'Going to debate Daniel so no one else ever has to.' Gotta love Matt's confidence. And he's justified for it. This will be a cerebral smackdown for the ages!
@ramigilneas9274 Жыл бұрын
It worked with Sye Ten Bruggencate.😅
@junepearl7993 Жыл бұрын
My Dad used to say “It ain’t braggin’ if you can really do it.” 😁
@robertaylor9218 Жыл бұрын
@@ramigilneas9274 the Q and A with sye was really eye opening to me. I saw in a question or two a man who had been convinced an entity was real, and was intellectually honest with himself (at least for a flash) about the implications of that entity’s described character. So when I listen to sye debate I see clearly someone who believes the entity he worships is an inescapable monster, and argues with everyone he can to convert them. Not for his own aggrandizement or satisfaction, but genuinely to save as many people from this lovecraftian dictator. He’s dishonest in many of his arguments, but if I’m right about his true position, then his actions are defensible. As Christopher Hitchens said “thankfully there isn’t any reason to believe such a deity exists”.
@eqprog Жыл бұрын
The debate with Daniel was sickening. I couldn’t even finish it. I almost think the police need to confiscate the dudes PREDATOR laptop. I almost suspect they will find some heinous illegal shit stored on it.
@MMAGamblingTips Жыл бұрын
Isn’t that the truth!!! Imagine advocating this gross nonsense.
@firstaidsack Жыл бұрын
Tbh, I think he just wants to protect his beloved prophet and justify whatever he did. For him Islam and the prophet are perfect and everyone who disagrees is just spreading "liberal propaganda".
@xsi45 Жыл бұрын
Not just him, there were all Mslims commentators agreeing with him and making justifications for chld rpe on the comment section of the debate posted on " moderndaydebate".
@smilloww2095 Жыл бұрын
I listened it all the way trough, and I think IP did a pretty good job altough I feel like it could have been a lot better still. Missed some chances that would really have a big impact. Like all IP had to do to show that the analogy of "a 40 year old woman has equal risk" was to bring up that it is about consent. While he mentioned this at other points he didnt hammer it down when daniel kept repeating this which was pretty frustrating.
@the_Hermanoid Жыл бұрын
I'm both excited for and dreading your upcoming debate with Daniel.
@BootupProcess Жыл бұрын
My Uncle died of cancer, and the last time I spoke to him was me explaining who you were and speaking about your debates and how interesting they are. I’ll always remember him and you fondly. Even if it’s sappy and silly, you mean a lot to me Matt. Ignoring all the good content you produce, it’ll always be a treasured memory. Seems stupid, now that I think about it, to talk about the possibility of there being no afterlife with a dying man. Thank you, Matt.
@xelasomar4614 Жыл бұрын
I would say that the word is not just "consent", but consent from a mind developed enough to know what it is that it's consenting to. That it is aware of all its implications, socially, physically, and the impact to his/her future. Because you can get a child to "yes" even when their inner self doesn't want or is aware of why.
@Suzume-Shimmer Жыл бұрын
Yeah, consent from a child is often similar to consent from a very inebriated person. They simply are not aware enough to make a responsible decision.
@cognitiveblues Жыл бұрын
Mslims in the comment section of that debate have no idea of what consent means. Some of them told me that when Aisha at 6 was *silent* when Muhammad took her as a bride, that meant there was consent on her part. Facepalm! I tried to explain to them that consent involves understanding the full implications and consequences of a decision and being able to make an informed and voluntary choice. Not being silent or even saying yes or no,, because a child does not have the cognitive functions of an adult to understand. I told them "A child who is only 6 years old does NOT have the cognitive ability, emotional ability, mental ability, life experience to fully understand the implications and consequences of marriage.So, it is not possible for them to give consent to a marriage. Children should be protected and allowed to grow and develop before being thrust into adult responsibilities such as marriage." Then they replied that the PARENTS gave consent! Another facepalm! I then told them parents do not have the right to make decisions that violate the individual rights of their child. Marriage is a serious decision that requires informed consent from both parties involved, broom and bride, NOT THEIR PARENTS. Children are not capable of giving informed consent due to their lack of maturity and life experience. Even if a child says "yes" to marriage, they may not fully understand the consequences of such a decision. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognizes the right to marry and found a family, but it also states that marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses NOT THEIR PARENTS. This means that neither parental nor societal pressure should be a factor in deciding whether or not to marry. You know what they replied to that? Why then parents force children to get an education! I mean the stupidity of these people knows no bounds!
@Djerunk Жыл бұрын
The word you are looking for is "informed" consent. Whereas children can not give it as they lack the faculties to truly be informed of their decisions and its consequences.
@MerelvandenHurk8 ай бұрын
Correct, that's why consent needs to imply _informed_ consent, and why we distinguish consent and _assent_. And children can only _assent_, if that. I used to be confused when people said "children can't consent" because... they _can_ say yes. But it's _informed_ consent that they're actually referring to, and I'd argue that only informed consent is actual consent. Otherwise it's only assent, at most. And children at the prepubescent age absolutely do not possess the capacity to provide informed consent on whether or not to marry someone, especially since the only cultures that would ask that of a child are cultures that also don't allow for divorce and have extremely disproportional power dynamics between men and women (since it's always older men marrying young girls, and never the reverse). So once they're married, they're stuck. It's not like they can easily just up and leave by the time they come of age and understand the word better. But even if they _could_ leave, it would obviously still be wrong.
@skepticsinister Жыл бұрын
Matt Dillahunty you are my hero, you are an inspirational force for the progress of humanity. Thank you.
@pamigreenway Жыл бұрын
I think it's a pity that Daniel isn't under serious scrutiny by authorities.
@marshallferron Жыл бұрын
He's probably already on several lists but he's just careful enough not to say anything illegal to say.
@Jimbo_Conn Жыл бұрын
Who's Daniel ?
