Dale Chawkins you’re using that term loosely. The abuse allegations against him were so numerous (including what he’s still being investigated for as of late april) that despite the deep pockets of the church, he still had to come before the law, and escape by the skin of his teeth. Not to mention the cabal of abuse that he supported, facilitated, and condoned as archbishop.
@@jacklarm2170 Define cruel, bad, and evil. After all, you cannot define the opposite of something if that certain something doesn't even exist to begin with.
@@jacklarm2170 I think this extract may be of some value to you; "The presence of morality within the human condition, or rather, the presence of evil, is actually evidence for the existence of God, rather than against it. For how could I even know that evil existed, or how could I even find displeasure in it, if I had not known what good was? And as evil is simply a privation of good, for evil to exist means that good must also exist. And for there to be any form of objective good in the universe, there must be a standard (grounded on the ontological level) of which we refer to when making moral actions. If there is no God who created the universe, then there is no purpose within said universe. You may argue that there is purpose in eating food, or more relevant to the discussion, making moral actions, according to your own arbitrary desires and whims, but this is like saying that a screw that is screwed within a machine has a purpose, but the machine in which the screw was screwed has no purpose. If the purpose of the screw is found within the object in which it is screwed, how then can it have a purpose if the object in which it was screwed is purposeless? Purpose derived from purposelessness is no purpose at all. If there is no divine lawgiver (through his nature we gain our objective morality, and through his commands, we gain our obligations), then how can good and evil exist? If I evolved just as a lion did, why is it objectively wrong for me to commit infanticide as a lion does? You must either have an objective reference for your morality in order to justify it, or you must simply assert that objective morals do not exist. This is a position no atheist can take, however, as claims such as, “SEPARATE CHURCH AND STATE!”, or “DON’T FORCE YOUR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS DOWN MY THROAT!”, are almost certainly moral claims in need of justification in order to even merit a response. "
John historical sex offence and u have cast judgment already because u can't wait for the official verdict because he obviously defeated Dawkins in this debate.be patient for the verdict.historical sex offences my foot
Multiple people have accused him of sex offences, and we already know that he was covering up for paedophile priests, so it's not difficult to see where this is going.
John let the courts do their job first.it is not always the first person who goes to court that must win the case.why do the liberal leftwing media like passing the media-verdict publicly which suits their agenda? even to convict bill Cosby is a problem after the media already sentenced him to death.
Is it a delusion if billions of people believe? Honestly, your the delusional one. The universe came from nothing and we just happened. That's crap. Sorry. Anyone believes that, they are not to be trusted with anything to be honest.
@@alalakjakaja5793 I'm not sure you know what an appeal means. You cannot have a high court decision reversed unless you are found innocent(in this case).
It's all about semantics. Nazi party is definitely a religion in itself. Giddens asserted that Vulgar Marxism in Soviet era was a form of 'secular religion'. It all comes down to defining atheism; is it non-belief or 'faith in science' ??
Ante Mesin almost half of the German soldiers who committed the atrocities against their own people were of Christian denomination though. That fact is irrefutable. In first chapter of Mein Kampf, Hitler describes himself as doing “god’s work”.
I've read Mein Kampf. In the middle ages one would be burned on a stake for some of the 'religious statements' made there. Nazi ideology was Darwinian through and through. Denomination is not a belief, simply imposition of state morals. I hope this does not happen to atheists, one thing is defending the right of non-belief and keeping faith out of science, quite another to try and 'change the world for the better'. It is a sure way of becoming a denomination. With the 'scientist' as the clergy. A chance there for possible neo-fascist empire? With the muslim taking the place of the jew?
@@Kitiwake so if you want to see a great debate watch Christopher Hitchens and Stephen Frye eviscerate the Catholic church right to the face of Ann Whitcomb and a Cardinal . The debate is "is the Catholic church a force for good in the world"... yes..I know, without watching you already know it's not, but to hear the intelligence of a well educated, humanitarian, secular, anti theist voice over the ear piercing drivel and weak points made by Catholic leadership is awesome. .. you can see the brainwashing crumble off of the Catholic sheeple in the audience...
The fact that his conviction was overturned doesn't prove his innocence. It merely proves that the judiciary system can make mistakes. Ponder this...... A boy child you don't know comes to you and tells you a man you know has abused him. The man you know comes to you and tells you he didn't abuse the child. The boy presents solid evidence. The man presents counter weak evidence. One of these is telling the truth One is lying There are two major factors....who gains more by lying and is it possible to mistake another's character? When posed the sacreligious question from Frank Turek.."Where does evil come from?..." Christopher Hitchens simply retorted...."Religion!".
@@rickallen9167 Yes, it does, because he was let by the Vatican and pope to be accused for paedophilia, because he spoke against so many things happening in Vatican... knowing how morons like you, who never question anything, would react even without evidence of his crimes. While, your atheistic hero, Dawkins, states that any pig is worth more than human embryo, that there should possibility to kill an infant after the birth if he develops uncurable illness, he also claims that paedophilia is ok. "In a recent interview with the Times magazine, Richard Dawkins attempted to defend what he called "mild paedophilia," which, he says, he personally experienced as a young child and does not believe causes "lasting harm." Dawkins went on to say that one of his former school masters "pulled me on his knee and put his hand inside my shorts," and that to condemn this "mild touching up" as sexual abuse today would somehow be unfair. "I am very conscious that you can't condemn people of an earlier era by the standards of ours. Just as we don't look back at the 18th and 19th centuries and condemn people for racism in the same way as we would condemn a modern person for racism, I look back a few decades to my childhood and see things like caning, like mild paedophilia, and can't find it in me to condemn it by the same standards as I or anyone would today," he said. Plus, he added, though his other classmates also experienced abuse at the hands of this teacher, "I don't think he did any of us lasting harm." You should be ashamed for being indoctrinated imbecile you are.
