I'll have to watch this later, I do like Stephen Fry (Er, give him a knighthood please Queenie).

The Catholics must have been debating pretty badly if they were trounced like this. Usually the more intelligent Catholics are first rate debaters and can take down pretty much anyone.

Anyway, I'll see in a moment.

LoL no suprise there. Everyone who is brave enough to represent conservative opinions on marriages and homosexualism is going to get crucified by media.

Stephen Fry was involved therefore this is surely an unfair debated. I'll watch it later.

Has Christopher Hitchens ever NOT destroyed someone in a debate?

where was Richard Dawkins?!!

If he would of debated they might of lost people rather then had crushing gains.

Richard Dawkins isn't the best debater.  He would of went on wide unimportant tangents that would of insulted anyone who believed in anything remotley spirutal.

probably not,however im reading his book:"the God delusion" which is very intresting reading to say the least,he certainly seems show some negative results from religion

Just on the fourth part now. To be honest I'm finding this all a bit one sided, even I could debate in favour for the Catholic church better than Anne Widdecombe and the John Onaiyekan. If they had put better debaters for Catholocism up there it would have been more equal in my opinion. They missed several key points that they really should have addressed.

Stephen Fry and Christopher Hitchens were only really bringing up predictable points about the Catholic church that you hear anywhere, in every debate. Widdecombe and Onaiyekan knew full well that these points were coming but didn't address them in their speeches, instead debating about the positive and leaving themselves as sitting ducks for the negative.

It's a shame because I think most people could have quelled half of the points that Fry and Hitchens made before they made them. When you debate you have to debate against the negative and for the positive, not just heavily on one and not the other.

That's fine with me then. I'm Christian but I'm certainly not catholic. 

I agree.

Richard Dawkins debates like me. Like a complete dickhead. We say our point in an obnoxious way and when it is not accepted we just call the opposition stupid. All it does is drive the opposition away as oppose to convince them to turn.

To be honest I have no idea why I debate like that. All it does is lead to you losing. And it is what Dawkins does. It is not a good way to debate.