@rachelfey Жыл бұрын
Matt: "I'm about to end this man's career"
@LateNightKaiju Жыл бұрын
That would be nice. Unfortunately Dan H has too many child sex advocates on his side to go down so quickly. He’s a vile individual corrupted by Islam and boosted by more of the same.
@MMAGamblingTips Жыл бұрын
What career? Lol.
@teddybruscie Жыл бұрын
More like... Fine, I'll do it myself..."
@ohhgeez865 Жыл бұрын
But he's not a rapper
@haactgaming9687 Жыл бұрын
Ra and Tjump are some of my favourite debaters and are very smart! I just thought it was a really bad discussion! It sounded like two theists arguing whose religion is better!
@Agent.503 Жыл бұрын
It is such a power move to publish your opening statement so early, Matt. The idea of putting consent as the main focus is going to be what makes Daniel fail to justify his position.
@locococo7362 Жыл бұрын
I already had some discussion around consent with muslims that support child marriage. The argument they gave me was that as long as the parents consent to the marriage, it's ok. Because that's what parents do : take decision for their child when they are too young. I'm pretty sure Daniel would use the same argument.
@JohnM-cd4ou Жыл бұрын
He clearly doesn't care about consent
@amosfwo4609 Жыл бұрын
Daniel doesn't care about consent.
@DagarBlue Жыл бұрын
@@amosfwo4609 Islam doesn't care about consent. The entire structure is dictatorial.
@rmtsapphire0 Жыл бұрын
@@locococo7362 still a big yikes
@Orbsaladin Жыл бұрын
Daniel rivals Jordan Peterson on his dishonesty and slippery nature. If there's anyone that can handle that kind of shit, it's Mr. Dillahunty. Thanks so much for everything you continue to do, Matt. From an ex-muslim.
@woutermortier2771 Жыл бұрын
Thank god Daniel doesn't have the broad vocabulary of JP. At least now it's clear what he thinks. JP gets away with a lot of fancy word salad because it takes too long to process what he says.
@Cognitivebluess Жыл бұрын
Hope you see this. Daniel posted a review of his debate in which he had a fake doctor going trough the studies shown by IP and misrapresented and lied about those studies to support his pdfile position. I hope there will be large channels pushing back on the sickness advocated by these child predators for the sake of children. I have a 9 years old child and this HORRIFIES ME!
@ShutUpWesley Жыл бұрын
"I'll have a debate with him, so nobody else have to" Doing the "lords" work Matt😅
@xsi45 Жыл бұрын
You know why there was no mentioning of male children married off? Because under Islam older men marry little girls and not vice versa. You do not see old women marrying little boys, or little boys married to little girls. It is mostly adult males with female children because the old male is considered the provider in the family. It is all disgisting, but you know why.
@YourSooFakeSauce Жыл бұрын
1:45 My heart was broke when you left the ACA as a host. You, Forrest, Dr.Ben, and Katie are my favorites. I still watch for the latter, but it hasnt been the same without the Dillahunty. I am SUPER happy to see you have a YT channel with hundreds of videos. I intend to watch all of them because you are, hands down, my favorite secular advocate. Cheers Matt!
@patrickboyle932 Жыл бұрын
Hope Matt has a good time at Debatcon.
@Dystopikachu Жыл бұрын
David Wood definitely has a special place in his heart for bashing Islam, especially when he has his buddy Apostate Prophet on stream with him. He has practically been talking about nothing but Islam for the past year what I can see on his channel. It's amazing how so much of what he says makes a lot of sense, right up until Jesus intrudes into his thoughts.
@Rogstin Жыл бұрын
AronRa and TJump was the only one I've seen so far, and you didn't miss much. They mostly debated lying to people for benefits and not religion. They didn't really define religion as I recall, but I think they implicitly meant faith based religions.
@theflyingdutchguy9870 Жыл бұрын
i watched it. and it was pretty painful😅
@soeasyastonercoulddoit Жыл бұрын
AronRa clearly defined religion. The problem was that he didn't hold people to that definition.
@zacharyshort384 Жыл бұрын
That was the first one you saw? heh..
@lyricduo Жыл бұрын
So glad to see ads popping up on your videos now. I’m planning to go back and binge watch your older videos to make a small ‘contribution’ to the amazing work you have done and continue to do. You helped me get through an extremely severe case of religious trauma syndrome and I continue to follow you for the lols. 😄🤪
@guyverdio Жыл бұрын
I'd agree that Aron/Tjump's debate topic was very broad. I really liked the idea of doing an atheist vs atheist debate though and would like to see more of that in the future.
@nineteenninetyfive Жыл бұрын
Yeah, let's face it you are more likely to get decent arguments out of people that don't find the stupid justifications for religion convincing.
@paul3263 Жыл бұрын
Impressive, Matt, you truly have the ability to get to the core of an issue. The key concept in these matters is undoubtedly consent. However, I suggest adding the word "mature" to it, thus forming the phrase "mature consent." It's plausible that a 9-year-old could give consent, but it's important to consider the maturity level required for valid consent, as well as the potential for indoctrination of children into certain ideologies. This is particularly relevant when it comes to controversial topics and beliefs that children may be exposed to, which could influence their ability to give informed and unbiased consent.
@zacharyshort384 Жыл бұрын
'maturity' and even 'adult' are arbitrary distinctions. We could have 'adult' be 19 instead of 18, in the USA, for instance. Obviously we are, as you rightly point out, concerned about the psychological maturity in the sense of being mentally prepared for sex, love, intimacy. This is the problem though; there is no specific age that someone is 'mature' in this way. People will reach this a different ages. So 'mature consent' is just not feasible as it's subject to this arbitrary nature; how one could determine said maturity level and whether it constitutes 'valid consent' would be difficult [to say the least], since it would vary as people grow psychologically at different rates. The only practical solution is to make informed decisions [ultimately arbitrary] on a specific age when we allow sexual consent, marriage, et cetera, based on our understanding of human psychology. What's the alternative? Investigate every individual to see if it was 'mature consent'? I think Matt said 'consent' without including 'mature' because he's banking on the understanding that consent entails an age that said society has deemed 'mature' since typically its implicit that people below the 'adult age' cannot legally give consent.
