It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How did this woman, become a saint? Ridiculous.

page: 8
9
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 07:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Republican08
 


Like I said before *in u2u*, imagine your response had she been an atheist. I would imagine you would be howling for blood.

P.s.: Mods aren't allowed opinions?

[edit on 7-8-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]




posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by Republican08
 


Like I said before *in u2u*, imagine your response had she been an atheist. I would imagine you would be howling for blood.

P.s.: Mods aren't allowed opinions?

[edit on 7-8-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]


No, mods have no opinions at all! Lol (i'm in a humorous mood) It was meant to be a little comic relief.

I don't know how exactly I would feel if she was an atheist. I'd have to find some "Saint" like Atheist, and criticize them , I suppose it'd be just as easy.

Although I would be a bit bias I suppose. I have crticized on quite a few occasions R.D. But he doesn't really claim to be a saint, saint being used and the greatest giver of mankind. Well in a way he does, but not as boastingly as mother teresa was regarded as.



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 07:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Republican08
 


I do have a sense of humor too you know.
Did she boast or was it others boasting about her? And wouldn't you boast about her had she been an atheist? I am pretty sure she didn't. The saint tag is something be put on her by others. Why would you fault her for it?



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 07:32 PM
link   
Gday


Originally posted by SLAYER69
OK lets try this since you know so much about me.
How many children do I have and how old are they and what was my mothers maiden name?Yeah I thought so.... Back on topic please.


Oh, Pulease !

YOU made claims about M. Teresa that I disagreed with.
So I responded.

It's not about YOU at all.

It's about your CLAIMS about M. Teresa - the subject of this thread.

Anyone who HAS studied the details will know that she DID actually believe suffering is good for people - she wrote so many times.


Consider this quote :

"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people."

She thought the suffering of the poor helped the world.

She was attracting to suffering, so she chose people who were suffering (the dieing poor), collected them, and made them suffer more!

But for HERSELF, she got the best medical care.


She was an evil sadist.


K.



posted on Aug, 7 2009 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Kapyong
 


This is pathetic.

Then I'll take her kind of sadism over most peoples virtues. Somebody writes a rant about their twisted personal views and people quote it as if it's the gospel truth.



For the record I didn't start the "Claims" and honestly the only reason I'm in this discussion is becuase she is not here to defend herself. I highly doubt that if she was online and read this dreck that she would even bother dealing with the likes of these twisted individuals. She would probably end up doing something evil like pray for you.


Yeah you have no agenda.

Pffft!




posted on Aug, 8 2009 @ 06:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Slandering Mother Theresa?

I cant imagine the desperate boredom someone must be in to create a thread like this.


Perhaps not so, questioning the awe this woman was held in and raising awareness for the somewhat less pious side of this walking god cannot be such a bad thing.


I would imagine that MT, was a kindly old lady at heart but it would appear that some of her actions were less than charitable and but a headline grabber for the tabloid of Catholicism.

Some years ago, the pope was to visit in my area, almost every tongue connected to a mouth was wagging, "The pope is coming, the pope is coming"

When questioned as to the reason for their somewhat over zealous euphoria, most of the people I spoke to, simple developed a blank stair of of a complete cranial vacuum.

None of these people were catholic and very few of them had actually held a bile let alone set foot in a church.

There seems to be a tendency to worship that which we are told to worship, be it Mother Theresa or Michael Jackson.

I see nothing wrong with this thread questioning the practically deification of this woman, it may well encourage people to think a little. At the very least it may raise awareness of the the totally insane and inhuman practice of Catholicism advising people not to use condoms and run the very real risk of contracting HIV.

This thread deserves S+F in my book for raising awareness



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 07:39 AM
link   
What's the point of picking on her, when there are so many truly evil people in the world! I'm sure she wasn't perfect, and I personally don't even believe in saints.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by dpmduran
What's the point of picking on her, when there are so many truly evil people in the world! I'm sure she wasn't perfect, and I personally don't even believe in saints.


The point is that the OP has an agenda against Christianity.

Granted she may have had her faults, but there is no denying what she did was selfless and should be commended.

This is just a smear thread to further his anti Christian agenda. Recently he has calmed down after a few other posters and I called him out on it.

We will see how long it lasts.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 07:57 AM
link   
I'll tell you what's ridiculous: desperately trying to find a personality admired by as many people as possible - and preferably well dead, so they can't talk back - in order to deconstruct them and thereby make oneself appear as a very "cool" paragon of incorruptible probity. (And cash in on one's probity, like good old Mr. Hitchens.)

Regarding Mother Theresa, I have known - as in personally, even intimately - people (several of them former staunch atheists) who actually worked with her, who helped her help those who had nothing (except pestilent open wounds). They knew her, warts and all.

The experience changed their lives and their outlook on life.

