Personally I think Hitchens makes a compelling case

Now I would say that, you might say, as I'm an atheist with no belief in any God.

But for me there is sufficient evidence (the Hitchens doc, numerous blog posts from trained western volunteers), that her clinics were kept squalid, that the standard of care offered was primitive at best, that patients were often denied even a basic level of palliative care, despite her foundation having access to huge levels of funding, because MT believed suffering is good and it brings you closer to Jesus and salvation. To have the ability to make things better for countless persons in pain and to consciously choose not to do so is, in my opinion, abhorent.

Add to that the hypocrisy of seeking the best medical for herself when it was necessary.

Add to that the support for some of the worst state heads the world has seen in recent years.

I won't add her fundamentalist views on abortion, divorce and contraception, but I could. For me, her wishes if acted upon widely would create even more suffering in the world, in particular for women and the poorest.

If the Catholic Church think this makes a saint, the best of luck to them. But I won't take kindly to anyone preaching about morals from a catholic platform.

Posted By: Under soil heating, Dec 19, 09:52:51