@shinywarm6906 Жыл бұрын
Just to flesh this out a bit with a concrete example: in England and Wales, "consent" must, at a minimum, include that the person has agreed by choice and has the freedom and capacity to make that choice. This, in turn, depends on numerous contextual considerations, including age, maturity and understanding; the history of the relationship; whether the person complained about is in a postition of power relative to the complainant; any threats or promises made contingent on the decision and so on. For some acts, there is a presumption that a person must have attained a minimum age to give a valid consent (eg in England and Wales, consent to sex under 16 is considered valid in only very restricted circumstances, and no-one under 13 can give a legal consent to sex, under any circumstances).
@baconsarny-geddon8298 Жыл бұрын
But Dillahunty believes that a 9yo CAN give valid "consent"- And to acts far more irreversably harmful than (horrific as it is) sex with an adult, or even marriage. Dillahunty endorses the "early transition" of children as young as 9 or 10, which is done based on exactly ZERO empirical evidence of any medical issue at all; It is SOLELY justified by the decision-making of the child- A decision with the INTENDED goal of chemically stunting a perfectly healthy child's normal, natural development, to have that child reach adulthood (ie. the age where their consent finally DOES become meaningfull and valid) ALREADY drug-dependent, and for that initially-healthy to end up drug-dependent FOR LIFE. (And that's only considering the INTENDED effects; There are also sky-high rates of UNINTENDED effects- partial or total loss of adult fertility. Partial or total loss of adult sexual function, and the ability to EVER orgasm. Plus a laundry-list of issues like spinal and joint problems, low bone density, obesity, etc). Logically, it's impossible for Matt to claim that a pre--teen child IS mature enough to make THAT decision... but is somehow also NOT mature enough to make the 100% reversable decision, that does NO physiological harm, to marry?!? (Note- This is absolutely NOT a defense of the insane idea that a 9yo child is old enough to marry; It's simply pointing out that MATT'S LOGIC says that a 9yo DOES have this maturity, and capacity for valid "consent"...)
@letswatchutube5132 Жыл бұрын
I love you Matt! Thanks for everything you do. You helped me see the flaws in religion
@Nicky_Dore Жыл бұрын
Sweet. Always like the reviews! 😃
@austinperkins8348 Жыл бұрын
Thank you Matt for addressing the glaring hypocrisy with not including boys! I was practically screaming when I was watching that debate
@skeptic_Todd Жыл бұрын
9:35 yeah, someone asked this question, and Kenny said he would accept it
@imatsoup1437 Жыл бұрын
You hit the nail on the head with Aron and Tjumps debate. It really was too broad of a topic and to be honest, Aron does a mediocre job at representing The Temple. We don't charge, although there is an option for money to be exchanged upon signing up for certificate declaring you into The Temple and that is not a requirement. Yeah, we're humanistic atheist in "goth drag" as he puts it; we're also ex vangelical/fundamentalist who've taken the threat of hell and disarmed that weapon used against us to keep us in check. We all have our reasons and places that we find ourselves in when we decided to join the movement to fight for freedom of and from religion. which has been taking root in our country for far too long and got out of hand. I'm not impressed with MDD. They seem to get the absolute worst people on just for them to be berated, and sometimes both side are just entirely ignorant and it's a poor representation for both sides. I haven't found any other sort of debates channel in the same vein. If you have any suggestions, let me know please. Peace homie.
@dingdongism Жыл бұрын
To add to the critique of MDD, they do no real moderation. It’s almost comically bad, where the “moderator” is more or less just paying attention to chat. Also there is the endless, awkward and scripted plugs for other debates and the channel itself. They never seem to end and interrupt the flow of everything. I honestly keep MDD in the background sometimes so I have chalked up some views for sure, but as a platform it’s pretty bad.
@BeheadedKamikaze Жыл бұрын
Really enjoyed your reviews and looking forward to the next! Regarding your opening to Daniel - Not suggesting you would overlook this, but I might suggest not simply relying on the audience's disgust at the topic, for there will most likely be some out there who don't share it. I hope you find a way to tackle the topic as objectively as possible, make it airtight, and don't let the bastard have any wriggle room on this one. I am confident you will do it justice. :) Cheers!
@soeasyastonercoulddoit Жыл бұрын
The only person that could pull off this kind of power move would be Matt.
@tkenglander6226 Жыл бұрын
Hmmm ... I'd think Cosmic Skeptic could take on a debate of this sort (but he might not want to). He'd most likely win though.
@saminsaqlain9099 Жыл бұрын
Matt is going to destroy Daniel. Like Matt said that Daniel only attacked Christianity instead of debating on the morality of child marriage. He can't do that with Matt.
@reuelmcintosh1589 Жыл бұрын
Hey Matt, you should get Tyler Vela on the show or debate his current position, seeing as he is no longer a Christian but still a theist. it would be interesting to see what common ground you now share about Christianity or to see another debate specifically about theism.
@jasonspades1265 Жыл бұрын
Oh wow, that's a really good suggestion
@Dume_Guy Жыл бұрын
Good suggestion. Even tho he is no longer a Christian, my mind immediately goes to Hitchens when he said, “even the diest still has all of their work ahead of them.”
@kylegeorge1245 Жыл бұрын
Really, he's not a Christian anymore? What's his reason ?
@rG1vZ Жыл бұрын
Didn't matt debate him once when he was still a christian?
@philj3167 Жыл бұрын
Kenny couldn't debate himself out of a paper bag... although he might be able to debate himself into one
@jonnawyatt Жыл бұрын
The best debate I've seen was the first one I've seen. "The catholic church is a force for good in the world" Christopher Hitchens and Stephen Fry vs a catholic bishop and the truly nasty Ann Widdicomb, who btw converted to catholicism from CoE. The latter were trounced.
