Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And cupper: though somebodynew has picked up your torch for you with a deflection (it doesn't exactly address your first bullet point but rather kind of takes a spin off it), I still await your own evidence/proof of that first assertion, as you stated you would like to discuss it. So, I will await your reply; thanks very much.
Somebodynew: I like the truth too. Very much. Much more than gossip and opinion blogs. So I await your evidence as well, not just vague blog quote-spreading and "well, look it up yourself". Thank you.
You are smarter than that, mordant. You refuse to see that what you seek to do is damage an EXISTING positive and inspirational meme and replace it with your ugly, negative and destructive one for reasons only you are privy to. What do you want this ugliness to do for humanity???
It is MT's ugliness. There are lots of ugly realities in the world. Don't shoot the messenger.
I don't like ugliness either but it is what it is.
NO. I am not promoting anything. The image already EXISTS, is widespread and it is a positive and inspiring one. YOU are promoting an ugly one for reasons not entirely clear to me. What will your image accomplish for humanity that is somehow better than the existing one???
Quote:
Originally Posted by somebodynew
It is also wrong.
That is the ACCUSATION by those who hate her for unknown reasons.
Quote:
I don't know. I kinda like the truth.
This is disingenuous as you probably thrive on little social untruths in your daily interactions to avoid hurting others or being hurt yourself.
Quote:
I tend to like to make my judgements based on that. I tend to think that is a GOOD thing, not burying my head in the sand so I can continue to believe a lie.
Most of us do, but we tend to want to have actual evidence to base them on, not accusations or opinions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerZ
And cupper: though somebodynew has picked up your torch for you with a deflection (it doesn't exactly address your first bullet point but rather kind of takes a spin off it), I still await your own evidence/proof of that first assertion, as you stated you would like to discuss it. So, I will await your reply; thanks very much.
Somebodynew: I like the truth too. Very much. Much more than gossip and opinion blogs. So I await your evidence as well, not just vague blog quote-spreading and "well, look it up yourself". Thank you.
Good luck. don't hold your breath, JerZ.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
You are smarter than that, mordant. You refuse to see that what you seek to do is damage an EXISTING positive and inspirational meme and replace it with your ugly, negative and destructive one for reasons only you are privy to. What do you want this ugliness to do for humanity???
I cannot understand why anyone would want to destroy something that has a positive impact on the masses merely to scratch some itch about some unverified and unverifiable truth. The Catholic Church is notoriously closeted and any actual information about them and their finances and operations are simply NOT available. I can understand the animosity toward it, but this smear campaign is in another league altogether.
1. It doesn't address the assertion that MT is claimed to have said there was no point in sterilizing needles, which was what you originally stated was truth, somebody. Do you have anything specific to that since that was what I was asking (based on what you were asserting)?
2. The money issue definitely seems at the forefront. It doesn't point to MT herself siphoning the money but perhaps she was a puppet in some way. That never seems to be made clear and she always comes off as rather naive in these articles, so I don't know what part she played, if any, in any monkey business with the donations. But whenever she's quoted regarding the actual money, she always appears to really not know much about it. I'm not saying that's "okay" - to not know where millions of dollars are going - just saying if she was indeed obedient to the church, then it wouldn't be such a surprise...and BTW, it still really wouldn't point to her being some sort of money-siphoning monster or something (or, well, "witch" ).
3. What I'm seeing here from this article (which is still hearsay from supposed witnesses but I'll go with those comments for now) is that MT was backward and definitely in no way a doctor...something she herself made no bones about. “We should remember that Mother Teresa was clear that Missionaries of Charity was not operating a hospital. The homes are to serve the poor and give them the basic needs,” says Sunita Kumar, wife of former India Davis Cup coach Naresh Kumar and one who has been working with Missionaries’ sisters for over four decades.
So, definitely seeing a whole lot of naivete, perhaps deliberately turning her head away from the money situation and trusting the church, a definite lack of medical training. Absolutely. Not seeing deliberately trying to harm people with dirty needles "just because", though. IOW, not seeing that she was "a witch" in the assumed definition of the OP. Rather, what I am seeing from this article (and others) is a woman who was naive, at times sort of gave up (various crises of faith), and had no medical training, and was very, very conservative. Not really shockers there.
As I have pointed out quite a few times on this thread, perfection is not required for canonization and many "saints" throughout history have obviously led very very imperfect, sometimes deliberately harmful (i.e. Saul/Paul pre-"conversion") lives, which the church makes no bones about. So, learning that MT wasn't perfect isn't a problem, at least for me...then again, as I have also pointed out, I never did think she was perfect to begin with. But the bottom line is: what I'm arguing is deliberate harm, deliberate viciousness, perhaps even sadism, as is being asserted on this thread, and so far I'm not seeing evidence of it.
So in the meantime...do you have support for the original claim (re: dirty needles), something that was not addressed in this link you provided? Not being ungrateful, I appreciate your having delivered this link, just saying, it doesn't address the original question. Thank you.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,926,708 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerZ
Um, LOL.
You're going to have to forgive me to not see some quote attributed to nobody but "Wordpress" as still questionable.
Who is this Mary Loudon? Would you mind providing me with the link where you got this so I can have a peek? Again, what we have here is hearsay but perhaps there's some solid backing in there somewhere...I won't know until I can have a look. There may be a context here - i.e. perhaps the person was speaking about someone who was literally imminently dying...but of course perhaps not, so a link would be a huge help. I appreciate it very much.
p.s. This is a separate issue than cupper's assertion that MT deliberately didn't buy sterilized needles when she could have, and presumably spent the money somewhere else...? Because those would be two different things. Just trying to clarify that you're bringing up a second issue and not cupper's original issue?
Oh, give us a break. Occam's Razor applies here, besides which multiple witnesses including Loudoun have made the same statement.
Oh, give us a break. Occam's Razor applies here, besides which multiple witnesses including Loudoun have made the same statement.
Obfuscation is not going to work sorry.
Nope, it doesn't...
Sidestepping is not going to work here.
Providing evidence will. It really is as simple as that, provide your evidence. No need for all this dancing around, avoidance, and finger-pointing. Just give the evidence and have done with it. So simple.
You asked to address your bullet points one at a time. You asked several times. You avoided my answer several times, when I agreed to follow up on them. Now you're at least no longer avoiding, so I assume you mean you ARE finally willing to address your own bullet points, with something other than gossip and a lot of copy-and-paste jobs on blogs. This was specific to deliberately providing dirty needles/refusing to spend directly available money on sterilized needles/deliberately refusing to clean needles. May we get back on track here? Do you, or do you not have support for this, specifically and if so, what was the context? Thank you.
That is the ACCUSATION by those who hate her for unknown reasons.
So this PERFECT person has a conspiracy of unknown haters? That makes more sense to you?
Quote:
This is disingenuous as you probably thrive on little social untruths in your daily interactions to avoid hurting others or being hurt yourself. Most of us do, but we tend to want to have actual evidence to base them on, not accusations or opinions.
Not so much. I don't need to lie to be kind.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
).
Still awaiting his evidence as well...not just hearsay and hysteria.
