Hitchens like everyone else may NOT have been 'perfect' but he was a truly outspoken Anti-religion/religious person and I thank him for being so.

Meh.
Just another opinion.

Another attack piece by someone Hitchens would likely have dismantled in a debate.

I didn't agree with everything he said, or all of his positions, but I found myself in agreement more than I didn't.

Name ONE person, just one, that you agree with 1000% with......I'll wait right here.....

OH fuck off, what a waste of time and eyesight.

He supported the Iraq War. He found that being pro-imperialist was profitable.

Hitchens was as much a religious fundamentalist as any theist ever was, and maybe for worse reasons. When he didn’t know the mic was on he admitted he didn’t want religion to go away because he was enjoying fighting it too much. I guess it gave him a sense of purpose (not to mention considerable cash). I always thought he was a vile and hateful man. When he died, his coworkers didn’t have nice things to say about him. Dawkins is little better. Harris is a mixed bag, and Dennett is a fine gentleman. IMHO.

I find this article extremely offensive! They misspelled despicable, and no one caught it! Flaunting your vocabulary when you can't spell it loses points with me.

So what if the gross overstatement that he had no original thoughts may in some small measure have some validity? For example, the concept of monotheism making one a serf may have derived from Robert Ingersoll. And there have been other examples I can't recall at the moment. But at least he stole from the best, and had the style and guts to promote such views to a new generation, most of whom are probably ignorant of their source. I sometimes hear complaints about the lack of "new" arguments against religion as if that counts in theism's favor. No need to re-invent the wheel for what is already valid.

The author of this rant (toxic34) is entitled to his opinion but it doesn't make it accurate or correct. I enjoy much of what Maher and Hitchens have had to say over they years. However, nothing from (toxic34) comes to mind as memorable.

I have read some of his books and I find him to be simplistic and not really understand some of the history of political thought. Not that I am an expert. I think he got some of his creditability by not believing in God.

Hitchens was definitely polarizing and antagonistic in his approach. Fine to have different opinions, but would sure like a bit more objective evidence in a hit job. We are not republicans after all.... ( I know , some are , suck it up)

I believe it is crass, classless and of absolute poor taste to call scumbag and other epithets to someone who is dead and cannot defend himself.

I don't compare Hitch and Bill Maher but I like both of them. That doesn't mean I agree with their every word. I also bet this writer of the piece you posted was writing just because he needed a byline by a certain deadline.

Not an article, just a blog. No supporting evidence. Not even signed.

He's just typical illogical atheist.

"Not a believer, in the theistic sense"? In what sense then?

A barely literate tirade, void of argument or substance. Opinions are a dime a dozen.

I am on the fence with this one. Even as I have become totally disillusioned with Bill Mahr. Their opinions have taken on a curveball effect! They must live with their public words, but at the same time, they hold nothing of substance in their later life, that I can use!

Worthless ridiculous bilge.

Hitchens made and defended his points. If it was wrong, how come no one called him on it in a very decisive way?

I'll be honest I never understood his beef with the Clintons but I think he had some points about Teresa, though I admit I am only taking his words as true because no one would ever correct him in debate lol

it's important to learn about these things before you completely dismiss them. htchens lacked tact because he was stuck at that level and couldnt advance. you never get past the hard consciousness problem until you take a leap and he couldnt ever get past his own ego to look further than his dogma.

I had to block a know it all here so now I am free of her insinuations and fictional expertise upon the history of religions but now she cannot learn from my sharings of fact....

“Article”. Just a long YouTube comment really. Don’t bother.