@snakeplisssken8095 Жыл бұрын
Matt, I would love to hear your thoughts about one of my favorite debates "Is the Catholic Church a force for good?" an oldie with Hitchens and Fry on Intelligence Squared.
@moshpitmi Жыл бұрын
I love you so much Matt!!!!! You liked my comment on twitter and I will hold that close to me forever
@NielMalan Жыл бұрын
As I listened to Matt's description of the debate, my consternation grew: do these debaters not consider children humans? It sounds as if the debates were conducted in the tone of "should I spay my cat?"
@Duchess_Van_Hoof Жыл бұрын
Just that, they do not consider children autonomous human beings deserving of rights. Ever notice conservatives shouting about "parent's rights" but never the rights of children?
@bipolarminddroppings Жыл бұрын
I dunno, I saw one clip of your debate with Jordan Peterson and wondered how you could ever lose a debate, I was told Peterson is one of the smart ones...
@bipolarminddroppings Жыл бұрын
@Orange Stapler I figured him out years ago, Ive just never listened to him speak before. I read the first page of his book, he got so many basic, easily checkable with google and wikipedia, things wrong about evolution in the first few paragraphs that I knew he had nothing worthwhile to say. If you can't get basic stuff right, like how long ago humans and lobsters last common ancestor lived, then you either don't care about truth and accuracy or you are deliberately misleading people to help make whatever inane point you are driving at.
@DariusRoland Жыл бұрын
Ok, Now I need a video of Matt singing like Eric Burden!! 😁😍😁
@swaggyswag147 Жыл бұрын
thank you matt, learned a lot how to handle conversations from you!
@user-co6wc8di5l Жыл бұрын
The take of non-Abrahamic religions not having an impact was very disappointing. There are millions of Hindus and Buddhists in the world and their religions have had an enormous effect on the human history of those relevant parts of the world. That does not even include localized religions that are immensely important to the long history of certain more isolated populations.
@dianarising7703 Жыл бұрын
I really appreciated that you mentioned consent. One thing I worry about with child marriage is whether the child actually wanted the marriage, or really understood what they were getting into. Great video.
@pamigreenway Жыл бұрын
We don't let children make a lot of potentially harmful decisions for themselves regardless of whether they want to do something or not. It's our job as adults, parents, care givers etc, to keep them safe until their pre frontal cortices are mature enough to make good decision or they've reached an age that allows them to make their own choices regardless of the outcome.
@baconsarny-geddon8298 Жыл бұрын
@@pamigreenway We don't let children make potentially harmful decisions, even if they want to... *UNLESS that child makes the 100% unsupported (and totally incoherent, unless you believe in "souls") claim, in denial of 100% of the empirical evidence, that they are (in some mystical, pseudo-spiritual sense) "REALLY the opposite sex"... In which case, Matt "super-duper-rational big-boy" Dillahunty decides that we can just ignore every single scrap of VERIFIABLE, EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE, because the unsupported assertion, justified by nothing more than "...but it FEEELS true, to me" is obviously the REAL truth!!! And only evil, hateful bigots would EVER oppose irreversably chemically mutilating this perfectly healthy child, HOPEFULLY making the initially-healthy child drug-dependent for life, for the purpose of making them (superfically APPEAR to) conform to the exact same gender norms that Matt PRETENDS to oppose... Matt is EXACTLY as irrational, and as eager to disregard the empirical evidence, as the religious nuts he criticizes, because he shares beliefs with 100% identical justification to theirs. There is absolutely ZERO empirical evidence supporting the claim that "Jesus died for our sins". Yet believers still accept that claim as "the REAL Truth", justified SOLELY on the basis of "but... but it FEEELS true, to me..." Identically, there is absolutely ZERO empirical evidence supporting the claim that "trans-women ARE women". Yet believers (like Dillahunty) still accept that claim as "the REAL Truth", justified SOLELY on the basis of "but... but it FEEELS true, to me..." Matt literally believes that speaking the magical spell "I identify as [x]" (somehow?) instantly transforms you into [x]. Christians and Muslims have some dumb, goofy ideas... but not even THEY are as irrational as Dillahunty's bizarre, faith-based religious belief that "IDENTIFYING as" a thing, is somehow the same as actually BEING that thing... -He PRETENDS to support women... but then endorse an ideology which literally erases "women", as an evidence-based biological catagory, from existence. It puts fully-intact, convicted male raapists in a cell with (real-world, evidence-based) women. It has erased the rights of women and girls to privacy, to safety, to self-determination, to fair sports. He PRETENDS to support feminism, but denies that "women" as an evidence-based, sex-based catagory even EXIST,and priorities the "validation" of 0.2% of males, above the basic safety of 100% of women and girls... -he PRETENDS to support gays and lesbians... but then endorsed an ideology which accuses ALL gays and lesbian s of being "hateful transphobic bigots, simply for BEING same-sex attracted (rather than "same-GENDER atrracted", which has never been a thing... He PRETENDS to support gays and lesbians, yet just like Christianity, Islam, and ALL homophobic ideology, Matt's beliefs demand that lesbians be prepared to have sex with males, and that gay men have sex with females... He PRETENDS to support gays and lesbians... but he's happy to allow THOUSANDS of same-sex attracted children (who are VERY often gender non-conforming, and also confused about their identity) suffer needless childhood chemical mutililation, after being mis--ID'd as """"trans kids"""" (by doctors who presume to know the future...), resulting in loss of adult fertilty, loss of adult sexual function, inability to EVER orgasm, significant loss of bone density (all documented results of puberty-blockers) And the fact that he's actively supporting the 100% medically unjustified, irreversable chemical (and surgical, from age 12 up) mutilation of children, justified ONLY by a claim with exactly ZERO empirical evidence, which relies on THE EXACT SAME "but it FEEELS true to me" reasoning as every other religion on earth, makes Matt's religious beliefs FAR, FAR more (measurably, objectively, physiologically) harmful than any other mainstream religion... (And like the dumbest kind of Christians, when you criticize Matt's religious beliefs for their 100% absence of empirical evidence, he won't even TRY to produce any actual evidence to prove the critic wrong; Instead, he just asserts that he can psychically read your motivations, and that rejecting his evidence-free beliefs automatically MAKES YOU immoral- "a hateful, bigotted transphobe!!" in his terms. ie, the EXACT SAME strategy as Christians, who respond to critics with accusations of "YOU JUST HATE GOD AND WANT TO SIN!!!!" A decade ago, Matt was a rational (if self-righteous, smug, and arrogant) man. Now he's relying on the EXACT SAME logic and arguments, as the most basic, irrational theists, to defend his anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-lesbian, 100% evidence-free religious beliefs...