Who would YOU believe, if you were me: them or some disgruntled stranger of whose motives (except the most painfully obvious ones) I know nothing?



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 08:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Republican08
 



I believe that Mother Theresa is actually being used by certain powerful groups of people for political agendas.

The lush donation monies collected serve no improvement to the poor and needy. With that kinda stuffy and insufficient medication, it's almost the same as sending them to jail.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by daysofnoe
 


AMEN to that. God is above us. Catholic means universal and was created to silence the true teaching of Christ.

But regardless of what you do or say, God will go on being God, and where will you be?

In the catechism it says that the Pope can change even the precepts of christ. They call himm the Holy See. How is that for an ego.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Republican08
 


Wasn't she in one of the poorest places in the world?

I mean, you look at it from today, but from before her, wasn't it worst?


And I'm a Catholic, but I've never seen any kind of major abuse of the infallibility crap. Most don't believe it anyway and to judge all Catholics based on the Pope's actions is, well, retarded quite frankly.

Also the idea of saint hood is to look at the positive contributions.

I mean, St. Augustine was a "playa" and a bad as they come.

[edit on 11-8-2009 by Gorman91]



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 04:20 PM
link   
Gday,


Originally posted by dpmduran
What's the point of picking on her, when there are so many truly evil people in the world! I'm sure she wasn't perfect, and I personally don't even believe in saints.


She deliberately made people suffer,
she stole from the poor and gave to the rich,
she secretly baptised non-Christians against their will.

She was an evil cheating sadist.

But the church puts her up as a model of decency and care!

It's OBSCENE.


K.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 04:21 PM
link   
Gday,


Originally posted by jd140
The point is that the OP has an agenda against Christianity.
Granted she may have had her faults, but there is no denying what she did was selfless and should be commended.


It IS denied.
When you check the facts, it turns out she was an evil sadist who MADE people suffer !


K.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 04:24 PM
link   
Gday,


Originally posted by Vanitas
I'll tell you what's ridiculous: desperately trying to find a personality admired by as many people as possible - and preferably well dead, so they can't talk back - in order to deconstruct them and thereby make oneself appear as a very "cool" paragon of incorruptible probity. (And cash in on one's probity, like good old Mr. Hitchens.)


Rubbish.
Those who HAVE checked the facts (unlike most people on this thread who just refuse to do so) found she was an evil cheating sadist.


Originally posted by Vanitas
Regarding Mother Theresa, I have known - as in personally, even intimately - people (several of them former staunch atheists) who actually worked with her, who helped her help those who had nothing (except pestilent open wounds). They knew her, warts and all.


I know of someone who worked with her.
She agrees with me.



Originally posted by Vanitas
The experience changed their lives and their outlook on life.


The experience left my contact disillusioned with her.



Originally posted by Vanitas
Who would YOU believe, if you were me: them or some disgruntled stranger of whose motives (except the most painfully obvious ones) I know nothing?


I believe the FACTS that show she was an evil sadist.
Not the faithful believers who try to hide the facts.


K.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 06:11 PM
link   
Here are some examples :

Secrecy about their money :

The millions in donations that Mother Teresa and her order solicited is parked in foreign bank accounts so that Missionaries of Charity do not have to tell anybody what their money is being spent on. It is the only Indian charity that does not release its financial records and such practises are unheard of for any charity in the West. So it is unknown what all the millions are spent on. It is estimated that at least half of the money is spent on religious activities, training nuns and the like, rather than true charity, such as the building of schools and decent hospices.

Failure to help people in need :

A disillusioned former official had he following to say:
"The money was not misused, but the largest part of it wasn't used at all. When there was a famine in Ethiopia, many cheques arrived marked 'for the hungry in Ethiopia'. Once I asked the sister who was in charge of accounts if I should add up all those very many cheques and send the total to Ethiopia. The sister answered, 'No, we don't send money to Africa'."


Disgusting conditions

The editor of The Lancet, Dr. Robert Fox, visited the home in 1994. Expecting to find an impressive hospital, he was left disgusted and disappointed. There were no blood tests to distinguish serious illnesses from other ailments, no methods taken to distinguish the curable from the incurable, painkillers were refused to cancer sufferers, needles were re-used without having been cleaned and sterilized, communal toilets were used. Patients were forced to defecate in front of each other. Whatever you wish to call this, it is certainly not dying with dignity.


The world is helped by the poor's suffering

"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people."

She believed it was GOOD for poor people to SUFFER.

So, she collected dieing, suffering, poor people and made them suffer MORE by refusing painkillers etc. She did NOT help the poor. She made them SUFFER.

That is the definition of a sadist - someone who causes suffering deliberately.

everything2.com...


