Amie

So do you base this on your "impression" being right?
It's his impression after all...

I'm with Gemma on this. I hold her in high esteem.

Mia stop rolling your eyes at me!

emphryio

Yes of course MT was a detrimental force. If the people who donated all those millions to her had known they just went straight to the Vatican bank, they might have instead donated it to a useful charity.

MT was extremely harmful to the people of India. The end result of her dishonesty in taking all this money was the death of thousands at least.

It is a big deal and how people approach this topic can be seen as a sort of inteligence litmus test.

(The basic divide being those who actually can read for more than 5 minutes at a time and those who can't.)

The Naked Mage

Attagirl, Amie. Don't let facts get in the way of forming an opinion!

Infinity Lover

And your definition of opinion wouldn't be "whatever you decide people should think" by any chance?

NakedMage + Sarcastic sneer = tediously predictable

Oh and Emphrio; are you saying anyone who might be in disagreement in even the slightest sense is mentally challenged? Saying what you think is one thing, saying what you think others should think about those who think differently is quite a step further. I for one am happy that I don't live in a place where people who stray from the norm get frowned upon and locked up.

The downright disrespect for people who have a different view in this discussion oozes intollerance, and I for one find that repugnant. Bear in mind that without that crucial element you wouldn't have much of a debate.

Over here it's the day the Dutch remember those who died during WW2, paying a dear price for that little something called freedom of speech. An asset of western society that should be celebrated rather than pissed on!

Sabine Grant

Heresy... I think you are placing words in my mouth. I recall having seen on TV the crowds of Indians who came by her exposed body to render homage to her..... is it possible that some people in India have a different perspective of MT? As I said earlier... the "gray" area is important to consider.
Again I do not have any particular loathing or admiration for MT.

The Naked Mage

No, Infinity, my definition of "opinion" is "a belief or conviction, based on what seems probable or true but not on demonstrable fact", which is what it's always been. It is simply MY opinion that the foundations of AMIE'S opinion are highly questionable.

Infinity Lover + slavishly taking the bullet for Amie = tediously predictable.

Infinity Lover

Okay, let's try to venture into that "grey area" Sabine mentioned...

Reading through the several links and articles, I do notice that as much as MT twisted the truth about the number of facilities, she appearantly never made false claims about what is/isn't done there.

From the interview with Hitchens at Secularhumanism.org:

" And in fairness to her, she has never really claimed that treatment is the point. Although she does accept donations from people who have fooled themselves into thinking so, I haven't found any occasion where she has given a false impression of her work. The only way she could be said to be responsible for spreading it is that she knowingly accepts what comes due to that false impression. "

That the driving force behind MT's prioritizing were her fundamentalist Catholic convictions, was known by the RC church from day one.

"For a long time the church was not quite sure what to do about her. For example, when there was the Second Vatican Council, in the 1960s, there was an equivalent meeting for the Catholics of the Indian subcontinent in Bombay. Mother Teresa turned up and said she was absolutely against any reconsideration of doctrine. She said we don't need any new thinking or reflection, what we need is more work and more faith. So she has been recognized as a difficult and dogmatic woman by the Catholics in India for a long time.

I think there were others in the church who suspected she was too ambitious, that she wouldn't accept discipline, that she wanted an order of her own. Traditionally, the church has tended to suspect that kind of excessive zeal."

I'm lifting this out of the interview, to stress that there are many people responsible for that which members here are disgusted by; not just one. To ball up all contempt and to throw it in MT's lap alone would be somewhat naive and unfair, though understandable. Aiming at one target is so much easier than at several. Hitchens certainly doesn't spit in just one direction.

Someone having an (to ones opinion) objectable perspective on certain matters is one thing, placing that person in a position where they can act upon those thoughts and ideas is another one. And initially it wasn't even the RC church that put MT in the spotlight.

"I think it was an entirely secular breakthrough sponsored by Muggeridge, who wasn't then a Catholic."
"Her break into stardom came when Malcolm Muggeridge - a very pious British political and social pundit - adopted her for his pet cause. In 1969, he made a very famous film about her life - and later a book called Something Beautiful for God."

So bullshitting people (or yourself) is wrong. And primarily caring about stroking your concience, rather than 'doing what's right', is hypocrite. But again; would it be fair to point in just one direction?

"As to why those who would normally consider themselves rationalists or skeptics have fallen for the Mother Teresa myth, I think there is an element of post-colonial condescension involved, in that most people have a slightly bad conscience about "the wretched of the Earth" and they are glad to feel that there are those who will take action. Then also there is the general problem of credulity, of people being willing - once a reputation has been established - to judge people's actions by that reputation instead of the reputation by that action."

Or how about proffesional pride getting in the way of improving one's efforts? MT's the only one guilty of this?

Hitchens about why the press hadn't looked deeper into MT's reelings and dealings...

"There's a laziness in my profession, of tending to make the mistake I just identified of judging people by their reputation. In other words, if you call Saudi Arabia a "moderate Arab state" that's what it becomes for reportorial purposes. It doesn't matter what it does, it's a "moderate state." Similarly for Mother Teresa: she became a symbol for virtue, so even in cartoons, jokes, movies, and television shows, if you want a synonym for selflessness and holiness she is always mentioned."

Another matter, is that, up to some degree, there was wishfull thinking on the part of those who approached her.

"This is interesting because, first, she only proclaims to be providing people with a Catholic death, and, second, because of the enormous amounts of money mainly donated to rather than raised by her Order."

Ultimately the magnitude of wasted money and suffering isn't the product of one little old lady, to which I would like to add the following bit of advise: get real! The credit for that should mainly go to those who gave her the power.

And anyone who thinks power doesn't tend to corrupt can go stand on their head now.

Infinity Lover

No debate there; when it comes to tedious predictability you are without question the expert.

wade-w

Infinity Lover, Mage:

Keep it civil. If you keep this up, I will close this thread.

The Naked Mage

Guess I'll just walk away, then.

Infinity Lover, be sure and PM me when you feel that Amie's old enough to represent herself, wot-wot?