My Cotton Challenge

[TagliatelliMonster]

You did. You clearly demonstrated that you to not understand the lesson that Mother Teresa was trying to teach about having love, mercy, compassion, empathy and understand for others.

What compassion, mercy, love,...?
What is compassionate about letting people suffer in agony, instead of actually treating them?

 

[joshua 1 9]

What compassion, mercy, love,...?
What is compassionate about letting people suffer in agony, instead of actually treating them?

Your presenting a strawman argument. When you misrepresented someone's argument that makes it easier to attack.

"The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern: Person A has position X."

We can have a discussion about your theory on pain though. That may well be a timely discussion because of the drug epidemic we are dealing with right now. We know that every cause has an effect. Pain is an effect and there must be something causing that pain. The Bible says: "Let beer be for those who are perishing, wine for those who are in anguish!" Proverbs 31:6 So if people are perishing then the Bible does not seem to object to us giving them something to comfort them. The question is what about the people that are not perishing? What do we do about their pain and discomfort. For me I would want to deal with the cause. Not just treat symptoms or deal with the effect.

Mother Teresa never claimed to be a Bible teacher. She said that was for the Priest to study the Bible and teach the Bible to others. She received guidance from the Priests in the work she was doing to help people.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Not really, the rock solid standard of Science is the double blind test and is is very difficult for them to outperform a placebo.

Really?

Okay.
Next time you contract a nasty desease, you take the placebo while someone else with the same desease gets the actual treatment.

See what happens.

So even if God is just a placebo effect that is still a very high standard to try to surpass.

It's not. The fact that you even know the concept of "placebo", is a testament to that.
There would be no concept of such if it were close to impossible to tell the difference between placebo's and actual medicine.

IF you think that is so easy to do then you must be a multi billionare many times over.

lol

My son came home the other day complaining about his math class and how difficult his assignment was. I said math maybe difficult but math is correct 100% of the time. You can trust in math and depend on math to always work.

Then you just gave your son false information.
Math is only as correct as the premises allow it to be.

It is perfectly possible to describe a non-existing reality with a mathematical model.
Your math could be 100% internally correct, yet the entire model completely wrong.

Math is like logic.
Conclusions are only as good as the premises.

"The half-life of knowledge is the amount of time that has to elapse before half of the knowledge in a particular area is superseded or shown to be untrue. The concept is attributed to Fritz Machlup (1962). For example, Donald Hebb estimated the half-lifeof psychology to be five years." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-life_of_knowledge

Whatever man.

Meanwhile, 300 years of science has accomplished hundreds of times more then 8000 years of religion.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Your presenting a strawman argument. When you misrepresented someone's argument that makes it easier to attack.

"The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern: Person A has position X."

What strawman?

What position of yours did I misrepresent?
It seems to me that I haven't even spoken about your position at all concerning anything.

In fact, in the post that you are calling a "strawman", I'm actually just asking you a question, which I will repeat here:

What "compassion", love, mercy,...?
What is compassionate about letting people suffer in agony, instead of actually treating them?

She certainly had the funds to ensure treatment of these poor people. Instead, she just provided them with a place where they can suffer in agony.

Again, what compassion?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Your presenting a strawman argument. When you misrepresented someone's argument that makes it easier to attack.

"The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern: Person A has position X."

No, it's a valid question: how is letting people suffer in agony when they can be given medical treatment an act of compassion?

 

[joshua 1 9]

What position of yours did I misrepresent?

Actually your attack was on the Catholic Church and their Canonization of Mother Teresa for her work in Calcutta. I do not think your allowed to attack her like that on here. We could check but I think this sort of personal attack on a Christian is against the rules.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Actually your attack was on the Catholic Church and their Canonization of Mother Teresa for her work in Calcutta. I do not think your allowed to attack her like that on here. We could check but I think this sort of personal attack on a Christian is against the rules.

Again, what position did I misrepresent? You accused me of a strawman... please substantiate that accusation instead of jumping all around (and now even falling so low as to try and shut me up by trying to scare me with bans or whatever).

I stand by every word I said.

Theresa was all about letting people suffer in agony.
Theresa received funds from all over the world - millions, billions of dollars.
Considering those trunks of money, those hospitals should have been state of the art places with more then enough resources to actually treat people. Apparantly though, that money was never used for that purpose, so where did that money go?
Theresa, when she got sick herself, stepped on an airplane and went elsewhere to a high-tech hospital for treatment. Which she paid for with....?
And why did she do that? Was the "hospital" where she did her "work" not good enough for her? Apparantly it was good enough for all the people that were suffering there, so why this double standard?

