3 ms·

God is an absolute, the source of all. The concept includes being responsible for the death of people in unfortunate circumstances. I don't see the idea that yo

God is an absolute, the source of all. The concept includes being responsible for the death of people in unfortunate circumstances. I don't see the idea that you are somehow above God because you identified that some people died in unfortunate circumstances. I don't "forgive her". I say there is a truth you have thrown under a bus. She didn't self promote, she was serving a purpose under a larger story. People suffering and someone being unable to fix it, doesn't make them a sociopath for trying to give some meaning to inevitable deaths. You and Hitchens are just grand-standing off the back of religion.

DonHopkins 6y ago
You haven't refuted even one of Hitchens' claims. All you're doing is trying to redirect and distract from them. Reciting a Dr. Bronner's Magic Soap label at me doesn't prove your point, it just shows you're irrational. And now you're making straw man arguments falsely accusing me of having the idea that I'm somehow above God. That's a non-sequitur. Where did you get that from??! Why do you have to just make shit up, instead of arguing the facts? Tell me what Hitchens said that isn't true, and prove it. This is a discussion about psychopathic people being able to conceal it, and fool gullible people into literally believing they're saints. Of course she relentlessly self promoted and grandstanded -- that's what she was doing when she attended a nun consecration ceremony (which she didn't need to do, and didn't help the poor) and decapitated innocent people with the propellers of her private charter airplane, killing two children, and a man who ran a home for lepers, then she arrogantly claimed it was a Miracle from God that SHE survived. How narcissistic can you possibly get? Do you or don't you agree that Mother Teresa is a psychopath, and if you disagree, how do you square it with the facts that Hitchens and others raise? (Without attacking the messenger, address the FACTS.) The spectacle of you trying to defend her with mumbo-jumbo, without contesting any of the widely know and documented facts about her, simply proves my point that she fooled a lot of gullible people who refuse to be swayed by the facts, including you.
- friendlybus 6y ago
  I don't know what to say. Your post doesn't make sense. She didn't fly the plane into people by her own hands. She didn't order her pilot to murder people in a failed bid to take-off. You reject the very concept of the religion you criticize. If you have a problem with magic soap labels then I can agree, I don't believe magic soap labes matter too. That's not what religion is. I fail to see how attending a religious appointment is a crime. Did she skip out on handing out food? Did she miss her chance to pass out medicine? What concrete thing could she have done to save her people? Your post is way over the line of sanity. Being angry that religion exists in the face of suffering isn't a valid criticism of theresa. Criticize the lack of solutions to the problem, by the people who were responsible. The rest is insane bleatings.
  - DonHopkins 6y ago
    You obviously haven't listened to any of Hitchens' or anyone else's criticisms of Mother Teresa, since you refuse to address or refute any of them. Funny how somebody who believes in invisible ghosts and resurrection and chants magic soap labels but doesn't believe in science or cause and effect will accuse somebody else who does of insanity. You're the deranged one arguing that the poor should suffer to help the world and the environment. That makes your personality very dark, indeed. We're having a discussion about psychopaths with dark personality traits who deceive people into thinking they're saints, and Mother Teresa is the archetypical textbook example of that. Do you have any evidence to the contrary? Can you prove Christopher Hitchens' criticisms are wrong? All you've contributed so far is serving as an example of somebody who refuses to look at the evidence and was gullibly fooled into believing a terrible person is actually a saint. Which was my point. Thank you!
    - friendlybus 6y ago
      I've listened to hundreds of hours of Hitchens. I liked him. I asked you for concrete refutations, which are implicitly based in science. Tilting at windmills here..
      - DonHopkins 6y ago

DonHopkins 6y ago

You haven't refuted even one of Hitchens' claims. All you're doing is trying to redirect and distract from them. Reciting a Dr. Bronner's Magic Soap label at me doesn't prove your point, it just shows you're irrational. And now you're making straw man arguments falsely accusing me of having the idea that I'm somehow above God. That's a non-sequitur. Where did you get that from??! Why do you have to just make shit up, instead of arguing the facts? Tell me what Hitchens said that isn't true, and prove it. This is a discussion about psychopathic people being able to conceal it, and fool gullible people into literally believing they're saints. Of course she relentlessly self promoted and grandstanded -- that's what she was doing when she attended a nun consecration ceremony (which she didn't need to do, and didn't help the poor) and decapitated innocent people with the propellers of her private charter airplane, killing two children, and a man who ran a home for lepers, then she arrogantly claimed it was a Miracle from God that SHE survived. How narcissistic can you possibly get? Do you or don't you agree that Mother Teresa is a psychopath, and if you disagree, how do you square it with the facts that Hitchens and others raise? (Without attacking the messenger, address the FACTS.) The spectacle of you trying to defend her with mumbo-jumbo, without contesting any of the widely know and documented facts about her, simply proves my point that she fooled a lot of gullible people who refuse to be swayed by the facts, including you.

friendlybus 6y ago
I don't know what to say. Your post doesn't make sense. She didn't fly the plane into people by her own hands. She didn't order her pilot to murder people in a failed bid to take-off. You reject the very concept of the religion you criticize. If you have a problem with magic soap labels then I can agree, I don't believe magic soap labes matter too. That's not what religion is. I fail to see how attending a religious appointment is a crime. Did she skip out on handing out food? Did she miss her chance to pass out medicine? What concrete thing could she have done to save her people? Your post is way over the line of sanity. Being angry that religion exists in the face of suffering isn't a valid criticism of theresa. Criticize the lack of solutions to the problem, by the people who were responsible. The rest is insane bleatings.
- DonHopkins 6y ago
  You obviously haven't listened to any of Hitchens' or anyone else's criticisms of Mother Teresa, since you refuse to address or refute any of them. Funny how somebody who believes in invisible ghosts and resurrection and chants magic soap labels but doesn't believe in science or cause and effect will accuse somebody else who does of insanity. You're the deranged one arguing that the poor should suffer to help the world and the environment. That makes your personality very dark, indeed. We're having a discussion about psychopaths with dark personality traits who deceive people into thinking they're saints, and Mother Teresa is the archetypical textbook example of that. Do you have any evidence to the contrary? Can you prove Christopher Hitchens' criticisms are wrong? All you've contributed so far is serving as an example of somebody who refuses to look at the evidence and was gullibly fooled into believing a terrible person is actually a saint. Which was my point. Thank you!
  - friendlybus 6y ago
    I've listened to hundreds of hours of Hitchens. I liked him. I asked you for concrete refutations, which are implicitly based in science. Tilting at windmills here..
    - DonHopkins 6y ago