Interesting debate, Christopher Hitchens and Al Sharpton

The ever-outspoken Christopher Hitchens, publicising his recently published book entitled 'God Is Not Great - How Religion Poisons Everything' enters a debate with the Rev Al Sharpton.

The full, free, video can be viewed here at fora.tv and makes for fascinating viewing. I think it makes a pleasant change to see an interview or debate from the USA conducted in a polite erudite manner with no raised voices, and in front of an audience which is equally attentive and respectful. There's no whooping and hollering here - and applause doesn't appear after every other sentence, unlike in other places and on other shows.

The discussion is definitely worth watching. No big final agreement is arrived at, as you can expect - since the subject is, partially:
1) the existence of deity/deities and for the greater part the possibility of the existence of moral frameworks outside the influence of religious instructions or teachings and
2) of the problems (vagueness, contradictory teachings) with moral frameworks as set up by religious instructions.

Unsurprisingly perhaps, the debate takes mostly a focus on Christianity, Judaism and Islam when religious texts are referred to - the other major world religions like Hinduism and Buddhism aren't referred to as far as I can recall.

Nevertheless, both of the fellows taking part in the debate make very decent points - and Rev Al Sharpton, as the fellow defending religion and religiously-oriented morality, makes some concessions that I did not expect him to give - and I give him full credit for doing so. I had expected him to be a whole lot more dogmatic than he was.

At any rate there is a good deal of humour there - Christopher Hitchens is a fairly controversial character, and has a fairly powerful bite with some unusually strongly held views on various matters. None of them appear to be founded from the shaky foundations of a position of illogical or kneejerk reactionism; he can, and often does, back up his views with vigorous and convincing arguments. Convincing even if in the event that you finally disagree with whatever is his final conclusion.

To give an illustration of his unwillingness to bow to convention when he has decided such 'convention' is illogical or distasteful, view the following video. He is asked to give his views following the recent death of the rather notorious 'Rev' Jerry Falwell:
youtube video of Hitchens interview

You can also read Hitchen's full views at Slate, where he has a column: http://www.slate.com/id/2166337/

Quite outspoken, but entertaining.