@SupremeSquiggly Жыл бұрын
@@baconsarny-geddon8298 It’s amazing how obsessed you people are about how someone else identifies. You’re literally creeping in the comments with a verbose copy and paste diatribe waiting for a moment to bring up trans issues on irrelevant topics.
@KBosch-xp2ut Жыл бұрын
@@pamigreenway Parents in many states in the USA can consent to their child getting married, which means a parent seems to be able to consent to harming their own child if they wish. Sad, but true.
@pamigreenway Жыл бұрын
@@KBosch-xp2ut Yep, it's horribly true.
@108Rudi Жыл бұрын
Most debates with theists should begin with an explanation of what a debate is, what words/concepts/logic/grammar are and what constitutes evidence.
@gunjinrieper4062 Жыл бұрын
Been waitin for this
@philipinchina Жыл бұрын
Your content is always excellent.
@hannahanderson4305 Жыл бұрын
I brought that up so many times their take on boys getting married at 9 or 10, "crickets".
@zeroglitch1310 Жыл бұрын
Comment for the algorithm. Hope life is treating you well, Matt.
@SamWeltzin Жыл бұрын
It would be nice if you could debate in favor of secular humanism more instead of just against others' belief systems, since one of the most common criticisms levied against you is that you don't take a stance on things (untrue, but it's something people say since most topics aren't even about your belief system). With a few pro-secular humanist debates under your belt, people can point to them when that criticism is levied.
@duggage Жыл бұрын
I can't seem to find your debate review of your own that you said you already did in a separate video. Is that on a different channel? Thanks, and keep up the LORDS work... ;)
@rstehlik100 Жыл бұрын
Neutral does not equal allowing harm
@peteredout4329 Жыл бұрын
The whole debate con was sicking because the whole thing seemed to be about supporting prediphilia. Aron and TJ (I listening to it) seemed silly because right in his opening Aron saw the folly of complaining about religion when he himself is involved with one and a lame excuse of I only bought a 15 dollar membership card did not help his position. While TJ said religion does some good things so we can toss out all the bad. Basically. I listened to about 15 minutes of the Daniel D debate and stopped because listening to people support prediphia is sickening. This is tough for me because I eclectic on the the whole view. I do believe that it is stigmatized to a point that people suffering from it and view it as wrong are afraid to seek help because of how they will be treated. (this is why I, like matt once mentioned, called the act prediphilia because I have no support for those predators that attack children.) Especially when you go online and people post means of guns and bullets and the meme reads the only cure for them is a .45 bullet. Once that kind of mentality was said of other mental health issues but once we had a better understanding we were able to better help those in need. More support to mental health is needed!!
@sadsismint Жыл бұрын
I think that there was some talk on consent, though it was quite brief and i can't recall which of the debates it was in. But still.... the people that debated the muslims really didn't give them hell to pay, when they could of easily pulled them back on topic and highlighted that they missed the points entirely.
@Sp00kyBedHair Жыл бұрын
dargndorp always said you could tell when it's the end of the month, because that's when you release these vids 🙂
@WackoT18 Жыл бұрын
@Matt in the QnA someone actually asked Kenny if Muhammed did consemate the marrige when Aisha was 9 would he still take Muhammad as his profet and islam as his religion. The question was asekt by a muslim who clearly had problems with Danial Hikikathou's viewpoint. Kenny anserd that if Muhammed did according to his sources the merrige was completely moral. (But he went in to the whole consemating does not mean sex wile giving the anser) i think Wood should have pused back more at this.
@GrimOakheart Жыл бұрын
I have to say, and maybe you do not like it matt, but after watching the child rape debate and your announcement I am actually really looking forward to that debate. Not in a way that one would be exited about two great boxers clashing in the ring, but more like the exitement that comes with watching a monster truck crushing a beat up automobile from the time when gay just meant "happy".
@seraphonica Жыл бұрын
honestly I wish this happened more often. (presenting one's opening ahead of time) lots less time wasted talking past one another if you're arguing in good faith. and quite clear when someone like Deepak Chopra argues astronomy with biologists and biology with astronomers.
@M4ttNet Жыл бұрын
Good analysis. I agree with Mike Jones doing well but I think he definitely pandered to the crowd too much. Which is a good thing if you're a comedian but having the crowd agree or disagree with you should have no bearing on the debate and actually makes you look weaker IMHO. Where I think Daniel really mis-stepped (beyond being repugnant in promoting child rape, his endorsement of child sex slavery was particularly abhorrent and shocking to me despite the bar already being so low) was when he kept trying to force and either/or question on Mike, it showed a real ignorance on American Christianity to force some of these points he clearly thought would be gotchas. Around 53:07. Where Daniel asked which was morally worse. A 10 year old girl (who allegedly has completed puberty) gets married to a "good" believing Christian man with parental consent vs a 10 year old having premarital sex with a 10 year old boy. Mike responded that he didn't need to answer that he thought both were immoral. Daniel then challenged if Mike would fight against pre-marital underage sex as strongly as minor marriage and Mike easily answered yes. Daniel seemed surprised then asked where and Mike just said here and now. The reality is amongst many Christians complete abstinence before marriage is strongly taught against vehemently and constantly. Daniel was completely ignorant of this and thought he had him trapped but just looked silly when he didn't and agreed he'd fight that equally. Ironically that argument might have been more targeted to say an atheist who doesn't hold the belief in absolute abstinence before marriage but does argue against minor sex. A bit of a sign of not understanding his opponent and having some pre-fab weak argument traps IMHO. Then Daniel goes on to challenge that some scholars suggest Mary might've been married to Joseph at 12-14 and asked whether Jesus believed child marriage was OK accordingly to his time period vs 2023 belief standards. Mike stumbled here IMHO. Instead of cherry-picking sources that might suggest some didn't believe in child bearing at such a young age it's far easier to just say yes Jesus would've believed what was taught in his time and we believe differently. Much like slavery was legal (and endorsed by the Bible) but we don't believe that now etc. I'm not sure if Mike Jones is some super fundamentalist, but unless he was that is a perfectly tenable argument and would've shut down another poorly crafted trap by Daniel. These whole it was done before so it's OK now arguments are tissue paper thin since you just have to find one thing that person doesn't agree we should continue, usually slavery will do the trick of course. Now maybe Daniel supports slavery still, considering some of statements I really don't know... but I'd still had made that counter and forced him to admit it if so. In fact since Daniel got so far in the weeds with whataboutism he should've just kept making Daniel confirm repugnant beliefs of sex at any age (if alleged puberty happened), that slavery and sex slavery was ok, etc etc etc. An easy game to "win" against him.