Simply being able to ask "Why we are here" doesn't make it a valid question. This is such good logic. There's no way the audience should have laughed at that.
In December 2018, a jury found him guilty of sexually abusing two 13-year-old choir boys in private rooms of St Patrick's Cathedral in the mid-90s - when the cleric was Archbishop of Melbourne.
blindtoby no that’s not it is ! Looking for gold is a real thing looking god is billshit 😂😂😂 look as hard as want you ain’t gonna find and nobody could know what god look a like because he is a fictional character in a historical book ! That some idiots are to stupid to forget about
James Royle okay, so you assume nothing created everything? And life “somehow” appeared? And you’re calling us idiots 🤦♂️. Where did the time, space, matter, energy and life come from? From your dumb mind? Yeah sure, “very logical”. You’re the fool here
The topic of the debate is _"Does religious belief make the world a better place?"_ I'd like to hear the answers to that question, from the boys that Cardinal George Pell sexually abused.
@@danielwoulfe4280 Yet in Islam - Muhammad slept with a child, and in Christianity a "hOlY gHoSt" impregnated a teenage virgin. Pathetic..religion is the epitome of stupidity and delusion.
Here is one reason there is suffering. 1 John 5:19 says the whole world is in the power of Satan - the wicked one. 2nd reason is that Adam and Eve wanted to decide for themselves what was right and wrong and that involved mankind wanting to rule independently from God. The results have been thousands of years of suffering. There is another important reason I haven’t time to explain.
Grumpy Oldfart . Thanks for your response grumpy. The comment was for those who want answers from the Bible. Your entitled to think that. Have a nice day.
@@MRK1973 1. God is supposed to have created everything including Satan are you saying Satan is more powerful than your god if so he obviously isn't omnipotent! 2.It has been scientifically proven that it is impossible for a whole civilization to propagate from just one human couple! This go's for the Noahs ark story as well there would not have been enough genetic diversity and children would end up with genetic mutations before to long. There is also not enough water on the earth to cover the whole land mass!
@@MRK1973 You are so full of shit:/ Satan, ]if you believe this rubbish] is a "fallen" angel. Good work from a supposedly all knowing god,lol. He never saw that coming, hahahahah
I've noticed a harsh reality... There are very few Trump fans who can tolerate logic of Dawkins' level. This truly reinforces Trump himself saying that he would appeal to Republicans due to their low intelligence if he ran for president.
Hahaha there is no hell,made up completely false doctrine by churches it's based on immortality of the soul the bible clearly says man became a living soul, now what about the spirit you may ask, the bible clearly states they are completely different things, check it out yourself, so dont worry anymore about.
The stark contrast between Dawkins' eloquent command of English and Pell's dithering bumbling failure to speak or make a comprehensible statment belies the relative understanding each has on a subject of which one claims to be an authority, the other a rational examiner.
Dawkins admits to not having read the bible cover to cover but he can discuss it all perfectly well as he has a general understanding. When Pell decided to concede that humans likely evolved from Neanderthals he fully exposed the fact that he is ignorant of the actual process and evidence for evolution... Neanderthals being cousins of ours, not something we evolved from. Dawkins pulled him on it and he tried to cockily joke it off, the man is a top blagger
Ejembi Moses Your 'god' is either vile, immoral or imaginary - which is it, or can you think of any more excuses for its total failure to do anything that is claimed.
Jack bassman anything like what? like the cardinal said,if u have the freedom to be good, it means u have total freedom to do evil too,and your actions will be judged at the end of your time here. what do u want God to do for your u?or what kind of proof are u looking for?
Pell got a better response from the audience during the introduction than Dawkins. One man dedicated his life to hard work, debate and science, the other abused children and lectured morality.
@@carolinafine8050 Only a royal commission findings he was complacent in the abuse. Tell me Carol if you know someone is a murderer and you assist in the cover up wouldn't you be complacent in the crime? The only naive child is you. Christ help you Carol
@@justdoit1726 so you don’t say “he abused children” now, just that he was complacent in it. See how easy it was to move you one step back? Also, more proof which is easily obtainable would have you moving back even further…: while you desperately cling to your baseless acrimony. This is what happens when you foist an ostensible justifying narrative over your prejudice. And, just because you use some parallel with murder doesn’t mean it actually sticks. Heck, you’ve already been shown to abandon one silly position.
@@carolinafine8050 Congratulations Carol you have effectively split hairs for a man who conclusively protected child abusers from justice, is that "silly" to you Carol? What do you think that kind of man does in his spare time? Collect trains and fix cars? And why do you think he protected several child abusers in the first place? It's not to hard to connect the dots. HOWEVER you did get me to "step back" whatever that means. And in doing so have gotten behind your computer once more to add a sequel to your defense of a man who definitely, without a shadow of a doubt aided in the suffering of children and allowed pedophiles to continue committing henious crimes within the church, and more than likely did it himself. Not sure what skin you have in the game here Carol, but Christ help you.
I watched this because my plumber was preaching to me about how the cardinal “destroyed” Richard Dawkins intellectually. Sorry. Don’t see that at all. If anything I see the opposite even with the moderator saving the cardinal many times.
Ha! Pel sits there with his sanctimonious speech and tells us the bible teaches us how to live a good and righteous life Shame he forgot to read it. Nasty human
Did anyone else notice how Dawkins focuses on answering the questions the best he can, while Pell juste criticize Dawkins' way of thinking and evades the questions by only speaking of the religion in a good way?
@@allstarwatt7246 because religions rely on fantasy and superstitions which can never be substantiated! Pure nonsense and mumbojumbo! Example Methuselah 900+ years old????? In the bronze ages?? Pure fantasy! While the religious get indoctrination to believe these fallacies!
