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.
I never claimed to be good.
My faults are great and many. I'm a sleazeball scumbag and have admitted that countless times. I'm the porn-guy for 30 years, remember? I'm making money plying my porn trade as I type this, as a matter of fact.
There are many ways one can be tendentious...and many things they can be that way about. We all have our flaws...and I've got lots of them.
Now that we have that squared away: It is easy for me to see things in a way others can't...it many times takes one to know one. Thus, my previous post.
Yes, but you hate doing it, that's what washes your soul clean.
And you're a better man than me, Arequipa, and I have great respect for your posts and your thoughtfulness. You are a thinker and your very post I quoted proves so. It didn't even bother me that you used one of MY posts to play the biggest April fool joke probably ever seen on CD--at least on the Religion and Spirituality thread!!
We all get fooled by somebody at sometime. And maybe MT fooled me. But I think she was a relatively uneducated woman who won the hearts and minds of a lot of very poor people. As stated before, she may not have been an administrator or supervisor or proficient in medicine--but she accomplished quite a bit with mostly volunteers, and most of all she brought the plight of the hungry, the lonely, and the desperate to the attention of the world.
For me that speaks to the very best of my own faith in God. It isn't about building fine cathedrals or a Vatican, it's about reaching out to humanity that needs help from wherever they can receive it.
I wish to God that I'd been a better man during my active life. And here at its close, I'm mostly disappointed in myself--and trusting God to take me in anyway. One thing I'm certain of--if He will take me in He would just as soon take in anyone--even evidence driven atheists. I see the divine spark in your posts as a humanitarian. And in my book it is all about the doing---with faith that Someone will be able to do more with what we struggle to accomplish than what we could ever hope to do.
Mother Theresa is gone now, but her work lives on--surprisingly it is even here in the U.S.
I have stated my existentialism previously--and MT once said something that remains foremost in my mind:
Mother Theresa
You and I are still among the living for today. And I wish you and yours, and everyone else on these threads, a very merry Christmas and joyous New Year (or Happy Holidays if the former is not your style).
And to you. And I don't deserve praise since as Faramir said 'I have done nothing other than that which I desired to do'. Or similar. And the important thing is not to whitewash or blacken Mother Theresa, but to get the facts that will enable us to make valid judgements.
I have already taken on board the good intentions and possible good results. I note that the article and photos was by a noted photographer who was not an investigative journalist and she photographed spotless and airy rooms and loving care. Nobody doubts they scrubbed everything daily and cared for their handful of patients per room.
The criticisms are those that do not show up in photos. It is par for the course that the sites I read tended to be either adoring and not a word of criticism, or hostile with a lot. The legacy lives on and the problems have probably been quietly corrected and it's all good, give or take catholic dogmatic thinking in hospitals. That doesn't alter the origins any more than the evils of the V2 programme are wiped out vt Von Braun's good intentions or the wonderful legacy of space exploration, space junk and possibly being able to divert an asteroid collision.
Taking money from dictators. The GBS play about the salvation army taking money from arms dealers. Is it justified? At least she wanted the money to do good.
Bad attitudes on condoms and contraception? That's what she was taught. It is a pity though, that while she was doubting her faith (lucky they didn't destroy her letters as she wanted) she didn't doubt her dogma and see that condoms and contraception would do more good than all the needles they ever rinsed under the cold tap.
And that's the question in my mind. It seems that she was awash with dosh and it got misused.
I have to read more, but it seems that doctors who visited were appalled by the malpractice. Ok, so she wasn't a financial wizard or a medical expert, but with all that dosh, couldn't she have hired some advisors? Didn't anyone suggest that she should?
There are rumbles about so few patients with so much room to spare and rumbles about 'why not leave her in peace?' As I say, it is the vatican stunt of canonization that is digging her up, and really it is this cynical publicity ploy that is the target.
If they can have their whitewash job exposed and either have to back down or go ahead anyway with red -faced determination amongst global jeers and howls of derision, then Mother Theresa will have some good in my book.
P.s "the biggest April fool joke probably ever seen on CD-- " I enjoyed that, even though a lot of people sussed me (Shirina bought it totally) and I blew the punch line. I should have used the FSM by Michelangelo rather than that painting I did - and put in a 'Happy April 1st" But I couldn't bring myself to call anybody a fool. And in fact the bigger joke was on me when half my posts got deleted for imitating Don rifleman's posting -style! It was done for him, you know. He always said he wanted to pretend to be deconverting as an April 1st spoof.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 12-23-2015 at 06:57 AM..
So, the question remains, why were unsterilized needles used, when there were millions raised that could have purchased them?
MT has a very low burden of proof apparently. We are arguing about proof of MT's unvirtuous aspects here here like formal philosophical proofs for and against god. The last article I linked to talked, among other things, about a man so appalled by what he saw when he visited MT's mission that he was tempted to start his own charity. The article is in a credible magazine and does not flinch either from the good or the bad. But it is little discussed compared to a fawning 1980 Life magazine piece.
To me another telling quote from the Forbes article is this:
Quote:
Hygiene has been an issue but has improved as sisters opened to better standard through volunteers from Western countries.
This is a statement from someone who had volunteered with MT's mission for 20 years. It has apparently taken that long for the sisters to simply start wearing gloves it would seem. This is deplorable. But not if it sullies the reputation of MT it would seem.
