Politically Incorrect: for those sick of PC Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Politically Incorrect: for those sick of PC

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Rambi who wrote (955)	10/10/1997 5:11:00 PM
From: Jacques Chitte	of 1014

>>This man is judging her through the eyes of our modern" oh-so-enlightened" society.<< He does play to his audience, doesn't he? And I sure got the juices flowing by crossposting this, no? Disclaimer to all: I am not advocating or debunking the contents. I presume it is a polemic with an ulterior motive, equal and opposed to the Official Version sanctioned by the Vatican. If someone asked me point-blank what my my my opinion was, I would have to reply very carefully. I think that the need to see society's heroes in black or white is a disease. People need to be more sophisticated. This public embrace of a Sweet&Simple Story makes for a public easily herded by politicians and other skilled orators. Kinda undermines the basic premise of government by vote. I'm not able to judge the material presented on whether it has the facts straight. But let me latch onto the example of the San Francisco hospice for dying men. On the one hand, it's a genuine act of charity to provide such a setting for the skinny end of our society. On the other hand, look at the imposed limitations. No visits...no pain medication? Why so...narrow? Who benefits by having charity corseted by dogma? I don't get it. (Of course, the inmates could choose not to use the facility. But if I were homeless and dying of AIDS, I'm not so sure I'd see a whole lot of alternatives. One could smugly say, better than a kick in the buns. We've already walked thru that on Feelings some months ago.) I never thought about it from the perspective you offer: Great leaps of faith and charity aren't gonna look good under a microscope. You're probably dead right. But what I would like to see is a bit more...negotiability! Provide the charity without the direct marketing of one faith or another. Let the guy have his smokes. Don't frown upon the city girl who's had enough of childbearing. I must admit, when Mother Teresa said that bit about God providing for all life, I was upset. I disagree! That is such a subordination of what's really happening to what is church policy. Surely she knew better; she wasn't stupid. After all, she was surrounded by unfortunates of all descriptions. But at the same time she chose not to run afoul of her sponsors in the Vatican. I greatly admire a life devoted to great organized acts of kindness. But I lament the conditional nature of much of this action. The catholic and the humanist alike must find the courage to lay all beliefs on the table for mutual examination, then negotiate the next synthesis. Imho.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next