@Tar-Elenion Жыл бұрын
The use of 'puberty' is anachronistic. The sex (meaning actual intercourse) is permissible as soon as the child-wife can bear it (i.e. not be physical injured).
@fplyerbs5251 Жыл бұрын
Totally respect the work you do and love most of your work...I wonder whether your consent video will be openly speciest or will you touch on the lack of consent by non human animals... Much love Matt
@MrWaterlionmonkey Жыл бұрын
"Any religion but the abrhabic religions has had a negligible impact on human history" i disagree. Buddhism is extremely important to asian history. It impacted government, philosophy, morality, war history, society, writing and civilisation, it was a civilising force throughout Asia. You can't understand any Asian history without some basic knowledge of Buddhism and by extention Hinduism from which it is related. Massively important in America and Europe for the hippy movement also.
@SansDeity Жыл бұрын
Fair point. Thanks
@MrWaterlionmonkey Жыл бұрын
@@SansDeity Wow! I love you Matt. You're the reason I'm an atheist.
@whydontyoustfu Жыл бұрын
Kenny answered this in q and a He said his marriage if happened was moral as brother daniel hachigaku argued😂
@jonstrummer6930 Жыл бұрын
Alright mate? Just as a matter of interest, Is your username Goobbaaraa/Goovvaaraa in English? I've spent a lot of time in India and taught myself how to read and write in Hindi but that was a looong time ago so I'm just checking to see if I can still do it.
@whydontyoustfu Жыл бұрын
@@jonstrummer6930 gubbaara.
@jonstrummer6930 Жыл бұрын
@गुब्बारा Ah ok. So it's the short 'oo' sound? I always get the 'u' or 'oo' mixed up. And the 'b' and 'v' as they look and sound similar. So my effort wasn't too bad!? Cheers mate.
@whydontyoustfu Жыл бұрын
@@jonstrummer6930 गु - gu गू - goo सु - su सू - soo व - vuh ब - buh Only difference is line inside the circle. Appreciate it mate. Not many people are interested in learning hindi. Good to know that.👍
@jonstrummer6930 Жыл бұрын
@गुब्बारा Thanks mate. I was there for a while backpacking around India and Nepal for about 7 months the 1st time then a year later I managed 8 months. So I had plenty of time to do it. I did it mainly because a lot of the coaches I was catching only had their destinations written in Hindi. And I thought it was the right thing to do to learn the language of the country I was travelling in. It didn't go down too well in the south though! Like the folks in Tamil Nadu really didn't like to speak Hindi! Jai Hind, mera bhai!
@tracewallace23 Жыл бұрын
Matt Dillahunty Could you please pin the details on Debatecon 4 (date, time, place, cost etc)? Sounds like a blast. I hope that I can come🙂😎 Thanks for all of your hard work to enlighten the population💪👍
@habibie Жыл бұрын
Thanks Matt.
@boxxyismyqueen1 Жыл бұрын
I was at Debatecon and during the Q&A I asked Daniel about whether consent matters (I am the very last question). Daniel completely dodged by saying there are different schools of thought with different opinions. I would have liked to press him more but they were over time and had to keep the Q&A quick.
@takoja507 Жыл бұрын
in Islam wives consent doesn't matter. There is no such a thing as marital rape. Woman is property and does as the man wills.
@mariomario1462 Жыл бұрын
Consent matters but not "as soon as they turn 18" that's not how it works
@emilwandel Жыл бұрын
He would say for minors the parents consent. He mentioned this multiple times when pressed about early puberty in infants. But no parent would agree but from the religious side they would be moral to do so. And thank you for asking this question.
@takoja507 Жыл бұрын
@@emilwandel Well in many USA states child marriage is legal and adults actually marry children in those so. I wouldn't say no parents consent to it. They do in modern day USA.
@emilwandel Жыл бұрын
@@takoja507 don't be dense he wasn't talking about a specific country but how marriages ale are made between the parents of the groom and bride and obviously need their consent. This debate was not about legality of things but about morals. And believe it or not consent is also a moral consent not just a legal one.
@alicankunta Жыл бұрын
I couldn’t find the debate review with Husain. Is it up there anywhere? Edit: It’s just uploaded today!
@whydontyoustfu Жыл бұрын
Me neither and wheres his opening for daniel debate which he was gonna upload
@paramountx Жыл бұрын
He mentioned-consent and Daniel said the parents give consent-
@grogash90 Жыл бұрын
If you didn't already, maybe you didn't considering you did accept to debate him was my thought, I suggest watching the debate Daniel had against Aron too "What's Best for Society, Islam or Atheism?", if anything else to be prepared for how deranged some of his talking points can be. The way Daniel talks about secular humanism sounds like a fever dream, basically entirely made up just to throw dirt on the opponent. Or maybe he really thinks what he said, it's really hard to tell to be honest.