What I saw is a philosopher debating the scientism and strawman of Dawkins. The most interesting part is Dawkins backtracking from his claim that science can answer the WHY question. Then later said why the question is silly. Without the why question morality disappears. The same man says we have to make up our meaning of life. Has he ever read anything about subjectivity and Relativity? And the implications? Scientists of today have very poor knowledge of philosophy.
@@auxtas If you’re discussing the morality in philosophy, of course scientists have poor experience in this field, because it is entirely irrelevant to what they are doing. The “meaning of life” question itself doesn’t really matter, as there is no evidence for a god, life doesn’t have a meaning except for living or existing, or the evolutionary traits that can be concluded as normal in the species. Dawkins perfectly understands this, and using morals as an argument for god is quite possible the worst argument you can make; even if there was a god who made a list of reasons and classifications of good and bad, that would mean god is subjective, rather than objective. Even if an all powerful being makes a rule, that doesn’t mean the rule itself is incorrect, correct, or the only option. Most scientists today consider morals as an evolutionary phenomena that can be witnessed in many other species, including the primates. Generally speaking, philosophy doesn’t really matter in the practical scientific sense here, because most philosophical deductions can be rendered as subjective.
Six years for abusing and in my view wrecking these kids life’s one of who died of a drugs overdose, ‘this surly can’t be justice’ but in the churches eyes as long as he asks his god for forgiveness then he is aloud in there afterlife club
Remember you “get all your moral guidance from the Bible”. Pity that Cardinal Pell got his moral standards from the Bible! And now Pell is sitting in jail for sexual offences. Maybe he will now contemplate his moral behaviour. His religious devotion has clearly not done his poor innocent victims one iota of good. This is what Richard Dawkins means when he says that he hopes people do not get their moral behaviour from the bible as Pell did. You end up in jail! 😂
@@KingEazie Can you explain that? Are you saying you have perfectly lived up to your principles through out your life? ...As for George Pell, now there is a man who faithfully tried to live up to his principles throughout his life; the principles of Jesus Christ
Why the hell do I need a god? I love I have empathy I love my neighbor more than most Christians I fight for my dreams Why do I need a genie to answer my calls for me to be happy?
@@MakeSomeNoisePlaylists Yes, he was. He was acquitted of all charges. Besides, if he was someone hidden by the Vatican for being paedophile like McCarrick (great friend of pope francis) or cardinal Danneels (Sant Gallen mafia who installed francis), than I would have agreed with you. On the contrary, he was let to be accused for paedophilia (with help of the Vatican) knowing how morons like you would react even without evidence of his crimes .. but what led to that is that he wrote so much against Vatican and pope since 2015 and "financial reform of the Vatican bank", about the New Age religious path, which the Vatican took under francis and being very vocal about it, especially before and about Amazon Synod where pope was blessing pagan deities. The price for his "apostasy" was - giving media and morons (like you) who never question anything, ammunition to be an even bigger moron. While, your atheistic hero, Dawkins, states that any pig is worth more than human embryo, that there should possibility to kill an infant after the birth if he develops uncurable illness, he also claims that paedophilia is ok. "In a recent interview with the Times magazine, Richard Dawkins attempted to defend what he called "mild paedophilia," which, he says, he personally experienced as a young child and does not believe causes "lasting harm." Dawkins went on to say that one of his former school masters "pulled me on his knee and put his hand inside my shorts," and that to condemn this "mild touching up" as sexual abuse today would somehow be unfair. "I am very conscious that you can't condemn people of an earlier era by the standards of ours. Just as we don't look back at the 18th and 19th centuries and condemn people for racism in the same way as we would condemn a modern person for racism, I look back a few decades to my childhood and see things like caning, like mild paedophilia, and can't find it in me to condemn it by the same standards as I or anyone would today," he said. Plus, he added, though his other classmates also experienced abuse at the hands of this teacher, "I don't think he did any of us lasting harm." You should be ashamed for being indoctrinated imbecile you are.
From the fountain of all human knowledge: The word religion is sometimes used interchangeably with faith or belief system, but religion differs from private belief in that it has a social aspect.[3] A global 2012 poll reports that 59% of the world's population is religious, 23% are not religious, and 13% are atheists.[4]
Can Richard Dawkins, LRon Dow, John Gaunt, Tourist Guy, or whatever his latest handle is, name six charities , or even one, set up and run by Atheist sponsored groups, anywhere in the world?
You seem to have misunderstood. What he meant was that asking 'why we’re here’ is pointless because there may not be an answer, it is irrelevant in answering why people are alive today.His point about jealousy was to show how a number of questions can be put put which are equally irrelevant and impossible to answer because there is no answer to it.
Seems like the audience was selected in favour of the priest beforehand,judging by the applause.I wonder if those fools still believe the nonsense preached by the church,knowing what depravity goes on behind the scenes.
Oh wow, 2020! Look what's popped up in my youtube recommendations ;) This theist, huh? "Morals for thee, not for me." In case there are viewers who still don't know, Pell is a cardinal (take note) convicted of child sexual abuse. That the Catholic Church tried to cover up. Throw these people in jail.
The most religious countries have the most crime and violence and the least religious countries have the least violence and crime. So much for morality.
@@Iys67 Countries that are the most religious have more crime than countries that are less religious. And about abortion, We murder every species of animals, including humans, every second out of every day.
Well this didn't age well for Pell!
He was just exonerated.
Dale Chawkins shocking he’s a beast
Dale Chawkins you’re using that term loosely. The abuse allegations against him were so numerous (including what he’s still being investigated for as of late april) that despite the deep pockets of the church, he still had to come before the law, and escape by the skin of his teeth. Not to mention the cabal of abuse that he supported, facilitated, and condoned as archbishop.
@@advocatusspeaks the (refuted) abuse allegations against him personally are not numerous
His High Court liberation verdict was an unanimous 7-0.
Religion needs good people . Good people don't need religion .
SuPerMaGneTiC s0uL you need all the help you can get.
