Who gets the rewards of charity?

[magsmay]

I was listening to someone on the radio talking about giving to charity and how it was not HOW much you gave, but what percentage of your income you were giving. An example was a millionaire giving £100 to charity and a 'pauper' giving their last penny. The 'pauper' would be actually giving much more than the wealthy man. They then went on to say Mother Theresa preached that to truthfully give to charity you had to give until it hurt -give more than you could afford, otherwise it was not charity. This got me thinking -who then is in receipt of this charity? Because if EVERYONE is expected to give -even the poorest of people -does it mean those in receipt of charity are expected to give it back or they won't go to heaven , be redeemed or whatever their religious beliefs (if any) tell them?? Surely the 'pauper' giving their last penny to charity should be the very person the charity is helping? I realise some of the statements in religious books are out of date with sentences like 'pauper' etc. but surely this would be akin to someone giving their last groceries to a food bank -then having to go to the food bank to be able to feed their family?

[birdie1971]

Tamborine - “... whatever Naomi & Birdie, I cannot think of another individual to match MT legacy of nurture to Aids, lepers, beggars, sick and homeless people in 3rd world lands that offer little respite to the fallen...”

'Whatever Naomi & Birdie'?. Oh dear. Once a person uses the word 'whatever' to start a sentence, it's pretty obvious that they have no idea what they're talking about and have simply given up. Sad.

Just because *you* cannot think of another person to match Mother Theresa's legacy does not mean that others do not exist. Using your ignorance as a crutch with which to prop up your own prejudices and belief is quite pathetic in this day and age of almost unlimited information at your fingertips. You heap praise upon the grotesque figure of Mother Theresa despite her penchant for prolonging the suffering of others for as long as possible before being legally forced to call in professional medical care. You claim that her 'legacy' are the many care facilities throughout the world that bear her name. So what? Jimmy Savile’s name adorns many a care facility and we all now know what kind of man he was.

There have been many great historical figures who have devoted their entire lives to the sick and disadvantaged and have received little or no recognition in the mainstream channels for doing so. Some people just don't have the backing of a massive global organisation like the Catholic church. Allow me to introduce you to one:

Henry Dunant

Who's he? He was an Swiss atheist and business man. He also created an organisation that was founded, “... to protect human life and health, to ensure respect for all human beings, and to prevent and alleviate human suffering, without any discrimination based on nationality, race, sexual orientation, sex, gender identity, religious beliefs, class, allegiance, or political opinions...”

You may have heard of it. It's called the Red Cross. And it knocks MT's efforts into a cocked hat.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Dunant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Red_Cross_and_Red_Crescent_Movement

[tamborine]

Red Cross indeed are an excellent charity and they dont demand contraception or abortion as you expected of MT. The Red Cross spend a lot on advertising; donated monies I guess.

The OP is about M.Theresa.

[birdie1971]

Tamborine – “... Red Cross indeed are an excellent charity and they dont demand contraception or abortion as you expected of MT...”

I fail to understand your point. I've already said [00:29 Thu 22nd Nov 2012], “... In a speech in Northern Island back in the 1980s she said that she was against the practice of abortion even in the case of rape...”.

This has nothing to do with what I do and do not 'expect' MT to have done.


“... The Red Cross spend a lot on advertising; donated monies I guess...”.

What are you talking about? Are you being deliberately obtuse?

[tamborine]

Personal insults aint debating Birdie, dear ;)

[naomi24]

Tamborine, I can't see any personal insults in Birdie's post. He doesn't know what you're talking about and he's asking if you are being deliberately obtuse. If you think that's an insult you should see what he says to me!

[tamborine]

me obtuse birdie, but I do know how to spell Northern Ireland.

What evidence have you for your derogatory claims against MT, especially the legal claim.

[birdie1971]

Tamborine - “... What evidence have you for your derogatory claims against MT, especially the legal claim...”

You blindly believe that Mother Theresa was a wonderful person. Clearly it has never occurred to you to investigate whether or not your views are valid. Even now, you're asking me to provide you with evidence that she wasn't all she was cracked up to be rather than just looking for yourself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Mother_Teresa
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/fighting_words/2003/10/mommie_dearest.html

[birdie1971]

Naomi - “... If you think that's an insult you should see what he says to me!...”

I think it's fair to say that you give as good as you get! ;-)

[ummmm]

So instead of using the donated money to feed the poor and buy medication 'Mother' Teresa used it to try and convert people to Catholicism. How sweet and caring.

[tamborine]

Birdies link: What's the alternative for the dispossesed? If medical facilities were available to beggars (adults & children) then MT homes would empty. Donations received by any charity are rarely questioned as to their source.

MTheresa is dead but the missions still operate. I'm informed they're self supporting. Links above for more info.

[birdie1971]

Continue in your delusion about MT if it pleases you. Just be aware that she was a deeply unpleasant individual who believed that suffering was necessary and legitimate and that she was unqualified to assess the medical condition of those within her charge. She was a religious zealot with zero medical training.

[birdie1971]

Tamborine - “... Donations received by any charity are rarely questioned as to their source...”.

Within the context of this thread, I have to ask – what are you talking about now? You're just rambling. Get a grip for crying out loud.

[naomi24]

Birdie, //I think it's fair to say that you give as good as you get! ;-) //

I attack the message - not the messenger. You overstep the boundary.

[tamborine]

Birdie, Hitchens:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Hitchens

Hitchens began his break from the established political left after what he called the "tepid reaction" of the Western left to the Rushdie Affair. The September 11 attacks "exhilarated" him, strengthening his internationalist embrace of an interventionist foreign policy

My choice is better than to follow an egotistical maniac who died of smokes & alcohol, earned no doubt by disseminating the famed. Its a shame he didn't put the same energy into human suffering.

As his brother Peter says "he's an idiot" who even denies his jewish geneology. Yep, give me a break - you follow the sheep birdie, my world suits me.

[jomifl]

You can't believe smokers and drinkers, they are probably Irish catholic priests.

[naomi24]

Tamborine, according to your link Christopher called his brother an idiot – not the other way around – and could you please show me the reference to his denial of his Jewish ancestry? I can’t see it there.

// My choice is better than to follow an egotistical maniac….//

But that’s exactly what you ARE doing.

[birdie1971]

Tamborine - “... you follow the sheep birdie, my world suits me...”

Ha ha. A 'keyplusian' remark if ever I saw one. You falsely accuse people who do not agree with you with the very thing that you yourself are overtly guilty of. In this case, following the herd. The last time I checked, the vast majority of people on this planet believe in a supreme being in one form or another:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religious_populations

From the above link, atheists are very much in the minority (approximately 16% of global population) and yet you claim that I and others like me are mere 'sheep'. Oh dear me.

Your final words are the most telling though - “... my world suits me...”. Your world? Is your world different from the one I live in? You seem to think so. But it isn't. We inhabit the exact same world. The world of electromagnetism, gravity and the weak and strong nuclear forces. The difference between you and I is that part of your world exists entirely in your own head since you believe in fairy stories about everlasting life and intangible supernatural beings who live in the sky.

You share this nonsensical, unprovable, fairy-tail with 84% of the population. And despite this, you accuse me and other atheists as being nothing more than 'sheep'...

[ummmm]

Birdie - don't waste your typing, honestly, you won't get a coherent debate.

[tamborine]

Am not interested in Hitchens further. He is not a charity, which is the point of this thread. A local family has a volunteer in MTs missions & I support through them.

[naomi24]

Tamborine, you might support it, but that doesn't make the organisation or its founder squeaky clean. It isn't - and she wasn't.