I have no right to take an innocent life. For me to do so would be murder. But God has no such prohibition. He can give and take life as He chooses. We all recognize this when we accuse some authority who presumes to take life as “playing God.” Human authorities arrogate to themselves rights which belong only to God. God is under no obligation whatsoever to extend my life for another second. If He wanted to strike me dead right now, that’s His prerogative. 
What that implies is that God has the right to take the lives of the Canaanites when He sees fit. How long they live and when they die is up to Him.
If you think it couldn't get worse, you are dead wrong.

But why take the lives of innocent children?  The terrible totality of the destruction was undoubtedly related to the prohibition of assimilation to pagan nations on Israel’s part. In commanding complete destruction of the Canaanites, the Lord says, “You shall not intermarry with them, giving your daughters to their sons, or taking their daughters for your sons, for they would turn away your sons from following me, to serve other gods” (Deut 7.3-4)
See, killing kids is perfectly alright as long as God tells you to. It's right there in the good book.

Kirk Cameron

Truly his logic and knowledge is beyond all comprehesnion. Here is Kirk discussing the moral complexities of homosexuality.

Kirk doesn't speak in this piece, but he is on the right smiling and agreeing with the absurd argument that bananas are the proof that evolution is not true.

There are many other candidates to be the anti-Hitchens.

Do you have any suggestions?



  1. Mother Theresa. It has to be Mother Theresa.

    Speaking of Kirk Cameron . . . Check this out:

    1. A close friend of mine went to the Harvard Humanist Group Group a few Sundays ago and listened to a woman who had been a nun and worked ounder Mother Theresa. Mother Theresa was simply an evil little woman from what the speaker said. The good mother didn't want to bring people out of poverty, but wished that the poor would come to know Jesus through their suffering.

  2. To be the anti-Hitchens you'd have to be religious and dovish. Mother Theresa seems to fit, or Daniel Berrigan or Thomas Gumbleton.

    I'm a leftist first and a secularist second, and didn't have a particularly high opinion of Hitchens.

  3. Me too.. I never cared too much for the guy.. Oh well.

  4. The Anti-Hitchens is clearly Mother Theressa.

    Hitchens = authentic
    Mother Theressa= fraud and a hypocrite

    Hitchens claimed to offend many, but liberates them instead. Mother Theressa claimed to help many, but enslaved them in torturous "hospital" beds wallowing in pain and denied access to real medical treatment.

    Hitchens respected and promoted reason and civilization. Mother Theresa respected and promoted ignorance and poverty.

    And finally, Hitchens embrassed life and celebrated the sensual. Mother Theressa scorned life and celebrated pain and suffering.


Google+ Badge

Pageviews last month