So do I .
That depends upon how you define good..
@@thomasfranklin72 Easy. Think opposite of cruel, bad, evil. Or if you need a visual, think Yahweh. Now, there's a real monster.
@@jacklarm2170 Define cruel, bad, and evil. After all, you cannot define the opposite of something if that certain something doesn't even exist to begin with.
@@jacklarm2170 I think this extract may be of some value to you;
"The presence of morality within the human condition, or rather, the presence of evil, is actually evidence for the existence of God, rather than against it. For how could I even know that evil existed, or how could I even find displeasure in it, if I had not known what good was? And as evil is simply a privation of good, for evil to exist means that good must also exist. And for there to be any form of objective good in the universe, there must be a standard (grounded on the ontological level) of which we refer to when making moral actions. If there is no God who created the universe, then there is no purpose within said universe. You may argue that there is purpose in eating food, or more relevant to the discussion, making moral actions, according to your own arbitrary desires and whims, but this is like saying that a screw that is screwed within a machine has a purpose, but the machine in which the screw was screwed has no purpose. If the purpose of the screw is found within the object in which it is screwed, how then can it have a purpose if the object in which it was screwed is purposeless? Purpose derived from purposelessness is no purpose at all.
If there is no divine lawgiver (through his nature we gain our objective morality, and through his commands, we gain our obligations), then how can good and evil exist? If I evolved just as a lion did, why is it objectively wrong for me to commit infanticide as a lion does? You must either have an objective reference for your morality in order to justify it, or you must simply assert that objective morals do not exist. This is a position no atheist can take, however, as claims such as, “SEPARATE CHURCH AND STATE!”, or “DON’T FORCE YOUR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS DOWN MY THROAT!”, are almost certainly moral claims in need of justification in order to even merit a response.
"
FYI: The Catholic priest lecturing us about morality in this clip, Cardinal Pell, has just been charged with historical sex offenses.
John historical sex offence and u have cast judgment already because u can't wait for the official verdict because he obviously defeated Dawkins in this debate.be patient for the verdict.historical sex offences my foot
Multiple people have accused him of sex offences, and we already know that he was covering up for paedophile priests, so it's not difficult to see where this is going.
J'avo Whiffer stop barking like an uncultured wild dog,try to make your point without being vulgar.
John let the courts do their job first.it is not always the first person who goes to court that must win the case.why do the liberal leftwing media like passing the media-verdict publicly which suits their agenda? even to convict bill Cosby is a problem after the media already sentenced him to death.
"Sex offenses" - Committing them, defending them, and serving up relentless indifference towards them. The legacy of George Pell.
It makes me sick to hear his disgusting voice. Sitting there telling us about god and how to be good.
Did the nonce get any prison time?
Lorraine Henneberry He talked also about morality 😂
Lorraine Henneberry couldn’t agree more !!!
What a vile creature 👎
jason antigua Yes, 6 years (I think)
@George Job he's your gods representative here on earth. Jesuses main man lololol. Leader of gangs of pedophiles. Jesuses pedophile priests.
Now Pell has been convicted of sexual abuse to kids...I'm choking on the irony.
How many kids?
@@Irishandtired Two too many.
HAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAAHAH im sitting here listening to this and dying
@@jacklarm2170 can't believe number matters to him(who asked).
Pell just looked so shady and here we go with the sexual abuse. He proved that there are no god thanks pell!
What a great man Cardinal Pell was! Falsely accused of heinous crimes by ravenous wolves! He served two years in prison as a result
Maybe some of those kids should have been in the audience asking questions
“When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called a Religion.”
― Robert M. Pirsig
Is it a delusion if billions of people believe?
Honestly, your the delusional one.
The universe came from nothing and we just happened. That's crap. Sorry. Anyone believes that, they are not to be trusted with anything to be honest.
No its called Foot-Báll Maaaaaté
After discovering pell's sheltering of paedophile priests, the mere image of his smug face makes me feel physically sick.
Update: Pell himself has just been charged with historical sex offenses.
Jack bassman where did u discover it from?from the media I guess.wait for the verdict first instead of hurriedly coming to conclusion that suits u
And guess what..... just heard about the news that Pell is charged with serious sex offences....
Rob260259 I fucking knee it and said it yrs ago....String him up fuckin nonce
Jack bassman
If he'd only been protecting other pedophiles, that would be the least of his problems.
If religion gives men like Pell their moral compass then I can certainly do without it
that was the point i made.
Well, he was found innocent so.....
Daniel Woulfe He wasn’t he appealed and was granted appeal and released because the judge was not a catholic
@@alalakjakaja5793 I'm not sure you know what an appeal means. You cannot have a high court decision reversed unless you are found innocent(in this case).
Daniel Woulfe Yes i know but what the whole case was built around was the fact the judge wasn’t catholic
Pell, not the brightest of men, will have time to study Charles Darwin, Bertrand Russell, and David Hume in his prison cell.
Iain Rae I love this comment 🤣🤣🤣
And Thomas Paine, Voltaire and all the other minds that shaped secular thought. ;)
And he was proven innocent and acquitted.
To think that the Nazi Party is an “atheist movement” is quite possibly the dumbest, ill informed view I’ve ever heard.
It is puzzling to me how many people believe just that. I find that most who assert that are trying to distract from reality...
It's all about semantics. Nazi party is definitely a religion in itself. Giddens asserted that Vulgar Marxism in Soviet era was a form of 'secular religion'. It all comes down to defining atheism; is it non-belief or 'faith in science' ??
Ante Mesin almost half of the German soldiers who committed the atrocities against their own people were of Christian denomination though. That fact is irrefutable. In first chapter of Mein Kampf, Hitler describes himself as doing “god’s work”.
Ante Mesin atheism is surely a lack of belief in a deity, as you can be theist and still have faith in science.
