A myriad of spectators gathered Monday night in the bitter cold to witness a historic moment on a secular university campus. The Aquinas Institute for Catholic Thought hosted Christopher Hitchens and Dinesh D’Souza at Macky Auditorium for a debate about the greatness and existence of God.
Both men are scholars and authors who hold widely different perspectives on what is, or is not, great about God. Hitchens is an atheist who represented a secular humanism position, while D’Souza argued for the existence of God from a Christian viewpoint.
The atmosphere before the debate was warm despite the chilly evening. Audience members both young and old filed into the packed auditorium eager for the opportunity to hear such creditable speakers debate such a heated topic.
The seats of Macky were overflowing with people of all faiths and none, all of whom came from different backgrounds but pondered the same question that evening, what is so great about God?
Students came to the debate to open their minds, challenge their beliefs and strengthen their faith.
“I want to hear both sides of the debate, it further confirms my faith,” said student Meahan Tschanz, a junior news-editorial major.
Other students were more curious about the debaters themselves. “Hitchens is interesting and he is willing to debate, other atheists present facts and don’t actually debate,” said Isla Schanuel, a senior Spanish and biology major.
Overall, most people were excited about the prospect of an intellectual debate.
“I’m here because I want to see a debate on higher intellectual issues intertwined with spirituality. I know what I believe, but I would like to see this issue debated publicly,” commented Kelly Hannaway, a senior marketing major.
The debate itself was organized into four sections; each speaker presented his argument, refuted his opposer, both men questioned each other directly and finally they received questions from the audience.
The medium for audience participation throughout the evening was clapping.
Boulder is an interesting town for a debate like this because it has a secular university, a strong atheist/agnostic community and a sizeable Christian population, but thankfully, all sides were evenly represented as evidenced by the distribution of applause.
The views that were articulated by Hitchens and D’Souza illustrated two schools of thought and two polar opposite ideologies, yet both doctrines were bound together by reason.
In his opening argument, D’Souza said, “we are debating with the same weapons, reason.”
D’Souza was the first speaker and he presented a case to the audience about the power and prevalence of the Christian faith. He said, “Western civilization was built on two pillars, Athens and Jerusalem.” He argued that the Christian tradition is the platform for our society, our morals and our legal system.
Hitchens, who followed D’Souza, focused his position on a hypothetical scenario; the figure known as the Jesus of Nazareth is proven to be mortal and the Christian faith collapses.
He argued that even if organized, monotheistic religion deteriorated, civilization would not disintegrate because people do not need religion to behave morally and ethically; without a savior, people will still act compassionately.
Hitchens continued to build his argument by saying that the Christian belief in vicarious atonement devalues personal responsibility because Christians can “throw their sins on a scapegoat.”
The debate heated up and the energy in Macky became suddenly tense during the third section of the evening when Hitchens and D’Souza confronted one another directly but emotions escalated even more during the audience question portion.
D’Souza stated that since the existence of God can be neither proven nor disproven, both he and Hitchens have faith – one has faith in a supreme being and one has faith that no such being exists, though neither can know with any authority what the truth really is.
D’Souza also said that “religion is hope in an idea of cosmic injustice.” The principal argument for religion, specifically Christianity, is that it gives human life a sense of purpose and greater meaning.
As part of his ending thoughts, Hitchens said that, “religion is philosophy frozen by dogmatism,” and if we continue to be a religious society we will forever live under a “celestial dictatorship.”
Hitchens explained that the beliefs of Christianity and other monotheistic religions give validity to tyranny and injustice in the name of a higher power and thus subject us, as a society, to a dictatorial ruler.
The end of the debate was met with an amicable applause but some students felt that although the topic was interesting, the organization was difficult to follow and the rebuttal statements trailed off into random tangents.
“I thought the set up was poor, there were no simple rules for the direction of the debate; it disintegrated into a back and forth,” said Austin Christ, a sophomore chemical engineering major.
The content of the debate was interesting and very thought provoking; Macky was abuzz with post-debate commentary and lively discussions among various groups of people, but the style of the debate format was heavily criticized.
“I enjoyed the first half hour because it was more narrow and focused. Beyond that, it was hard to keep on track,” said Michael Cousineau, a philosophy graduate student.
Contact CU Independent Staff Writer Allison Doyle at Allison.doyle@colorado.edu
