There was an error in this gadget

Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Hitchens on Clinton

I haven't posted much (anything, really) on U.S. politics in a while and I didn't intend to start with a shot at the Clintons but I love Hitchens.

1 comment:

Glenn said...

Loving Hitchens

Christopher Hitchens is an interesting guy. Since James Burnham and Milovan Djilas, the best right-wing polemicists have been former left-wingers. There's no enthusiasm like that of a convert.

Hitchens is one of the authors - Richard Dawkins is another one - who have recently published books debunking God. Hitchens' book sounds interesting.

I am in the middle of my self-imposed moratorium on buying or borrowing new books, so I'll have to wait to read Hitchens' book on religion. From what I've seen in reviews, though, I suspect he's taking a pragmatic approach.

Adler - and, I have since seen, hundreds of conservatives - use as an argument for the existence of God, that belief in God is a useful thing for maintaining order in society. That argument is, of course, a non-sequitur. Just because it is good that people believe in God, doesn't mean that there really is a God to believe in.

On the other hand, from what I've read, Hitchens argues that religion has all these terrible consequences: wars, persecutions, genocide, terrorism. It would be better that people not believe in God. While that might be true, neither people's non-belief in God, nor any social advantages of non-belief in God, mean that there is no God.

Nope, proofs of the existence or non-existence of God must be independent of the consequences of belief or non-belief.

One of the books I was working on when I established a cut-off was So Help Me God, by Forrest Church. It has many examples of the manner in which the established churches of New England supported the Federalists, and establishments of religion, as supporting social order - if not stasis.

(By the way, you have a nice facility of using links in your blog. I need to work on that.)