I've read Mein Kampf. In the middle ages one would be burned on a stake for some of the 'religious statements' made there. Nazi ideology was Darwinian through and through. Denomination is not a belief, simply imposition of state morals. I hope this does not happen to atheists, one thing is defending the right of non-belief and keeping faith out of science, quite another to try and 'change the world for the better'. It is a sure way of becoming a denomination. With the 'scientist' as the clergy. A chance there for possible neo-fascist empire? With the muslim taking the place of the jew?
Dawkins is simply a marvelous and illuminated mind, we need more of this!
There are some more: Schmidt-Salomon from Gremany.....
I thought neither of them were good but both of them were respectful, which is more than I could say for most of the other anti theists.
@@Kitiwake so if you want to see a great debate watch Christopher Hitchens and Stephen Frye eviscerate the Catholic church right to the face of Ann Whitcomb and a Cardinal . The debate is "is the Catholic church a force for good in the world"... yes..I know, without watching you already know it's not, but to hear the intelligence of a well educated, humanitarian, secular, anti theist voice over the ear piercing drivel and weak points made by Catholic leadership is awesome. .. you can see the brainwashing crumble off of the Catholic sheeple in the audience...
@@Kitiwake I hope you know that anti theism and atheism are not the same thing
@@Kitiwake That's rich.
"I WANT TO KNOW WHAT IT WILL TAKE TO KEEP YOU QUIET"
George Pell, speaking to abuse survivor!
Religion is for those who seek meaning. Science is for those who seek the truth - even if the truth is unpleasant.
Truth despite evidence, philosophy without authority. We are seeing the fruits of science in our lives and the world is becoming very ugly.
I like how 90% of the top comments are about his early conviction, wonder if they'll have retract about it now.
Never trust a catholic
He had friends in high places, now he's dead Thankfully
The fact that his conviction was overturned doesn't prove his innocence.
It merely proves that the judiciary system can make mistakes.
Ponder this......
A boy child you don't know comes to you and tells you a man you know has abused him.
The man you know comes to you and tells you he didn't abuse the child.
The boy presents solid evidence.
The man presents counter weak evidence.
One of these is telling the truth
One is lying
There are two major factors....who gains more by lying and is it possible to mistake another's character?
When posed the sacreligious question from Frank Turek.."Where does evil come from?..."
Christopher Hitchens simply retorted...."Religion!".
@@rickallen9167 Yes, it does, because he was let by the Vatican and pope to be accused for paedophilia, because he spoke against so many things happening in Vatican... knowing how morons like you, who never question anything, would react even without evidence of his crimes.
While, your atheistic hero, Dawkins, states that any pig is worth more than human embryo, that there should possibility to kill an infant after the birth if he develops uncurable illness, he also claims that paedophilia is ok.
"In a recent interview with the Times magazine, Richard Dawkins attempted to defend what he called "mild paedophilia," which, he says, he personally experienced as a young child and does not believe causes "lasting harm."
Dawkins went on to say that one of his former school masters "pulled me on his knee and put his hand inside my shorts," and that to condemn this "mild touching up" as sexual abuse today would somehow be unfair.
"I am very conscious that you can't condemn people of an earlier era by the standards of ours. Just as we don't look back at the 18th and 19th centuries and condemn people for racism in the same way as we would condemn a modern person for racism, I look back a few decades to my childhood and see things like caning, like mild paedophilia, and can't find it in me to condemn it by the same standards as I or anyone would today," he said.
Plus, he added, though his other classmates also experienced abuse at the hands of this teacher, "I don't think he did any of us lasting harm."
You should be ashamed for being indoctrinated imbecile you are.
Q. What's the difference between Professor Dawkins and Bishop Pell?
A. One will be spending the rest of his life in prison, and Dawkins won't.
Nicely predicted
You rightly predicted well...
Simply being able to ask "Why we are here" doesn't make it a valid question.
This is such good logic. There's no way the audience should have laughed at that.
The majority are scared by such obvious truths & so they nervously laugh. Plus this is a group of Aussies, so... y’know?
Right! it implies that there is a purpose to existence. We don't know if there is a purpose to existence.
"Why is there suffering?". Indeed, what causes religious leaders to cause suffering?
Monetary gain, subjugation of the weak in mind, sexual gratification from being in a position of power.
So edgy
In December 2018, a jury found him guilty of sexually abusing two 13-year-old choir boys in private rooms of St Patrick's Cathedral in the mid-90s - when the cleric was Archbishop of Melbourne.
It would appear your story is missing a piece of the court record...
One moral atheist and one immoral who pretends to be a believer.
Malcolm Dale
Looking for God is like looking for gold.
If you don't know what gold looks like you're
going to have a hard time finding it.
blindtoby no that’s not it is ! Looking for gold is a real thing looking god is billshit 😂😂😂 look as hard as want you ain’t gonna find and nobody could know what god look a like because he is a fictional character in a historical book ! That some idiots are to stupid to forget about
James Royle okay, so you assume nothing created everything? And life “somehow” appeared? And you’re calling us idiots 🤦♂️. Where did the time, space, matter, energy and life come from? From your dumb mind? Yeah sure, “very logical”. You’re the fool here
@@terminator7584 ironic name
Suboptimal Constructor i know
Watching this on the day Pell got convicted
Likewise. I immediately remembered this interview.
me too! and Im not even in UK , but big Hitchens fan.
and than they wonder why I take all priests for pedos...
@JUAN ROMAN Name one who isn't? Thanks.
JUAN ROMAN you should watch the movie spotlight.. have a good day sir.. good luck with your imaginary man upstairs
@JUAN ROMAN You are almost right... fast forward to today. It is happening in the Vatican.
So surreal watching this now, since Cardinal Pell's conviction. Here he sits as the moral voice of Christianity, and all the while....
where ever did you think christianity was moral?