@Raz.C Жыл бұрын
- "My God is Chrom! He LAUGHS at your Four Winds!!" 'Hah!! My God is the Everlasting Sky! YOUR God lives beneath it!" Nb: That's Conan debating theology with Subotai in the 1982 film (NOT in the 1984 travesty).
@TheDeath138 Жыл бұрын
The Aron/TJump debate was kind of boring actually. It just boiled down to arguing about whether the utility of lying to people because it makes them happy is good or not. One of the parts that did bug me a little though was TJump using the "Well would you lie to the Nazi's about the Jews in your basement" question because I feel like that's a different ballgame than what the debate was supposed to be about. Especially when you consider that the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition (along with several other genocides and even some of the crap we're dealing with in this country right now) were committed and pushed for by people who believed the lies of their religion. I also frankly don't think utility out weighs truth. I'd rather know the truth than to be lied to just to maintain a blissful ignorance. The other part that bugged me was TJump dismissing pretty much out of hand studies that said the opposite of the ones that he brought up with some basic hand waving. He basically used a standard theist tactic there. I've seen people say that they think TJump won that debate, but I don't agree even if I do think that Aron perhaps wasn't as prepared for that debate as he seems to be for others. As you said though, the topic was far too broad to be of any real use to anyone anyway.
@Sweddoski Жыл бұрын
The metastudy Tjump brought up had included the study AronRa had and also said that they were several hundreds agreeing with Tjump 2 against and 8 you couldn’t decide. The fact you can’t listen to a debate is a you issue :)
@waves_under_stars Жыл бұрын
I haven't seen your debate review with Hussein, where is it?
@landsgevaer Жыл бұрын
Apart from the generality of "does religion do more harm than good?", how do quantify how much harm and how much good (a specific) religion does, and even if you could answer that, how do you weight those against eachother? How do you weight the number of suicides against the amount of money donated to the poor, etc.? That too is way too vague.
@No_Use_For_A_Name Жыл бұрын
Yeah, Ive heard Haqiqatju talking about this crap before. The reason he doesnt mention young boys being married off young is because, and I was surprised he didnt really mention it in this debate, that marry the girls off young was all about making the window of birth as wide as possible. So it doesnt really matter for males. They can have no babies for 20 years, then all of a sudden empregnate an infinite amount all in a short amount of time. So it isnt as big a deal as whats required of females. Its all wtong and medically terrible and unsound, but that is his argument.
@linomars7475 Жыл бұрын
Mmmm Asia, ancient Egypt, early roman empire and ancient Greece (to name a few big ones) strongly disagree with the "other religion than Abrahamic religions have had negligeable impact on recorded history
@ryanwert7591 Жыл бұрын
I don’t see your review for your latest debate that you mentioned? Was it taken down by KZfaq? 3.0 isn’t showing in your videos.
@thesouringgentleman Жыл бұрын
I watched the sickening debate until he said there needs to be some outlet for sexual frustrations in 8 year olds, and anything outside of marriage is sinful. I’m not a violent person…
@neetpride5919 Жыл бұрын
Daniel Haqiqatjou: Noted Predator Laptop Owner
@samforsyth Жыл бұрын
Not sure anyone would consider it "going against your word" if you change your mind now that you have more knowledge about Daniel. But the prerequisites you've laid out are more than fair, as well.
@mcarp555 Жыл бұрын
Can someone provide a link to the review of the debate with Hussein? I don't see it on Matt's channel, but he's saying he's posted it.
@bengreen171 Жыл бұрын
Wood was his usual smug self when addressing Islam. And I think Mike also slid into that way of patronising condescension when he harped on about Christianity 'saving the world'. Both are in no position to crow about morality, as you rightly pointed out, since both hold to a position that is just as arbitrary as Islam, and both defend positions that are widely held to be anathema to modern moral views in the world today. Congrats to Mike for being in a position where he could finally use the data honestly to back his case.
@Champruby Жыл бұрын
All of Matt's objections to the first debate topic, were answered in the opening statements
@danielrose881 Жыл бұрын
"Toss out everything except the Abrahamic religions, because statistically speaking in the grand scheme of things, because everything that is not one of the Abrahamic religions has had a negligible impact on human history". Paused at 5 mins to comment, so this may get mentioned later, but no, you can't just assume that the Abrahamic religions make up practically all of religious belief around the world, it makes up just over 55% of world belief, leaving a whole heap of other beliefs to discuss... hello over 1billion Hindus!
@SilortheBlade Жыл бұрын
"Well that's just super" In my best reverend Lovejoy voice.
@AlBundyOz Жыл бұрын
You contradict your own statement. 55% is considered THE MAJORITY ffs............
@danielrose881 Жыл бұрын
@@AlBundyOz I didn't say "majority". But he did say "negligible impact on human history"
@santerilaakeristo7305 Жыл бұрын
Yeah, I also thought that was really weird statement. Maybe if you look it in a lens of “how does this affect western world” but that’s pretty small minded.
@robertmiller9735 Жыл бұрын
I think he meant that the Abrahamic religions have more influence and, especially, have done the most harm. Which is still iffy. From what I've heard, Hinduism does PLENTY of harm.
@theriffwriter2194 Жыл бұрын
I don't believe in any kind of psychic ability or anything supernatural but I do feel some people have a stronger sense of intuition than others. Or maybe the word I'm looking for is instincts. What I'm getting at is Haqiqatjou makes my skin crawl more than almost anyone I've ever seen on a screen and I'd bet pretty much anything it's only a matter of time before he really hurts someone and I don't think I'd ever agree to be in the same room as him. I hope I'm wrong.