I never spoke about the catholic church or whatever. So please don't put words in my mouth.
All I did was share the above facts.

Now... what "strawman"? Which position of yours did I misrepresent? Which position of yours did I evern talk about in the first place - let alone mispreresent?

 

[joshua 1 9]

No, it's a valid question: how is letting people suffer in agony when they can be given medical treatment an act of compassion?

The point I was making had to do with today's drug epidemic because of the overuse of opium based drugs allowed by the FDA today. They need to be more conservative and less liberal. As for what Mother Teresa did or did not do, I really do not know. She did not write anything, we can only go with what other people say about her. Today we are dealing with a substantial increase in the death rate from overdose of drugs that are used for pain. Going from fentanyl to carfentanil laced heroin is increasing the death rate even more.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

The point I was making had to do with today's drug epidemic because of the overuse of opium based drugs allowed by the FDA today. They need to be more conservative and less liberal. As for what Mother Teresa did or did not do, I really do not know. She did not write anything, we can only go with what other people say about her. Today we are dealing with a substantial increase in the death rate from overdose of drugs that are used for pain. Going from fentanyl to carfentanil laced heroin is increasing the death rate even more.

No, you didn't. You said that Mother Teresa was showing compassion by making people suffer in agony instead of giving them simple medical aid, which would not have simply been drugs.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The point I was making had to do with today's drug epidemic because of the overuse of opium based drugs allowed by the FDA today. They need to be more conservative and less liberal.

How is that an answer to the question???

As for what Mother Teresa did or did not do, I really do not know.

Maybe you should try and find out, before arguing about it and taking a position on it?

She did not write anything, we can only go with what other people say about her.

No. Her "work" and the donations she received are pretty well documented.

Today we are dealing with a substantial increase in the death rate from overdose of drugs that are used for pain. Going from fentanyl to carfentanil laced heroin is increasing the death rate even more.

This, again, has no relation at all to the points being discussed.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Next time you contract a nasty desease, you take the placebo while someone else with the same desease gets the actual treatment.

I have doctors that get upset with me because I do not want to take all of the drugs they want to prescribe for me. That is my choice. I have the right to pick and choose what treatment I want. For example I recently had a problem from my back because I carry a little bit of extra weight. We decided the best approach would be to go though osteoporosis therapy exercises for a pinched nerve in my back. I learned different positions that I can use when I sleep to avoid the nerve getting pinched. I rejected taking drugs for the pain because I wanted to resolve the cause of the problem not just treat the symptoms. I lowered by Blood Pressure from 195/119 down to 100/50 with diet, exercise & stress control. I do not think any medication would have been as effective as a more natural approach to good health. To be sure good health is a daily ongoing effort.

 

[joshua 1 9]

No, you didn't. You said that Mother Teresa was showing compassion by making people suffer in agony instead of giving them simple medical aid, which would not have simply been drugs.

I did not say that. You did, actually monster did, but now you want to defend him and the argument he is failing to establish. I did a little research in Mother Teresa and there are people that accuse her of different things. I questioned if the rules allow people to attack Christians like that. I thought the rules prohibited personal attacks like that.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I did not say that. You did, actually monster did, but now you want to defend him and the argument he is failing to establish. I did a little research in Mother Teresa and there are people that accuse her of different things. I questioned if the rules allow people to attack Christians like that. I thought the rules prohibited personal attacks like that.

The rules prohibit personal attacks on USERS only. And again, you were the one who made the claim that Mother Teresa was showing compassion by withholding medical aid to the people under her care. Do you care support that claim?

 

[Paul Finch]

The rules prohibit personal attacks on USERS only. And again, you were the one who made the claim that Mother Teresa was showing compassion by withholding medical aid to the people under her care. Do you care support that claim?

You are flogging a dead horse.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Mother Teresa did the exact same thing only the other way, she denied her God on her deathbed and died an atheist.

And she was anything but a saint (also Mother of All Myths).

One has to wonder about the application of a one-coat-covers-it-all gloss to Christian saints in general, not to mention the one who supposedly started it all...

 

[Truthfrees]

MOD HAT
This thread has been closed at the OP's request.