@thecalling there is evidence of pell covering up known pedophiles. His so ‘holy voice’ will burn in your hell. Hope he rots
@The Calling he’s a child rapist
@The Calling defended by child rapist
@The Calling it helps to believe in god when your raping children. “Pope Benedict XVI”
The topic of the debate is _"Does religious belief make the world a better place?"_ I'd like to hear the answers to that question, from the boys that Cardinal George Pell sexually abused.
Fifth Ape
You knew them did you ?
@@blindtoby8967 can u stop defending a convicted pedophile you do this in every comment
Cardinal Pells actions are condemned by almost all religious belief.
@@danielwoulfe4280 Yet in Islam - Muhammad slept with a child, and in Christianity a "hOlY gHoSt" impregnated a teenage virgin.
Pathetic..religion is the epitome of stupidity and delusion.
Damn dirty ape.
Isnt it funny how the future answered these questions.
I wonder if pell owned a van..
Christianity treates women as property.
Why is there suffering?
I wonder Mr Pell..
Here is one reason there is suffering. 1 John 5:19 says the whole world is in the power of Satan - the wicked one. 2nd reason is that Adam and Eve wanted to decide for themselves what was right and wrong and that involved mankind wanting to rule independently from God. The results have been thousands of years of suffering. There is another important reason I haven’t time to explain.
Grumpy Oldfart . Thanks for your response grumpy. The comment was for those who want answers from the Bible. Your entitled to think that. Have a nice day.
@@MRK1973 1. God is supposed to have created everything including Satan are you saying Satan is more powerful than your god if so he obviously isn't omnipotent! 2.It has been scientifically proven that it is impossible for a whole civilization to propagate from just one human couple! This go's for the Noahs ark story as well there would not have been enough genetic diversity and children would end up with genetic mutations before to long. There is also not enough water on the earth to cover the whole land mass!
@@MRK1973 Sounds like you believe in a very weak God.
@@MRK1973 You are so full of shit:/ Satan, ]if you believe this rubbish] is a "fallen" angel. Good work from a supposedly all knowing god,lol. He never saw that coming, hahahahah
There are two people I disliked right from seeing the way they conduct themselves Pell and Trump.
I've noticed a harsh reality... There are very few Trump fans who can tolerate logic of Dawkins' level. This truly reinforces Trump himself saying that he would appeal to Republicans due to their low intelligence if he ran for president.
You don’t seem to see the sexual misdeeds of Bill Clinton that make anything Trump might have done seem quite tame.
Brian Walendy Not all Trumps supporters are a moronic as you so have faith.
"Why be good?"
That's it in a nutshell.
Now I understand why Tony isn't on q&a anymore
If there is a hell George Pell is certainly going there.
Hahaha there is no hell,made up completely false doctrine by churches it's based on immortality of the soul the bible clearly says man became a living soul, now what about the spirit you may ask, the bible clearly states they are completely different things, check it out yourself, so dont worry anymore about.
Hebrew 4:12.
The stark contrast between Dawkins' eloquent command of English and Pell's dithering bumbling failure to speak or make a comprehensible statment belies the relative understanding each has on a subject of which one claims to be an authority, the other a rational examiner.
Dawkins admits to not having read the bible cover to cover but he can discuss it all perfectly well as he has a general understanding. When Pell decided to concede that humans likely evolved from Neanderthals he fully exposed the fact that he is ignorant of the actual process and evidence for evolution... Neanderthals being cousins of ours, not something we evolved from. Dawkins pulled him on it and he tried to cockily joke it off, the man is a top blagger
Sounds like you're being prejudiced against the Australians...
I'm baffled that someone who says is a scientist says the mountain has no purpose.
Thank God for making me an atheist.
Mels wilGrolsch God did not create u to be a robot,u are responsible for your actions,that's why there is judgment
Who told you that?
Andy Hay. Worse than that in all probability
Ejembi Moses Your 'god' is either vile, immoral or imaginary - which is it, or can you think of any more excuses for its total failure to do anything that is claimed.
Jack bassman anything like what? like the cardinal said,if u have the freedom to be good, it means u have total freedom to do evil too,and your actions will be judged at the end of your time here. what do u want God to do for your u?or what kind of proof are u looking for?
George pell really lost this debate. in fact he showed great ignorance in his understanding of evolution.
He said human came from neanderthal😭
He’s in the jailhouse now!
Oh, thank you for replying with something that has absolutely nothing to do with my comment. We need religion like a hole in the head.
Go looking.
Not only found guilty of his crimes...but also covered up other priests disgusting crimes.
Religion is and always has been about power, money, control, and I cant believe people dont see this
Most people of faith have been indoctrinated during childhood, that's why
That score again:
Pell ... 2 boys sexually abused
Dawkins ... None
Probably the tip of the iceberg.
@@jackthebassman1
2 convictions
Probably many more.
Plus the cover ups Pell did for those below him in the church hierarchy.
Steven C Highley .
Reason vs Make-believe would've been a more proper title.
Pell got a better response from the audience during the introduction than Dawkins. One man dedicated his life to hard work, debate and science, the other abused children and lectured morality.
No proof he abused children. You have childish insults to bolster your position. Shame that doesn’t reveal something about yourself to you.
@@carolinafine8050 Only a royal commission findings he was complacent in the abuse. Tell me Carol if you know someone is a murderer and you assist in the cover up wouldn't you be complacent in the crime? The only naive child is you.
Christ help you Carol
@@justdoit1726 so you don’t say “he abused children” now, just that he was complacent in it. See how easy it was to move you one step back? Also, more proof which is easily obtainable would have you moving back even further…: while you desperately cling to your baseless acrimony. This is what happens when you foist an ostensible justifying narrative over your prejudice. And, just because you use some parallel with murder doesn’t mean it actually sticks. Heck, you’ve already been shown to abandon one silly position.
