Munk Debates- Hitchens and Blair Debate Religion

Photo is from The National Post.

Tony Blair- War Criminal. That was the chanting that greeted us from around the corner as we made our way to Roy Thompson Hall last night for the last of this year's Munk Debates. I was a bit surprised, I'll admit, but the local news cameras were all there and although Blair is no longer the PM, he is still involved in Middle-eastern politics, so perhaps I should not have been.

Next stop, security. No big shock there, as I had been phoned the day before to be reminded to arrive with plenty of time to allow for the scanning and searching that is required when former heads of state appear in public. I have to say, used to as I am to airport measures, this was a rather ineffective display of serious security. The guard posted at the door, young and likely inexperienced, just took my word that all I had was "a cellphone and my wallet down there" when I briefly opened my purse. On the side sleeve, I had one of those cloth grocery bags, which I merely lifted up to show- anything could have been hiding underneath, but I guess I looked really trustworthy, especially after I pointed out that "there's only feminine products" in the side pocket. It never ceases to make me laugh how squeamish some men are about tampons, but I digress. The metal detector wands were almost laughable too- I removed my coat and purse, held them at the tip of my outstretched arms (the shoulder really is getting stronger!) and the wand went up and down my legs, torso and arms, but not over the purse and coat. Not much of a check, is it? My sister and I remarked that a good blowdart would have easily done the trick, given how close we ended up being to Blair once we were seated.

The debate itself was rather one-sided, and I say this above admitting I am firmly in agreement with Christopher Hitchens on the Con side of whether religion is a force for good in the world. Hitch had a lot of automatic sympathy from the audience- he is in the last stages of what is likely terminal cancer, he looked pale and gaunt, and at times he struggled to keep his voice strong and clear, though I can assure the wit and sharpness of his criticisms did not seem to suffer from his grave illness. It was very hard to look at his thin, bald frame, but he did not disappoint those who came to hear him lob endless verbal grenades at his opponent. Blair, on the other hand, was a real let-down. For someone who was a seasoned parliamentarian, I expected more than just the same argument repeated in various ways. Granted, perhaps Hitchens had the easier position to take, but he seemed much more prepared to give examples and counter-arguments than Blair did. All we heard from the Pro side was that people of faith were motivated by this faith to do great things and that ,surely this was enough to win the debate. Hitchens went after him for all sorts of historical wrongs, continued attacks on science, women, poverty, and war atrocities aided by the religious leaders of all stripes, but Blair hung on to one message, often trying to separate fanaticism and wrong-doings from religious institutions as misinterpretations of religious ideals rather than products of doctrines. Overall, he didn't seem to be able to make his points as strongly as his opponent, who won the debate in 68% of the audience's opinion.

My favourite Hitch story was one I was already familiar with, from a journalistic foray into Northern Ireland in the 70s at the height of The Troubles. He was due to interview one of the leaders (and I cannot remember for which side, honestly) and was taken at gunpoint to meet with him. During the ride, with a pistol pressed into his temple, he was asked whether he was Catholic or the Protestant. His reply: I am a Jewish atheist. Your friendly local gunman: Are you a Protest or Catholic Jewish atheist? You can't make this stuff up, and it was part of a great retort to Blair's claim that the Good Friday Peace Accord was the result of faith groups coming together to solve a problem. Hitch quickly descended upon him with the obvious point that, had there not been religious intolerance to begin with, there would have been no discord.

There was also a beautiful portion of the evening when Christopher Hitchens explained that one does not need to be religious to admire the luminous or transcendent that occurs in the world- he held up the Parthenon as an example of something so beautiful, that it matters little that it was once a temple to long-forgotten gods. In that view, he and I are much alike. He praised the beauty or architecture and sculpture (but not painting, which made me chuckle along with many others) brought about by faith, but doesn't feel one needs to have belief or faith to appreciate them as extraordinary creations in our material world.

My only regrets are that the sound quality was not always great. I was seated in the choir section of what is primarily the Toronto Symphony orchestra's main performing hall, a mere ten feet away from both speakers, and struggled often to make out the words. Granted, Hitch coughed a lot and lacked steadiness in his volume and clarity, but even Tony Blair seemed faint at times. My last regret is that I will likely never hear Christopher Hitchens speak live again, and that saddens me, admirer as I am of his spoken and written words. Apparently many fans who bought tickets last night for over $500 thought so too.

For anyone interested, you can purchase the full debate audio here.