It turns out that there was a big flaw in the arrangement of the debate. The non-believer side was well cast. The fact that the two believers were quasi-deists obviated most of the thoughtful argument. By deist I refer to those who invoke an all-encompassing, loving-force type god. While such thoughts are crowd pleasing and great for warm fuzzy feelings, they don't offer much meat for serious discussion/debate. Especially given that the fundamentalist Christian/Muslim/Jewish practitioners are the ones who cause the most havoc in the world. The post modern deist argument could be nut-shelled as "God is Love and Can't we all just get along". And who is prepared to argue against that? The problem is that such diluted god-talk leaves one no closer to the solutions for life's pressing problems. We've all been taken round a big fuzzy circle and, in the end, left to figure out the answers for ourselves.
Still, it was worth watching, if for no other reason than to see Oprah's guru, Deepak Chopra, dethroned by truly intelligent thoughtful people. I'm certain his followers will perceive him as being set upon by atheist hounds. Everyone else will be able to watch him clumsily grasping at any handhold when confronted by those who are not so easily impressed with mystical jargon. It is my belief that he was exposed as the opportunistic hustler with the bloated ego that most of us long suspected.