Soylent Green Is People!!!

I was at TownHall.com just now following a link from Instapundit about the Lileks debacle (the Minneapolis Star-Tribune newspaper has reassigned its best writer as a local-stories reporter) when I ran across this link: Why ATHEISTS are 1000% percent out to lunch...

And yes, it's the usual drivel.  Kevin McCullough criticizes Christopher Hitchens for making "consistent strawman arguments" against religion, then comes up with this:

In Hitchens' own life, he wants it both ways.  He wants to acknowledge the evil of Islamic radicalism; he wants to fight a war against Jihad; but he's not willing to say that evil has a source.  He wants to say that we should be outraged and fight for the protection of our future, but if there is no good and there is no evil - and if there is no God there is neither of those - then there can't be any rationale for saying that their way of believing is any different than ours, therefore if they want to murder us, they should be allowed to.

(My transcription.)

How about a rational rationale?  How about the concept that we'd rather not be murdered?  Does that make no headway with you, Mr McCullough?  Are you really unable to distinguish between the ethical and moral values of Islamic extremism and Western civilization without reference to your personal religious beliefs?

Sheesh. I do love this exchange, though, from the comments on a linked (and equally clueless) post:

Pesky Purple wrote:

You guys forget about the soul. And there's no explaining away that one.

To doubt it's existence would be to doubt every artistic contribution made since the dawn of time.

Uncle Alby wrote:

I will ask you to explain why a soul is required for the creation of art, as opposed to, say, insanity.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at 12:51 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Post contains 292 words, total size 3 kb.