I don't know that D'Souzas views are all that much different from most speakers who argue for theism. He is actually smarter, more eloquent, has more appealing, philosophically confusing distractions, and is a better speaker than most apologists I have seen debate. Peter Singer is on the other hand outside of the mainstream on animal rights, paedophilia, and his idea that it is all right to terminate lives of babies shortly(28 days is a rough cutoff) after birth if it is medically deemed that they will have a life filled with suffering because of extreme physical impairments. His ideas on euthanasia are not all that radical. I would check these youtube videos out where he lays out the logic. I think his logic is soundly reasoned, but the consequences for the positions he argues on animal rights and paedophilia, I believe, would not be totally positive, and in some cases very negative. Plus, the animal rights position, basically means giving up eating any animal, and I don't think I would ever be willing to give that up, regardless of the ethics involved.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=3bi81JcddWc

http://youtube.com/watch?v=AF3VTu5lR_o

http://youtube.com/watch?v=gAhAlbsAbLM