having fought in the iraq war and the second world war side- by-side, it has brought us together. there is a lot in common. there are assets that are very good. i think in some ways, american society is more open and is much less class with and then british society. -- much less class driven than british society. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> for a dvd copy of this program, call 1-877-662-7726. to give comments on this program, visit us at q-and- a.org.

the programs are also available as podcasts. >> the redesigned booknotes web site now has over 800 artists interviewed about their books. there, you can see transcripts and use the searchable database and find links to authors' blogs and other things. it is a great way to enjoy the authors and their books. >> the house of commons is in recess, so "prime minister's questions" will not be shown this week. it will return on wednesday, january 12, with live coverage at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span2. tonight, a debate between four and british prime minister tony blair and christopher hitchens.

later, "q&a," with the differences between the u.s. and british governments. original documentary on the supreme court has been newly updated and ayers on sunday, january 2. usd things only available to the justices and their staff, and you will hear how the board works -- the court works, hearing from all of the justices, including elena kagan. also, hear about the latest developments. this will be airing for the first time in high-definition sunday, january 2, at 6:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> next, a debate between former british prime minister tony blair and christopher hitchens, author of "god is not great." after the debates, they took comments from the audience. this is just under two hours.

>> it is my privilege to be your moderator tonight. i want to begin by welcoming the worldwide audience of the british broadcasting corporation, some 240 million people that will have access to this debate through the bbc world service, the d.c. online news, and bbc world news. -- the bbc online news. we want to bring this debate to a truly global audience. i also want to welcome the tens of thousands of people watching this live on munkdebates.com. it is terrific they are a part of this debate, too, and i want to turn our attention to this hall, where a lucky 2700 people are here in the flesh to listen to this debate tonight. let it be said that on this day, things to the generosity of

peter and melanie monk, canada and its large city toronto is clearly at the heart of the conversation. [applause] now, the moment we have all been waiting for. we have our motion before us. be it resolved, religion is a force of good in the world. all we need is our debaters here, center stage. ladies and gentlemen, please welcome mr. tony blair and mr. christopher hitchins. [cheers and applause]

[applause] tony blair was the prime minister of the united kingdom from 1997 until 2007. among his many international roles today, he is a representative in the middle east, working with the u.n., the u.s., russia, and the eu to try to secure a lasting peace in the region. after leaving politics, mr blair converted to catholicism and launched a global initiative, a foundation, to promote respect and understanding among the world's great religions. many of us in this room have read his recent best-selling memoir, "a journey of my political life." kirsten hithins is an author,

journalist, an atheist. his regular "vanity fair and" riding is central reading for anyone and anyone concerned about global affairs. christopher has a number of best-selling books, too. obviously, "god is not great." in his recently published memoir. he was recently diagnosed with esophageal cancer, and as such, we are doubly grateful that he and his family are here tonight. >> let me briefly run down the next hour and half will unfold.

each debater has been given seven minutes for their opening remarks for and against the motion. mr. hitchens and mr. blair will confront each other had on, so to speak, through two rounds of formal or bottles. we will then bring the audience into the debate through written questions. all of you received a written questionard. fill that out and pass it down the aisle for collection. i will also be taking questions from audience members on t stage. those questions will be asked directly to mr. blair and mr. hitchens. we will also bring in our online audience through a series of questions. the debate will conclude with short, five-minute closing statements and a second audience vote on the motion. before i call on our debaters for their opening statements, let's find out how the 2700

people in this audience voted as they came into the hall. we're going to get those numbers up on the screen now. 22% of you are in favor of th motion. 57% are opposed. 21% of you are undecided. we also asked y a second question tonight. we asked you if you are open to changing your vote. let's have tho numbers. wow. 75% of this audience could change their vote depending on what they hear in the next hour and half. ladies and gentlemen, we clearly have a debate on our hands. remember that we will pull the audience again at the end of the proceedings to find out which of these debaters was able to win

swaying as with the power of their arguments. the time has come for introductory remarks. christopher hitchens will begin with his opening statement. >> thank you, ladies and gentlemen. munk familyo the amou for making this possible. i might have to seize a lat er chance of taking my esteemed opnent. 3.5 minutes for the material world will not be excessive. i have the text -- because i will not take attacks from a known religious extremist or fanatic.

that prime minister blair's urging, he was recently canonized. his apologia made many people reconsider and join the roman catholic church. he is considered a great christian thinker. here is my text from the apologia. the catholic church said that it holds it better for the sun and moon to drop from heaven, for the earth to fail, and for the many millions on it to die in extremist any than that one soul should be lost or commit a cent, tell willful untruth. you will have to say it is beautifully phrased. but to me, it is my proposition. what we have here is a distillation of precisely what is twied and immoral in the faith mentality. it is essential fanaticism.

