rocketdog
This is a way better debate than Hitchens / Sharpton. Some real sparks here, especially during the Q & A fun. I hope they do a few re-matches.

Miken
The "atheism debate" was the ultimate intellectual sideshow right after Alan Watts when I was a student. Hitchens draws adherents by simply engaging the audience. McGraths' discipline doesn't surprise me as he is as plodding in his speech as any Anglican on the pulpit. I've heard McGrath debate Dawkins as well and the effect was the same. It's a shame that McGrath is such a terrible public speaker. They might actually have had some intelligent discourse.

Foxyarse
Hitchens is an alcoholic narcissist and no he is not boring.

SQUAREHEAD
hitchens is right about many things, but he's hard to take in large doses. though, he's quite entertaining when he's a little sauced.

giallopudding
Bravo to Prof. Hitchens, and his eminently sensible grandiloquence in stating the case for rationality over superstition. His place among 21st Century giants in philosophy is assured.

Miken
I don't believe Mr. Hitchens is a professor or a philosopher. He's a journalist.

Rakajj
A great debate, I truly love Fora.tv for making all of these debates available, its great to turn one on while working around the house and just to listen to the intelligent debate from both sides. Intelligent debate is truly an art and it thrills beyond words. I personally feel that Hitchens had the upper hand through much of the debate, McGrath, while obviously an intelligent and civil person was a bit too reluctant to assert his beliefs I feel. If he had been a bit more coercive perhaps Hitchens wouldn't have been able to steer the conversation so much, as an athiest myself I'll end with a long live Christopher Hitchens.

smjr
In any Q&A about religion versus reason that raises the question "WHY?" we need to look to science for the explanation, rather than religion. For example why do we have any obligation to each other? A rational atheist will turn to science for an answer - psychology, evolution, sociology, etc. Turning to religion to answer the question "why?" resorts to divine revelation based on ignorance and mere guesswork. Science is systematic and based on logic that can be tested, etc. Divine revelation of religion is merely a cultural belief passed on through the generations based on a non scientific attempt to discover so called truth.

John Schlismann
Great debate; I recently discovered flora.tv and am looking forward to viewing more like it.