@@carolinafine8050 Congratulations Carol you have effectively split hairs for a man who conclusively protected child abusers from justice, is that "silly" to you Carol? What do you think that kind of man does in his spare time? Collect trains and fix cars? And why do you think he protected several child abusers in the first place? It's not to hard to connect the dots. HOWEVER you did get me to "step back" whatever that means. And in doing so have gotten behind your computer once more to add a sequel to your defense of a man who definitely, without a shadow of a doubt aided in the suffering of children and allowed pedophiles to continue committing henious crimes within the church, and more than likely did it himself.
Not sure what skin you have in the game here Carol, but Christ help you.
Carolinafine. The word you want is "complicit", not complacent.
The sheer ignorance and lack of joined-up thinking on the part of the Cardinal is quite staggering.
Why even bother, you cant argue with people so deluded:/
Which side
@@leonardniamh the religious obviously,lol
And we also have creepy Hell...sorry, Pell.
Yes this is who is going to hold your child's hand in heaven
Dawkins speaks so cleverly and knowledgeably , his reasoning will win over any reasonable thinking person. Theists don’t understand!
So you mean "Nothing created everything "ruclips.net/video/cPlTsWFYBIM/видео.html
If this man is one of god's representatives on earth good luck and watch out for your kids
I watched this because my plumber was preaching to me about how the cardinal “destroyed” Richard Dawkins intellectually. Sorry. Don’t see that at all. If anything I see the opposite even with the moderator saving the cardinal many times.
It's difficult to listen to PELL even before he was found guilty. I watched this awhile back it was difficult then
Thumb nail of Richard Dawkins and a priest ? I’m in.
Ha! Pel sits there with his sanctimonious speech and tells us the bible teaches us how to live a good and righteous life Shame he forgot to read it. Nasty human
The problem is he did read it.
Did you know him ?
The bible isn't a moral book, let's get that straight.
Do you reckon q&a will invite Pell back for a rematch with Dawkins? lol
One of the many people I would like to meet in a elavator.
David Colby You mean meeting pell in your adolescence, no?
how much embarassment can the producers of this debate feel....shame on them
Did anyone else notice how Dawkins focuses on answering the questions the best he can, while Pell juste criticize Dawkins' way of thinking and evades the questions by only speaking of the religion in a good way?
this is because Pell knows that he can't logically support his religious beliefs.
That's a bright mind vs a religious one - in a nutshell
@@allstarwatt7246 because religions rely on fantasy and superstitions which can never be substantiated!
Pure nonsense and mumbojumbo!
Example Methuselah 900+ years old????? In the bronze ages?? Pure fantasy! While the religious get indoctrination to believe these fallacies!
What I saw is a philosopher debating the scientism and strawman of Dawkins. The most interesting part is Dawkins backtracking from his claim that science can answer the WHY question. Then later said why the question is silly. Without the why question morality disappears. The same man says we have to make up our meaning of life. Has he ever read anything about subjectivity and Relativity? And the implications? Scientists of today have very poor knowledge of philosophy.
@@auxtas If you’re discussing the morality in philosophy, of course scientists have poor experience in this field, because it is entirely irrelevant to what they are doing. The “meaning of life” question itself doesn’t really matter, as there is no evidence for a god, life doesn’t have a meaning except for living or existing, or the evolutionary traits that can be concluded as normal in the species. Dawkins perfectly understands this, and using morals as an argument for god is quite possible the worst argument you can make; even if there was a god who made a list of reasons and classifications of good and bad, that would mean god is subjective, rather than objective. Even if an all powerful being makes a rule, that doesn’t mean the rule itself is incorrect, correct, or the only option. Most scientists today consider morals as an evolutionary phenomena that can be witnessed in many other species, including the primates. Generally speaking, philosophy doesn’t really matter in the practical scientific sense here, because most philosophical deductions can be rendered as subjective.
Where do they do this "debate" at the Ark Encounter?
Why does the audience keep clapping for the dinosaur?
This is not logical.
He has pell from grace.
jimbo43 pell into some innocent boy cheeks
2023 ain’t playing, let’s go
Oh he’s a “cardinal” and has some authority that other people don’t have. BS.
Six years for abusing and in my view wrecking these kids life’s one of who died of a drugs overdose, ‘this surly can’t be justice’ but in the churches eyes as long as he asks his god for forgiveness then he is aloud in there afterlife club
Remember you “get all your moral guidance from the Bible”. Pity that Cardinal Pell got his moral standards from the Bible! And now Pell is sitting in jail for sexual offences. Maybe he will now contemplate his moral behaviour. His religious devotion has clearly not done his poor innocent victims one iota of good. This is what Richard Dawkins means when he says that he hopes people do not get their moral behaviour from the bible as Pell did. You end up in jail! 😂
If by 'Natural Selection' you select choir boys you can't procreate.
Men dressed in long black frocks who also happen to be experts in fairy-tales. It would be miraculous if some of them were not child abusers.
"Why is there suffering?" Because some people can't keep their paws to themselves? And, because we seem incapable and/or unwilling to solve problems.
Oh My! How on earth did the cardinal have the nerve to go on TV when he knew all along that he was breaking the law and doing something inexcusable!
That’s wat religion turns you into …a hypocrite
@@KingEazie Can you explain that? Are you saying you have perfectly lived up to your principles through out your life? ...As for George Pell, now there is a man who faithfully tried to live up to his principles throughout his life; the principles of Jesus Christ
Why the hell do I need a god?
I love I have empathy I love my neighbor more than most Christians
I fight for my dreams
Why do I need a genie to answer my calls for me to be happy?
Cardinal Bell was an innocent man. May he rest in peace. 🙏🙏🙏
no he wasnt !
@@MakeSomeNoisePlaylists
Yes, he was.
He was acquitted of all charges.