is consideration of the human being as raw material. it is the fantasy of purity. once you assume a creator and a plan, it makes us objects ia cruel experiment where we are created sick and commanded to be well. we are created sick and then ordered to be well. over us to supervise this is installed a celestial dictatorship, a kind of divine north korea. [laughter] greedy, exigent on critical praise from dawn until dusk and swift to punish the original sinjs with which it originally gifted us in the first place. [laughter] however, salvation is offered.

redemption is promised at the low price of the surrender of your critical faculties. [laughter] religion, it might be said, must be said, would have to make extraordinary claims. i would maintain net extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. weight begin by asking whether it is good for the world to appeal to our credulity and not our skepticism. is it good for the world to worship the deity that takes sides in wars and human affairs? it appeals to our fear and guilt. is that good for the world? to add to our terror of death, is it good to appeal? to preach killed and shame about

the sexual relationship -- guilt and shame about the sexual relationship, is this good? is a religious responsibility to terrorize children with the image of hell and eternal punishment for themselves and those they love? perhaps worst of all, to consider women and inferior creation. is that good for the world? can you name me a religion that has not done that? to insist that we are created and not involved in the face of all the evidence, to say that certain books of legend and myth, man-made and primitive, [inaudible] religion forces nice people to do unkind things. it also makes intelligent people say stupid things. handed a small baby for the first time, why reach for a

sharp stone to do the work of the lord? [laughter] as it has been aptly put, the good will do the good they -- the best they can. ifou want to have good people do wicked things, you will need religion. i have one minute and 57 seconds to y why i think this is self evident in our material world. let me ask tony again, because he is here, and because the place where he is seeking peace is the birthplace of monotheism. you may think it is unusually filled with love and peace. everyone in the civilized world roughly agrees that there should be enough room for two states 4 two peoples in the same land. i think we have a rough agreement on that.

the u.s. cannot get it. the israeli parliament cannot get it. they cannot get it because the parties of god and the veto on it. everyone knows this is true. because of the divine promises made about this territory, there will never be peace or compromise. there will instead be misery, shame, and tyranny. people will kill each other's children for ancient books, caves, and relics. who is going to say that this is good for the world? have you looked lately at the possibility that we used to discuss as children in fear, what will happen when messianic fanatics get hold of an apocalyptic weapon? we are about to find out as we watch the islamic republic of iran and its party of god allies make for this. have you looked at the revival of zionism in russia with the

black coated leadership of russian orthodoxy is raked over an increingly xenophobic, tyrannical, expansionists, and aggressive regime? have you looked lately at the teaching in africa of the church that says aids may be wicked but not as wicked as condoms? i have done my best. believe me, i have more. [laughter] [applause] >> it is a real pleasure to be with you all this evening, to be back in toronto is a particular privilege and honor to do with christopher in this debate. i do not regard the leader of north korea as a religious icon. you will delighted to know.

i am going to make seven points. the first is this. it is undoubtedly true that people commit a horrific acts in the name of religion. it is also undoubtedly true that people do act on an extraordinary common good in spite of our religion. almost half of health care in africa is delivered by face based organization -- faith- bases organizations. almost 1/4 of aids care is provided by catholic organizations. there is the fantastic work of muslim and jewish relief organizations. in canada,here are thousands of religious organizations that care for the mentally ill or disabled or disadvantaged or destitute. here in toronto, there is a shelter run by christian charity

for homeless youth in canada. the proposition that religion is unadulterated poison is unsustainable. itan be destructive it can also create a deep well of compassion and frequently done. people are inspired to do such good by what i would say is the true essence of faith. along with doctrine and ritual particular to each faith, there is a basic belief common to all faiths in serving and loving god in serving and loving your fellow human beings. as witnessed by the life and teachings of jesus, one of selflessness and sacrifice, there is the torah. rabbi hillel have someone tell

him that he would convert if he could stand on one leg and recite t tour. he sd do unto others as you have done unto you. the hindus search after selflessness. the buddhist context subjugate selfish desires to care for others and to respect others of another faith. in my view, that is the true face of face. the values derived from this ethnic offer many people a benign and progressive framework by which to live our lives, stimulating the impulse to do good, and disciplining the tendency to be selfish and bad. faith defined in this way is not merely solace in times of need nor a relic of unthinking tradition. still less, a superstition or