@feedingravens Жыл бұрын
My (layman's) opinion is that one's opinions, viewpoints, self-esteem, PREFERENCES are pretty much fixated sometime in your life in an instant - and no one knows, and it is is individual, at what moment of your development, on what hormonal level, on what social conditions, on what type of event this behavioral "imprinting" occurs. (In german the term "Prägung" is a standard term for such behavioral mechanism, no idea whether there is a specific term in english) And as you dp mpt lmow, and as we should hold the individual freedom extremely high, we should be VERY careful not to force our views upon anyone. And if it is to bring a kid to prefer pudding to icecream. It has a right to find that out for itself. Of course it is a thin line, one MUST guide children, prevent them from harming themselves. But as little as possible. Rule of thumb - will it cause permanent damage (or traumatization) or just hurt? No - then warn and leave the choice to try it out. And when you warned and were proven right when the kid tried it nevertheless, your authority is WAY more established as when you forbid everything, and the kid tries it out in secret and finds out nothing happens, that all the screams are just nonsense) (My mother told me again and again that I should not touch the hot oven plate, that hurts, and finally said "OK, then do it", and while I smacked my hand on the plate, grinning at her, she let in the water. And the rest of the evening I sat there with my hand in a bowl of icewater. Point made.) Especially puberty is the phase where you find out what you want, where your social behaviour is defined/determined, so here you need as much feedom as possible From your gender identity, the gender(s) you want to be with, to your hobbies, what you want to do for a living, all that needs to be found out. The more the parents allow, the more they just coach and not order, the more they will be included in the finding process, keep track what is actually going on. Child marriage is the EXACT opposite. Directly from the restrictive parental environment you are handed over into a situation where there is a determining institution, HE defines your social environment, in which you are a tiny add-on without any say, HE has full financial control, you have zero possibility to so anything on your own. That is not US freedom that is slavery, a handmaid's tale.
@Cosmic_Darkmatter Жыл бұрын
Probably the best way to state that is, The Abrahamic religions have the most impact on Modern/recent history. Clearly children don't have the mental/physical(consent) maturity to realize the implications of marriage or the things that generally go into a relationship(including consummation). The notion that you have to marry them off as soon a possible is ridiculous, there is no reason that people shouldn't wait till they have all the maturity to make that choice. You can debate when that point is, but its not 1-16............ and questionable at 17 and 18.
@newtype385 Жыл бұрын
Sorry you have to debate Daniel, but I have complete trust in you to disprove and destroy all his points and beliefs in that subject. I had only seen him debate Vaush before this last debate on a different subject. Vaush was upset finding out about Daniel's child marriage beliefs after the debate and that he didn't get to take him down a notch.
@No_Use_For_A_Name Жыл бұрын
I was actually pretty dissapointed in the TJump Ra debate. I did find it pretty boring. And i did actually make a comment that entailed that I would think you would have to isolate each religion, it just doesnt really work. I was dissapointed because I do like how TJump debates, so I was interested to see how two people on a similar side of a topic were going to go about it, maybe TJump was going to use it as like some sort of training or something. But yeah, I sort of have to say that i did find it pretty dissapointing.
@2ahdcat Жыл бұрын
I don't like MDD because I don't like James. He said some shitty things a while back and He can't moderate for shit IMHO. BTW, You audio's a bit low. Had to turn my volume up to 80% to hear You clearly. . Still... worth the watch 👍
@LettersAndNumbers300 Жыл бұрын
So unless you backed it on Indiegogo one can have no idea what it’s about…? Just so I understand, thanks.
@watchin7029 Жыл бұрын
Matt can you make a video suggesting videos, books, documentaries, content creators, blogs and web sites. Something ,maybe, not exhaustive but indicative of your mental and intellectual diet.
@ramigilneas9274 Жыл бұрын
So Michael Jones was accused of dismissing some parts of science for religious reasons by someone who dismisses much much more of science for religious reasons? What a strange tactic.
@nexxterra Жыл бұрын
Show idea...ask AI to "prove god"...Then do a show on what it says...
@drooten Жыл бұрын
Kenny would never answer your question. Regardless of how you phrase a question, he will push back on them. Meanwhile Daniels argument made me feel sick to my stomach.
@trog69 Жыл бұрын
So, the debate is about the center channel? Is a 2.1 system as good as a 3.1 setup rather than the "phantom" center? Veddy interrrestink, but stupid!
@mr_whitehair Жыл бұрын
Anybody know what software Matt uses to keep track of notes and talking points? I see him use it occasionally and I find it interesting
@PhysiKarlz Жыл бұрын
Pen and paper.
@dingdongism Жыл бұрын
@@PhysiKarlz Is that on both iOS and Android?
@PhysiKarlz Жыл бұрын
@@dingdongism If you have one of those devices underneath the paper, yes.
@kevinshort3943 Жыл бұрын
Maybe that's a good idea for a future debate. Exposing extreme views to the light of exposure, and hoping they shrivel up *vs* starving them of the oxygen of publicity
@Pancakegr8 Жыл бұрын
“Consent” was definitely used, however, only in a scenario where parents give consent to marrying their daughter off to a man.
@Iverath Жыл бұрын
I didn't watch Matt's video, but I think the subject of the video was TERRIIIIBBBLLEEE
@lostfan5054 Жыл бұрын
David Wood is a snarky jerk. He's always like that. He debated Eric Murphy a while ago and he's just mean.
@robtbo Жыл бұрын
David already has a disadvantage in any debate about Islam in that he thinks that his convictions make him convincing to anyone even attempting to be objective. “God tells us the right thing to do and it’s not oppression to require others to comply via forcible or coerced submission.” His supporting arguments will ignore any benefits of and often the very existence of non-traditional Islamic practices.
@toyranch Жыл бұрын
David Wood's young son Reid died of a disease in the middle of April 2023 (less than 2 weeks ago) so give him a pass. Just FYI
@tommy32408 Жыл бұрын
My head may explode, I almost agree with Matt...
@wbalvanz Жыл бұрын
I liked the one where Michael and Daniel - two men (a Muslim and a Catholic) debated on which children they could rape. I noticed that at no point was consent of the girl being married off was covered, too.
@adako25 Жыл бұрын
19:40 Matt is the eminem of debating LOL ending people's careers