Our belief is not a belief. Our principles are not a faith. We do not hold our convictions dogmatically. We believe with certainty that an ethical life can be lived without religion. [Emphasis mine, of course]Chuckle. No dogmatically-held convictions, then. Just belief with certainty. So, Hitch, what if you turn out to be wrong about the possibility of "an ethical life [...] without religion"? Being so entirely undogmatic, you ought to hold your belief a little more tentatively, I feel.
Of course, anyway, his point is besides the point. The real question is whether ethics is at all meaningful given a naturalist ontology. As always for this discussion, I refer readers to my human rights post. Just please don't try telling me people are valuable because money is valuable...