explanation of biology. instead, it answers a profound spiritual yearning, something we feel and sense instinctively. this is a spiritualresence. it is bigger, more important, more meaningful than just us alone. it has its own power separate from our power. even as the world's marvels' multiplied, it makes us kneel in humility and swallow our pride. science and religion are not incompatible and destined to fight each other until eventually the " recent of science extinguishes the fanatical flames of religion. science educates us as to how the physical world is and how it futions. faith educates us as to the purpose to which such knowledge is put. it guides the limits of what science and technology do not to make our lives maturely richer,

but rather richer in spirit. imagine a world without religious faith. not just no place of worship, prayer, scripture, but no men or women who because of their faith dedicate their lives to others, showing forgiveness or otherwise they would not, a leading to their faith that even the weakest have a right and they have a duty to defend them. i agree in a world without religion, the religious fanatics may be gone. but if fanaticism be gone, and then realize that such an imagined vision of a world without religion. the 20th century was scarred by visions that had precisely that imagining at their heart. it gave us hitler, stalin.

in this vision, obedience to the will of god was f the week. it was the will of man that should dominate. i do not deny for a moment that religion can be a force for evil. but i claim that it is based on faith and that religion can also be a force for good. i believe it is true to the essence of faith. i say to the world that without religious faith, we would be spiritually, morally, and emotionally diminished. i know very well that you can point like christopher does to examples where people have used religion to do things that are terrible and that have made the

world a worse pce. but i ask you not to judge all ople of religious faith by those people any more than we would judge politics -- [laughter] -- by bad politicians. [laughter] -- or by bad journalists. [laughter] the question is, along with all of the things that are wrong with religion, is there also something within its that helps the world to be better and people to do good? i would submit that there is. thank you. [applause] >> tony, your training in parliament had you perfectly lending that right on the seven-

minute mark. we're moving into our rebuttal round. i would like the audience to get engaged, applaud when they hear something they like, and help reinforce our time limit. when you see the clock ticking down, start applauding. that will move us through this in an orderly fashion. christopher, is now your opportunity in our first of two were battlegrounds -- rebuttal rounds to respond. there are two browns. you have four minutes within each of those rounds. >> i have four minutes. >> very good. [laughter] [applause] >> the hold your applause, for heaven's sake. no one was arguing that religion should or will die out in the world. all i am arguing is that it

would be better there was more of an outbreak of secularism. logically, tony is right. i would be slightly better off being a wahabi muslim or a jehovah's witness than i am wallowing as i do in their secularism. i am arguing that we need a great deal more of one and a great deal less of the second. i knew that it would come up that we would be told about charity. i take this very seriously. we are the first generation of people to do with the cure of poverty really is. a deluded people for a long time. it has a name. it is called -- it deluded people for a long time. it has a name. it is called the empowerment of women. [applause] if you give women some control over the rate at which they

reproduce, give them some say, take them off the animal cycle of reproduction which nature and some religious doctrine condemns them, and you throw in a handful of seeds, education, health, and optimism will increase. it has been tried in bangladesh and bolivia. it works. name me one religion that stands for that or ever has. wherever you look in the world and try to remove the shackles of ignorance, disease, and stupidity from women, it is inevitably the clergy that stands in the way. [applause] if you are going to grant this to catholic charities if i was a member o the church that preached that aids was not as bad as condoms, i would be putting some conscience money into africa as well. [applaus

i am not trying to be funny. if i was trying to be funny, you misunderstood me. it will not bring back the millions of people who died wretched desk because of that. this is not done wrongly in the name of religion. it is a direct precept, practiced and enforceable discipline of religion. i think he will find it is so in this case. if you are going to say we did the mormons will tell you the same. you may think it is cracked that joseph smith found another bible buried in upstate new york. i would rather have no mormons, no missionaries, notes joseph smith. do we grant to hamas and hezbollah, both of who will tell you and incessantly do, look at our charitable work.

without us defending the poor, where would they be? they are right. they do a great deal of charitable work. it is nothing compared to the harm they do. but it is a great deal of work all the same. [applause] i am also familiar with the teachings of the great rabbi hillel. there is the injunction not to do to another what would be repulse of to yourself. that is found with confucius. it is found in the heart of every person in this room. everybody knows that much. [applause] we do not require divine permission to know right from wrong. we do not need tablets administered to us, 10 at a time in tablet form, on pain of death, to be able to have a moral argument. no, -- [applause]

we have the reasoning and the moral persuasionf socrates and our own abilities. we do not need dictatorship to give us right from wrong. thank you. [applause] >> mr. blair, and will give you an additional 25 seconds for your first rebuttal. >> first of all, i do not think we should thinkhat because you can point to examples of prejudiced in the name of religion that bigotry and prejudice are wholly owned subsidiaries of religion. there are plenty of examples of prejudice against wom, gay people, against others that come from outside the world of religion. the claim that i ma