Besides, if he was someone hidden by the Vatican for being paedophile like McCarrick (great friend of pope francis) or cardinal Danneels (Sant Gallen mafia who installed francis), than I would have agreed with you.
On the contrary, he was let to be accused for paedophilia (with help of the Vatican) knowing how morons like you would react even without evidence of his crimes .. but what led to that is that he wrote so much against Vatican and pope since 2015 and "financial reform of the Vatican bank", about the New Age religious path, which the Vatican took under francis and being very vocal about it, especially before and about Amazon Synod where pope was blessing pagan deities.
The price for his "apostasy" was - giving media and morons (like you) who never question anything, ammunition to be an even bigger moron.
While, your atheistic hero, Dawkins, states that any pig is worth more than human embryo, that there should possibility to kill an infant after the birth if he develops uncurable illness, he also claims that paedophilia is ok.
"In a recent interview with the Times magazine, Richard Dawkins attempted to defend what he called "mild paedophilia," which, he says, he personally experienced as a young child and does not believe causes "lasting harm."
Dawkins went on to say that one of his former school masters "pulled me on his knee and put his hand inside my shorts," and that to condemn this "mild touching up" as sexual abuse today would somehow be unfair.
"I am very conscious that you can't condemn people of an earlier era by the standards of ours. Just as we don't look back at the 18th and 19th centuries and condemn people for racism in the same way as we would condemn a modern person for racism, I look back a few decades to my childhood and see things like caning, like mild paedophilia, and can't find it in me to condemn it by the same standards as I or anyone would today," he said.
Plus, he added, though his other classmates also experienced abuse at the hands of this teacher, "I don't think he did any of us lasting harm."
You should be ashamed for being indoctrinated imbecile you are.
I could listen to dawkins almost as long as to hichens...
The scientist vs. the child buggerer.
JiveDadson
You were there were you ?
@@blindtoby8967 You're an idiot.
Yea this world is so messed up man...people believe in imaginary friends rather than having curiosity to seek the answers to our universe
When QandA was worth watching..
People should study religion like they study science. I find catholic theology absolutly facinating. Ignorance is the cause of all evil
Dawkins kicks this guys ass because Dawkins has science behind what he says not meth from the bronze age.
cardinal Pell gives me the creeps ! Always did, even before he had been convicted
From the fountain of all human knowledge:
The word religion is sometimes used interchangeably with faith or belief system, but religion differs from private belief in that it has a social aspect.[3] A global 2012 poll reports that 59% of the world's population is religious, 23% are not religious, and 13% are atheists.[4]
George Pell: The Sarah Palin of the Catholic Church.
Dawkins versus dinosaur.
try to get hold of Dr Barbara Thiering's "The Riddle Of The Dead Sea Scrolls" both in book and dvd or vhs form. Very interesting.
Can Richard Dawkins, LRon Dow, John Gaunt, Tourist Guy, or whatever his latest handle is, name six charities , or even one, set up and run by Atheist sponsored groups, anywhere in the world?
I think Richard Dawkins is at least 4/5's of a biologist rather than the 1/5 stated in the title
Hahaha it's a reference to a 5 part series of RUclips clips i.e clip 1 of 5, not Richard Dawkins degree in Biology XD
@@Omgr4Gaming Did you genuinely believe I thought the video was referring to Dawkins as one-fifth of a biologist?
@@joshdwyer13 you're either a biologist or not. I have no idea about your intellect based off one fucking RUclips comment
Dawkins: *says something.
The audience: WOOOO!
The Cardinal: *says something.
The audience: WOOOO!
the cardinal stinks.. god bless you dawkins I hope the world wakes up to the truth one day.
I hope so too
Omar
@@Mirrorgirl492 4 years is too short...
God bless you Dawkins 🤔
You realise the stupidity of saying "god bless you" and "Dawkins" in the same sentence yes? If not I fear you are missing the whole premise
You seem to have misunderstood. What he meant was that asking 'why we’re here’ is pointless because there may not be an answer, it is irrelevant in answering why people are alive today.His point about jealousy was to show how a number of questions can be put put which are equally irrelevant and impossible to answer because there is no answer to it.
The way the audience look they focus at Richard answers is so delightful.
Seems like the audience was selected in favour of the priest beforehand,judging by the applause.I wonder if those fools still believe the nonsense preached by the church,knowing what depravity goes on behind the scenes.
Viva Cristo Rey!
The Blind [Pell] leading the blind [some of the audience] - where is Pell now?
So you mean "Nothing created everything " ruclips.net/video/cPlTsWFYBIM/видео.html
Well this is awkward 😅
Pell paid off his victims
7:10 'I get my morals from Game of Thrones' LOL :D
Poor old George....he has lost the first 2 rounds and is hoping to get out of Gaol with his last Appeal...
Oh wow, 2020! Look what's popped up in my youtube recommendations ;) This theist, huh? "Morals for thee, not for me." In case there are viewers who still don't know, Pell is a cardinal (take note) convicted of child sexual abuse. That the Catholic Church tried to cover up. Throw these people in jail.
2 mins into the video and the cardinal needs water and he hasn't spoken yet.
Dawkins is God in my house.
Where’s all the mouthy theists at? Lol
Ah its Mr Pell. A model for his faith
Yes indeed. Much admired and loved.
God bless Cardinal Pell.
It's sad that Dawkins is not very good at these debates. I'm totally on his side, but he constantly lets all sorts of logical fallacies fly past him
I like Prof Richard Dawkins. He is always on point and very concise in terms of logical presentation. I mean I am inspired by him.😀😀👏👏👏👏👌
The most religious countries have the most crime and violence and the least religious countries have the least violence and crime. So much for morality.
abortion and assisted suicide are both violent and immoral. Yet most countries that turn away from God initiate and support those acts.
@@Iys67 Countries that are the most religious have more crime than countries that are less religious. And about abortion, We murder every species of animals, including humans, every second out of every day.