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: The Philosopher who wrote (12315)	4/24/2001 11:44:18 PM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Okay, now we know you have no objection to her doing her best to deprive the brutally poor of birth control in a country where a condom can prevent a slow, agonizing death by starvation or a faster one by dysentery. Because she believed God wanted it that way. And loved the suffering of the poor. What about pain killers? Okay, with you, for the poor, to die of cancer of the pancreas without morphine because of her religious beliefs? You think the poor chose to die in agony? What planet are you from? What about washing needles in cold water? No probleme? Good care for herself, though. Top drawer. Or do you believe the papers lied about that -- do you believe she was really treated in one of her "clinics"? Using the money for nunneries? Praising Baby Doc? (Do you believe he loved the poor and the poor loved him?) Here's my first post here on the subject of the hard working Mother Teresa, who so loved suffering that she couldn't get enough of it. Message 15685843 The piece quoted isn't by Hitchens, it is by an ordained clergyman, written in defense of MT. Quoted is a former Missionary of Charity Sister, Susan Shields-- a non-Marxist, I assume-- who worked as a key official in MT's order. Now, Hitchens being a Marxist, must have made up... Well what, Christopher, do you think was made up? You didn't say. I can't find anyone taking exception to his information, or that of the Missionary Sister who was there, either. I can find people taking the position, like you, that what she did was good, or that she was a good person, or even saying she had performed miracles and should be beatified; but not saying Hitchens or the former Missionary of Charity made anything up. All you have said for sure is that depriving the starving poor by the millions of birth control is morally fine with you, if she believed God wanted it that way. And the truth about heroes isn't that important to you. And nobody's perfect. And anyone who talks about MT's little... quirks... is "vilifying" her. And I believe I just noticed you saying that not all the Keating money was stolen, so she was right to ignore the letter from the court, and that it is only illegal acts by her you would frown upon, and maybe not those? I don't think it was actually illegal not to use the money given to help the poor to alleviate their misery as the donors thought was happening while they were languishing in her wretched "medical" facilities. Because she didn't have to account for it. So you're fine with that. And the Missionary of Charity Sister? You will dismiss her description as... those of a disgruntled former employee? (Maybe she was disgruntled because she believed in pain killers.) The 1981 speech (public) in praise of Baby Doc and the missus... just fine with you? Let's post the words of your guy, taken from a post of yours. He dislikes Hitchens (I don't like or respect Hitchens personally myself, but since I haven't found a single denial of anything factually descriptive he said, and I've looked, I'm beginning to respect him more), and says, in his defense of MT, something that I assume you agree with and I don't. (I personally think it's a perverted and destructive and cruel worldview): <>i>Of course part of the reason Hitchins disliked Teresa was that she sucked up to dictators (Baby Doc Duvalier) and thieves (Charles Keating) as long as they contributed to her cause, but I think the main reason for Hitchins' animosity is that Teresa believed it was more important for the poor to abstain from practicing contraception or abortion than for them to live comfortably in the material. Translate "than to live comfortably in the material" to "than to not watch their children starve to death and die of disease they are too weak to resist and live in illiteracy and hopelessness and brutal poverty, by the millions and millions." trollope.org