Maybe you don’t know what a vow of poverty really is, you don’t own anything, that’s all. If someone wants to buy you a $100 meal it is OK. What you say is meaningless.
I was in the health care field for many years, and this didn’t sound right to me. I just asked my wife for her opinion (she’s a Nurse Practitioner) and here’s her response:
That statement is completely untrue. A professional who is educated in pain management should be able to manage a patients symptoms without killing them. It is an art and a science. Many things are taken into consideration when prescribing, such as the patient’s renal function, prior pain medication use and the type of pain they are experiencing.
Why a silly question, do you think people are either all good or all bad. Black or white again. The real world is not like that, there are numerous shades of gray in everyone. The Catholic church has always advocated no divorce.
I don’t think Mother Teresa was all bad. I just think she wasn’t a saint, and that her reputation is overrated.
So you discount the person’s testimony just because they are an atheist?
Have you met lekatt?
I have. But, several posters in this thread have not. I want to make things clear for them.
You really think where Mother Teresa was with no doctors or nurses this matters.
Well, can you give me the definition of a saint, do they have halos or wings? She lessened the suffering of thousands of poor people no one cared about. I say she did good. Now let them who is without sin cast the first stone.
That unsupported assertion you just made is exactly the point that is under debate in this thread.
I am glad you asked that question. I discount the testimony of any person with an agenda no matter what they profess. I don’t care if you are an atheist, just don’t let it color your judgement. I have an atheist friend that don’t go around with the atheist chip on his shoulder. That is the way it should be.
Being an atheist don’t make you unhappy, anxious, or depressed, any more than being a theist. But whatever you carry inside you comes out, if you carry love then the love comes out, etc. I don’t know why atheists think they have to down everything religious, makes no sense to me. If a person is happy, peaceful, and contented with the path they have chosen, then why is it necessary to bash others? You tell me.
Unsupported? A Nobel Prize winner, hundreds of books and articles about her self sacrifices, tens of thousands of Indians mourned her passing and you say unsupported? Geesh.
Then why did you mention it in the first place?
As pointed out, Arafat also won a Noble prize.
With so much to choose from, it should be an easy matter to provide a proper cite.
Hey, Arafat had millions mourn for him too.
You wrote something about hospices and pain management that my wife, a trained professional, could weigh in on and tell you that you’re wrong. Correcting bullshit is part of what this site’s about. It seemed more apropos since you were telling someone else that they knew nothing about hospices and were passing yourself off as an expert because you “worked at one.”
Again, as other keep having to remind you, part of this thread is determining whether or not she had the money to pay for appropriate pain relief. Since others have shown that she did and that she admitted that the suffering was good, I’ve got enough information to form a conclusion. Since you’re still claiming that you don’t, you’ve proven that not only atheists can have agendas.
No, that’s not what he said. He said “No, you made the assertion. You back it up. You do your own work.The one English cite you provided did not prove what you claimed it did. Why should I believe your Spanish cites are any better?”.
The English cite was a list of houses (which, apparently serve the public good less than open sewers do) and the Spanich ones are claimed to be unworthy of checking, because the English one wasn’t to his liking.
A list of houses is not proof that do anything, other than exist.
If your English cite was good, I could have seen my going the extra mile and getting your Spanish cites translated. It wasn’t. So, I didn’t.
Diogenes’ points are still valid.
You are mistaken. Mother Teresa was from the Ottoman Empire/Albania/Yugoslavia/Macedonia (the regimes and borders kept changing) and her name is translated from Cyrillic script. Like other names translated from other languages/alphabets (Mao Zedong, Moammar Gadhafi, etc.) there is some flexibility in transliterating it into English.
“Teresa” is the usual spelling, but the “correct” spelling is debatable. If you’d sent her a check to “Mother Theresa,” by all indication she would have cashed it.
So far as I can tell, that quote entirely backs up my interpretation.
If they were simply unworthy of checking, then I would be on your side in this. One cite considered unimpressive does not mean all other cites don’t even need to be looked at. The problem is, so far as I can tell, the recipient in this case can’t read Spanish. So it’s not simply a matter of checking them as it is with the English source, it’s a matter of translating them to a good standard, which at the very least requires more of an effort. If, as seems reasonable here, there are likely to be other cites in English, and if the person giving the cites understands English themselves, and if the one cite in English doesn’t bode particularly impressively for the others, it seems reasonable to me to ask for other cites which are in English.
The whole point of a cite is that it backs up your argument sufficiently for the person you’re arguing with. It doesn’t matter that you believe it or read it, because you’re already convinced. You want to convince others; and that, in this case, appears to mean supplying cites in languages they can read, just as it requires supplying cites they can find no bias with or cites that are relevant to the topic at hand.
It wasn’t transliterated from anything. She chose the name after a saint. It wasn’t actually her Albanian name.
Her official Church Title is “Blessed Teresa of Calcutta,” by the way. And since it is a church title, and not her actual name, the Church’s spelling is definitive.
“Theresa” is wrong. It’s pointless to dispute that. Just acknowledge the correction and move on.