At any rate ... I've made my point and folks are free to ignore or discount it to their heart's content. I'm not (and really, couldn't if I tried, given the hero worship) ignoring MT's good intentions and deeds or her dedication and willingness to experience deprivation whether in empathy for those she ministered to, or in harmony with her church's teachings about what a privilege deprivation is. Maybe I have at least gotten 1 or 2 of you to think just one increment less credulously about MT, maybe I haven't. Personally I am going to give my charity $$ to organizations like Doctors Without Borders which provides the quiet heroism and selflessness without all the religious cruft and BS -- plus it stands against human suffering much more unambiguously than MT ever did on a good day.
MT has a very low burden of proof apparently. We are arguing about proof of MT's unvirtuous aspects here here like formal philosophical proofs for and against god. The last article I linked to talked, among other things, about a man so appalled by what he saw when he visited MT's mission that he was tempted to start his own charity. The article is in a credible magazine and does not flinch either from the good or the bad. But it is little discussed compared to a fawning 1980 Life magazine piece.
I posted a link to this as well.
"I was shocked to see the negligence. Needles were washed in cold water and reused and expired medicines were given to the inmates. There were people who had chance to live if given proper care,"
And then was told it does not mention needles. The next paragraph warns us to remember that this was not a hospital. Then why are they providing medical services? Is you is or is you isn't?
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,922,771 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordant
....(cut for brevity)...
Personally I am going to give my charity $$ to organizations like Doctors Without Borders which provides the quiet heroism and selflessness without all the religious cruft and BS -- plus it stands against human suffering much more unambiguously than MT ever did on a good day.
Exactly. A cousin of mine volunteered for Doctors Without Borders, interjecting herself in the aftermath of the Yugoslavian bloodbath, and then topped it off by going to Rwanda. Most of my charitable donations go to areas in conservation, however Doctors Without Borders is the one place where I have regularly donated.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,922,771 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by somebodynew
I posted a link to this as well.
"I was shocked to see the negligence. Needles were washed in cold water and reused and expired medicines were given to the inmates. There were people who had chance to live if given proper care,"
And then was told it does not mention needles. The next paragraph warns us to remember that this was not a hospital. Then why are they providing medical services? Is you is or is you isn't?
Yet MT's apologist will not acknowledge and address the issue of why unsterilized needles were used. They obfuscate by asking for evidence, and when evidence is provided, they say it's not good enough.
"I was shocked to see the negligence. Needles were washed in cold water and reused and expired medicines were given to the inmates. There were people who had chance to live if given proper care,"
And then was told it does not mention needles. The next paragraph warns us to remember that this was not a hospital. Then why are they providing medical services? Is you is or is you isn't?
I can understand that in the early years of this ministry where $$ were scarce and many volunteers were locals used to deplorable standards of "care", that something was better than nothing. But a question asked in another article was a fair one; IIRC it asked, given that MT's charity had collected $100 million by 1980 why didn't they build a state of the art hospital or at least introduce basic sanitary and palliative methods in their existing facilities?
I think the reason is very similar to why my alma mater resisted state certification. Just as a Bible Institute found it unpalatable to provide an impartial education, doing something substantive and game changing for the "poorest of the poor" would have involved requiring their nuns to be educated nurses, which isn't lowly enough to fit their vow-of-poverty shtick; and it would have brought about accountability and scrutiny. To this day only god (ha!) knows how they spend their money or how they really care for their charges, and the estimated 7% figure for $$ that actually goes to help actual people remains something beyond the standard of proof required of evidence in the RCC and even here on this thread.
Since we don't know how the $$ are spent we should demand accounting for how it is spent, instead we say there is no proof it is misspent or squandered so let's canonize MT as a saint and allow her sacrosanct public perception to govern unchallenged and provide her with immunity.
MT has a very low burden of proof apparently. We are arguing about proof of MT's unvirtuous aspects here here like formal philosophical proofs for and against god. The last article I linked to talked, among other things, about a man so appalled by what he saw when he visited MT's mission that he was tempted to start his own charity. The article is in a credible magazine and does not flinch either from the good or the bad. But it is little discussed compared to a fawning 1980 Life magazine piece.
To me another telling quote from the Forbes article is this:
This is a statement from someone who had volunteered with MT's mission for 20 years. It has apparently taken that long for the sisters to simply start wearing gloves it would seem. This is deplorable. But not if it sullies the reputation of MT it would seem.
At any rate ... I've made my point and folks are free to ignore or discount it to their heart's content. I'm not (and really, couldn't if I tried, given the hero worship) ignoring MT's good intentions and deeds or her dedication and willingness to experience deprivation whether in empathy for those she ministered to, or in harmony with her church's teachings about what a privilege deprivation is. Maybe I have at least gotten 1 or 2 of you to think just one increment less credulously about MT, maybe I haven't. Personally I am going to give my charity $$ to organizations like Doctors Without Borders which provides the quiet heroism and selflessness without all the religious cruft and BS -- plus it stands against human suffering much more unambiguously than MT ever did on a good day.
I am not defending MT but if her treatment was so appalling that it resulted in a witness tempted to start his own charity and nothing more, it is hard for me to focus on MT when there are many other appalling things going on.
I believe you have to leave the church because of it basic principals and values in order to see a different point-of-view of MT.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cupper3
Yet MT's apologist will not acknowledge and address the issue of why unsterilized needles were used. They obfuscate by asking for evidence, and when evidence is provided, they say it's not good enough.
I am not sure why all this energy/focus on apologists.
I believe you have to leave the church because of it basic principals and values in order to see a different point-of-view of MT.
I have done this and that is why I have a different "point-of-view of MT".
Quote:
Originally Posted by elyn02
I am not sure why all this energy/focus on apologists.
That's who we are engaging with on this thread. They are saying anything contrary to the pleasant fantasy image of MT that is held in the popular imagination represents some form of hatred or a desire to destroy actual good.
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.
