Talk:Mother Teresa

Is ...
... there anyone on Earth whom RationalWiki does not despise? Let Them Eat Cake (talk) 19:20, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Carl Sagan? :D
 * Anyway, "RationalWiki" is a bunch of bytes and can't despise anything. As for the community, it is not monolithic. Most of the users have their own priorities and hobbyhorses. As a result, article coverage, quality and style are uneven and there's no unified editorial tone, except the general "not very reverent". If you have issues with a particular article, point out the specific problems you see.--ZooGuard (talk) 19:31, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * You trying to say that someone who founded a charity that specifically doesn't help people and squandered all its money building monasteries and convents, all because the suffering of others made her feel close to her own imaginary friend, isn't someone worth despising? I suppose, at best, we can have sympathy for her if you assume she was fairly innocent and just the victim in a massive publicity game by the Catholic Church, but there's not masses of evidence for that being the only angle. Scarlet A.pngtheist 19:59, 10 August 2012 (U
 * I suppose a more accurate question would be: "Is there any religious person on Earth whom rationalwiki does not despise? &mdash; Unsigned, by: 128.204.203.103 / talk / contribs 04:05, 5 July 2014

This?
''"Unpopularity

This made Hitchens deeply unpopular ..." err, what "this"? Looks as if there's a quote missing. (and the tone of the article is all too nice to the evil old bag) Scream!! (talk) 20:04, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Not only that, but:
 * This article appears to be an embarrassing jumble of paragraph fragments strewn about with no real coherence and vaguely pointed in the direction that Mother Teresa was promoting causes she shouldn't have. The writing style is all over the place as well. It is also very uninformative about things she has done, focusing just on random things she has said or promoted (and even that only in passing and not in detail). In short, it looks more like someone's notebook than a real article. Nullahnung (talk) 20:20, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Mother Teresa as an example...
...no, not of a saint, but how (self) promotion as a saint, even in today's world of easy access to countervailing information provided by sceptics who actually checked up on the facts surrounding her life, continues to be what shapes the public image of Mother Teresa. This illustrates why fundamentalist/literalist claims relying on the virtues and miracles wrought by the saints of the past can be safely rejected. Of course saintliness is irrelevant to questions of accuracy in terms of claims about God/gods or history anyway, but the claims, such as the disciples being too saintly to lie or otherwise distort any facts regarding Jesus, a cornerstone of literalist apologetics, are thus suspect even if we were to disregard the fallacious reasoning they employ. Mother Teresa, her image and her actual deeds and statements and not least the ways she has been embraced and employed by not only the Catholic Church but by other Christian groups as well thus constitute a highly pertinent historical analogy with all those far less well-documented saints whose lives come down to us in the form of hagiographies written in a far more credulous age. ScepticWombat (talk) 15:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Error
A red error notice has appeared saying, "Cite error: tags exist for a group named "note", but no corresponding tag was found." What's wrong? Proxima Centauri (talk) 13:26, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
 * fixed it I am not the Ombud's man 13:42, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Proxima Centauri (talk) 13:58, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. I am not the Ombud's man 15:09, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Albanian nationalism
"Mother Teresa herself never offered any excuse for these actions, and had furthermore nothing to say when her portrait was being flouted by pro-Greater Albania zealots in Macedonia and Kosovo."

I find this sentence rather strange (although I suppose it is Hitchens' view rather than RW's). Irredentists see themselves as completely altruistic freedom fighters working for the cause of justice, and it seems very strange to me to expect one to apologize. Hell would probably freeze over before any one of them would voluntarily apologize for their beliefs or actions, and if such a thing did happen, their in-group would probably consider them traitors.--Кřěĵ (ṫåɬк) 07:07, 11 October 2017 (UTC)