Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E who wrote (12313)	4/24/2001 10:04:19 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

I don't understand why you're playing this game. Let's get some facts out that we can look at. Why are you insisting on going through all this hypothetical crapola? It does no good to anybody, that I can see. And let's differentiate admiration from hero worship. Have I ever said she was a hero of mine? I don't think so. But from what I know of her life, yes, I do admire her. She did something neither you nor I have the courage to do -- she dedicated her life to helping others in the best way she knew how. I had something vaguely approaching that sort of courage when I was younger and active in the civil rights and peace movements. But would I be as willing to put my life on the line today for those same principles? Would I be willing to be arrested, beaten, gassed, risk death, for the principle of racial equality, or the principle of peace in a far off country? Frankly, no. I spent one summer working as a full-time residential volunteer counselor for a camp for the mentally ill. It was very rewarding, but also very draining. Exhausting both physically and mentally. Am I glad I did it? Definitely. I learned a tremendous amount, and think I contributed to some lives that needed to know there were people in the world who cared about them. Would I do that for all my life? Not a chance. But MT didn't just serve for a few years and then move on to a life of relative ease and comfort. She stuck with it for all her life. Yes, I do admire that. Having in a very small way been there, done that, moved on, I can admire her for continuing in her life of service year after year after year. It takes a very special kind of love to do that, IMO. Would I cease to admire her if she were less than perfect? Well, how about you -- does a flaw in a person mean you won't admire them no matter what good they have done? If so, you have very few people you can admire. If any at all. If her flaws are of great magnitude, if overall her life were a negative and not a positive to those she sought to serve, yes, I would have concerns. So far I've seen no credible evidence of that, nor have you produced any. In fact, you've produced nothing except unsubstantiated accusations. Not worthy of the E I admire on this board. Do I object to her opposing birth control for Indians? Not at all. Those are her beliefs. They aren't yours. Fine. You fight for yours, she fought for hers. I can admire both of you for having deep convictions and fighting for them. I admire lots of people who do things I wouldn't do, who believe things I don't believe. As to the other things you talk about, I can't say how I will react if you ever provide me with substantiated evidence of them. I'll let you know, if you ever do. But it's seeming less and less likely that you can, or will.

To: E who wrote (12313)	4/25/2001 4:31:20 PM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 82486

How does... reporting that [Hitchens] is a Marxist serve as a rationalization of Mother Teresa's behavior, I wonder. It doesn't. But in evaluating how much weight one wants to give to any published source, I think it's only rsponsible to look at the author and the publication. For example: when reading reports of what happened with our plane recently, I frankly gave more credence to reports printed in Time than those printed in Peoples Daily. And if there are conflicts between what Colin Powell says and what the Chinese leaders say, my working assumption (subject to change if the facts dictate otherwise) is to believe Powell. My point is that I think it's just prudent to note that Hitchens is an avowed member of a belief system that deems all religion to be false and an "opiate of the masses" and which is actively hostile particularly to the Catholic Church and Pope (witness the Marxist Chinese mass arrests of people simply for worshipping peacefully). I think it makes his objectivity open to question. Just as I would think a statement by the Pope about an icon of Marxism would probably be open to question. Note I didn't say false. I just said open to question.