this post was submitted on 29 May 2024
49 points (100.0% liked)

politics

18866 readers
21 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

For comparison, coverage from:

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 15 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Just watched trumps little tirade during a break in the trial and he said "even mother Teresa couldn't beat these charges..."

Sounds like it's going great!

[–] [email protected] 15 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Remember when mother Teresa paid a pornstar to keep her mouth shut while she was running for election? Yeah, I heard she couldn’t beat those charges in a court of law.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Mother Teresa was a horrible person who reveled in the suffering of others while avoiding suffering herself.

His statement is truer than he knows if he's comparing himself to her.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

That is a gross oversimplification of Mother Teresa. I’m no fan of hers, but let’s dislike her for truthful reasons rather than exaggerations.

She never reveled in anyone’s suffering, though she did remark that suffering brings us closer to God, which I would consider an unhelpful stance at best.

She ran multiple hospice care centers because no one was doing anything and people were just dying in the street. She had extremely limited resources and could only provide limited medical care as she wasn’t a doctor and again, I say this with intended emphasis, literally no one else was doing anything to help.

She saw unimaginable suffering and did everything in her power to reduce that suffering to the extent of her ability and resources, which was far more than anyone else was doing.

I don’t think she’s a saint, but I think her goals and efforts were laudable even if her beliefs and methods were less than ideal.

This Wikipedia page highlights the controversy surrounding the quality of medical care, but also shares the counter argument, which is that they struggled with the same problems as the rest of healthcare in India and were treating people no one else would.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

They weren't treating them they were refusing treatments for people under their care. Saying suffering brings u closer to God and then inflicting and or prolonging that suffering makes her a shitty person.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Source?

Even in the critical article in the wikipedia, they noted that they were giving limited treatment to the best of their ability. Their ability, however was lacking. To say that they denied treatment to encourage suffering is a far cry from the harshest criticism I’ve come across from anyone who actually witnessed their facilities.

Again, I’m not a fan of Teresa. If there’s more evidence of what you’re saying, that’s totally valid, I’ve just not seen it myself and I did some digging myself just to make sure of what I was talking about.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Some people just exist to shit on other people for no particular reason except to shit on people...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

What does that mean? Like the crimes are so bad and blatant that they wouldn't give anyone a pass?