New Orleans Pelicans Fan
Member since Apr 2009
re: Dartmouth Society of Douchebags (Posted on 12/23/12 at 9:49 am to TigerJeff)
Why Mother Teresa Was Evil
She built up and ran an international corporation using slave labour. It was not slave labour in the legal sense, of course, but the psychological reality was precisely that of slave labour. She chose India as her base and got many young girls for her convents. Those young girls/women were not there voluntarily in the psychological sense, they were there because their parents put enormous psychological pressure on them to become nuns. Mother T had a hideously austere set of rules for them, summed up by chastity, obedience and suchlike, and that meant obedience to the church, i.e., her. (One wonders what happened when chastity and obedience came into conflict. I'll bet it was chastity that got sacrificed.)
She got off on playing the part of the ministering angel, and chose to save the souls of the lowest of the low – the people who were dying. The problem is that she was not interested in curing anyone. As Christopher Hitchens has said, an English nurse actually left after Mother Teresa had refused to help a child who would certainly have lived had he had a course of antibiotics. Her response was that it was irrelevant because he was going to meet God anyway! She wasn't interested in the living or potentially living, only the dying, and she was only interested in the dying for her own selfish pleasure in getting off on playing the ministering angel. She wasn't interested in helping them to get better, only to save their souls.
She betrayed the dying too. What she was doing was incompatible with having moral relationships with people. When you develop a relationship with someone, you thereby acquire an obligation to treat that person differently from how you might treat a complete stranger. A parent who has a child adopted at birth does not raise obligations to that child, but a parent who chooses to parent does thereby raise an obligation to the children she chooses to bring up. To the extent that Mother Teresa developed relationships with people in her care, she was acting immorally in not using the available money to treat them where that would have made a difference to whether they live or die, for example.
The pope beatifies Mother Teresa, a fanatic, a fundamentalist, and a fraud.
By Christopher Hitchens
This returns us to the medieval corruption of the church, which sold indulgences to the rich while preaching hellfire and continence to the poor. MT was not a friend of the poor. She was a friend of poverty. She said that suffering was a gift from God. She spent her life opposing the only known cure for poverty, which is the empowerment of women and the emancipation of them from a livestock version of compulsory reproduction. And she was a friend to the worst of the rich, taking misappropriated money from the atrocious Duvalier family in Haiti (whose rule she praised in return) and from Charles Keating of the Lincoln Savings and Loan. Where did that money, and all the other donations, go? The primitive hospice in Calcutta was as run down when she died as it always had been—she preferred California clinics when she got sick herself—and her order always refused to publish any audit. But we have her own claim that she opened 500 convents in more than a hundred countries, all bearing the name of her own order. Excuse me, but this is modesty and humility?
One of the curses of India, as of other poor countries, is the quack medicine man, who fleeces the sufferer by promises of miraculous healing. Sunday was a great day for these parasites, who saw their crummy methods endorsed by his holiness and given a more or less free ride in the international press. Forgotten were the elementary rules of logic, that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and that what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. More than that, we witnessed the elevation and consecration of extreme dogmatism, blinkered faith, and the cult of a mediocre human personality. Many more people are poor and sick because of the life of MT: Even more will be poor and sick if her example is followed. She was a fanatic, a fundamentalist, and a fraud, and a church that officially protects those who violate the innocent has given us another clear sign of where it truly stands on moral and ethical questions.
Mother Teresa: Faithless Fraud and Hypocrite
by Michael Parenti
What usually went unreported were the vast sums she received from
wealthy and sometimes tainted sources, including a million dollars from
convicted savings & loan swindler Charles Keating, on whose behalf she
sent a personal plea for clemency to the presiding judge. She was asked
by the prosecutor in that case to return Keating's gift because it was
money he had stolen. She never did. She also accepted substantial
sums given by the brutal Duvalier dictatorship that regularly stole
from the Haitian public treasury.
Mother Teresa's hospitals for the indigent in India and elsewhere turned
out to be hardly more than human warehouses in which seriously ill
persons lay on mats, sometimes fifty to sixty in a room without benefit
of adequate medical attention. Their ailments usually went undiagnosed.
The food was nutritionally lacking and sanitary conditions were
deplorable. There were few medical personnel on the premises, mostly
untrained nuns and brothers.
When tending to her own ailments, however, Teresa checked into some of
the costliest hospitals and recovery care units in the world for
And I had a couple of friends who lived and worked in in India. They pretty much say the same thing. But believe what you wish.
This post was edited on 12/23 at 9:55 am