Keeping stolen money :

Hitchens also includes the contents of a letter written to Mother Teresa by the man prosecuting the case against Keating, Deputy District Attorney for Los Angeles Paul Turley. In the letter, Mr. Turley pointed out to Mother Teresa that Keating was on trial for stealing more than $250 million from over 17,000 investors in his business. In addition, Turley expresses his opinion that "[n]o church, no charity, no organization should allow itself to be used as a salve for the conscience of the criminal" and suggests:

"Ask yourself what Jesus would do if he were given the fruits of a crime; what Jesus would do if he were in possession of money that had been stolen; what Jesus would do if he were being exploited by a thief to ease his conscience? I submit that Jesus would promptly and unhesitatingly return the stolen property to its rightful owners. You should do the same. You have been given money by Mr. Keating that he has been convicted of stealing by fraud. Do not permit him the 'indulgence' he desires. Do not keep the money. Return it to those who worked for it and earned it! If you contact me I will put you in direct contact with the rightful owners of the property now in your possession."

After the conclusion of the letter, Hitchens notes: "Mr. Turley has received no reply to his letter. Nor can anyone account for the missing money: saints, it seems, are immune to audit."

en.wikipedia.org...(book)



K.


[edit on 11-8-2009 by Kapyong]



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 06:20 PM
link   
Groups like this are not here to help the poor. They just want to baptize you before you die of hunger and disease.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 06:25 PM
link   
Yeah, let's go after everyone who has ever tried to do anything good in this confused piss hole we call earth. Let's go after Mother Teresa, Dalai Lama, Mohandas Gandhi, Martin Luther King.... The whole shebang.
Let's just downgrade all of them.
Really, man. Come on!!



[edit on 11-8-2009 by SpeakerofTruth]



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 06:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Kapyong
 


Have you even looked at some of the sources that your source uses?
That information is based mostly on opinions.


Sources:


*

ffrf.org...

*

www.newstatesman.com...

*

www.vsubhash.com...

*

www.ahealedplanet.net...


[edit on 11-8-2009 by SLAYER69]



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 07:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Kapyong
 



1) Having actually worked relief I can tell you that when you are an NGO in developing nations you are there at the leisure of the government. There have been many programmatic decisions we made that had to be reviewed by regional government before we could implement. Dollars that you may have earmarked for building permits are stalled for months and years even because they see it as you "taking up residence". In many instances a government will tell you where you can set up shop, what limits there are to your ability to assist...its not like it is in the US. You must go through various ministers of health, finance, justice, etc to get anything at all done.

In many cases your monies are kept in a neutral location because of provincial thugs (aka bureaucrats) that make nickle and dime monetary demands based on how much money they assume you have. So just because she had a pile of money offshore, as you put it, doesn't mean she was using it to buy herself a Ferrari Enzo. And just because her facilities were "sheet" doesn't mean it was her choice that they were so.

Do you know how hard it is to get a building permit in a developing country? How many pockets you must grease? She was given an old temple to use and she used it.

2) As to the checks earmarked for Ethiopia...these women weren't CPAs and honestly it was not their responsibility. You can earmark money for needles, or medicine, but not a location. The people that wanted money sent to Ethiopia should have gone to the Ethiopian mission directly or to the office of the Holy See with a kind letter asking them to place it in the St. Peter's fund for the purpose of sending money to Ethiopia. Asking the Little Sisters of the Poor in Calcutta to send money to Ethiopia is like asking your local YMCA to earmark funds for Ethiopia. They are two different charities, with two different program numbers, etc. I highly doubt their office had enough down time to deal with those sorts of details.

3) In reference to her not writing the DA of Los Angeles back... my mother supposedly sent me three care packages and over a dozen letters to Uganda. I got maybe four letters and a package. Are we even certain she received it? Are we certain the individual handling the letter could read it? Are we certain Mother Theresa was even shown it? Did the DA think of calling?

4) She ran a hospice, not a hospital. A hospice is where people are taken once they have been diagnosed as terminal. So deciding who is treatable is not their area of expertise.

5) Their mission started prior to the modern NGO model. You are judging her through the lens of modern eyes. She was an old woman before I was even born. They didn't have ISO, TQM, CQI and other quality measures then. No one sent her to school to learn how to run a hospice, a shelter, etc. She did what she thought she needed to do. Are Catholic Charities today run better than her mission? Absolutely. Almost all charities are run according to a business model, and as the countries themselves improve, the ability to serve improves. It is much easier today to do relief work, and it's still not easy.

BTW, I have been to state run hospitals and clinics in the developing world and very few of them would meet Mr Fox's standards. Some nations still have rolling power blackouts at state run hospitals!

Was she perfect? No. Was she a saint? Depends on how the debate goes. I might have done things differently, but I don't know since I've never been her in her particular set of circumstances. However, she was in the fight which is more than I can say of her critics and 99% of all the people on the planet.

It is very easy to say what Tom Brady should have done to win that super bowl from the comfort of our living room, but on the field we'd all look like a-holes.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join