Who will play her in the inevitable atheist-propaganda hate-filled anti-christian flick?

Who will play her in the inevitable atheist-propaganda hate-filled anti-christian flick?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=65JxnUW7Wk4
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Demi Lovato

Idris Elba

Kate Winslet.

the one put out by the catholic church? where they celebrate elevating her to idol status and encourage their followers ti pray to her, directly contradicting the ten commandments?

catholicism is heathen teir. if you think pipes and saints are important you are a fool.

jesus said wherever there are two who believe, that is his church.

> being a nun is hard
> omg, she accepted money from a dictator and her patients only went there to die
> why couldnt she have been a progressive liberal and accepted help from others?
> omg, she began to doubt at the end of her life

movie in a nutshell.

She wasn't a nice or a good person but devout.

> bible says the saints pray for us and have our best interest at heart
> we somehow cannot pray to them to pray for us

She doesn't even have two legit miracles. This Pope is the worst.

>sick people go to her
>she prays for them
>they still all die

>those people could have gone to a hospital and lived

I'd say praying for Hitchens' cancer is a pretty solid miracle.

>You can ask your priest to pray for you
>You can't ask a dead priest to pray for you, because their physical death has affected their spiritual life

That sounds a lot like heresy to me

It will be comedy by Seth Rogen

Screencap this

Judy Dench

>If they were serious about reducing the number of people suffering in the gutter, and reducing arrivals at her "Home for the dying", shouldnt serious action have been taken on behalf of future generations of Calcutta's children?


you fail to see that your little liberal.libertarian rant is exactly the problem in the West. People want wealth and they think that it is enough to be healthy in order to stop suffering. Health is not worth clfip_laboulettinging to. And even it it were, it is half a job, because once people are healthy liberals/libertarians have no idea what to do with them, besides turning them into wageslaves.
This what liberals/libertarians fail to see and the more they cling to their >MUH Human RIGHTS, the more they sanctify material pleasures where their goal is for everbody to have good body pleasures [good is defined by them and if your pleasures differ from them, then they will punish you].

>protestant monkey in charge of calling others "heretics"
>protestant monkey in charge of understanding commandments

Who would play young Mother Teresa?

> Jesus says to Peter "Upon this rock i will build my church"
> Peter made head of the Apostles
> Peter travels to Rome
> Is buried in Rome and his tomb is still there
> The only reason Europe is christian is because of the Catholic church in Rome
> There would be protestants or christians without it
> Apparently God had nothing to do with this and the churches teaching is heathen in nature

Protestants are the worst

no idea...

... but I know who would fuck her! :)

> There would* be protestants or christians without it

* wouldnt

No matter what arguments cynical atheists put up, it boils down to people that haven't done anything worthwhile in their lives quibbling that she could have helped the thousands of people she helped in a bit better way if she had the 21st century hindsight to do it differently.

youtube.com/watch?v=65JxnUW7Wk4

Well, that was quick.

>if she had the 21st century hindsight to do it differently

Considering she was criticised by her contempories as well, this is bullshit.

Real Catholics should be in an uproar over our new "Pope" and his recent actions.

But did she help them because she cared or because she thought she should or was expected to care.

Sarah Silverman and it will be driected by Seth MacFarlane

>Hitchens expressed shock that Teresa encouraged victims to forgive those who harmed them, causing many to wonder whether he was aware of the basic tenets of Christianity.

>The height of absurdity came when Hitchens assailed Mother Teresa for allegedly giving her heart to greater Albania, “a cause that was once smiled upon by Pope Pius IX and his friend Benito Mussolini.” It would have been hard for Pius IX to have been friends with Benito Mussolini, given that Pius died in 1878, and Mussolini was not born until 1883, but why should Hitchens be concerned about historical facts, when he was having such fun making them up?

Why do people trust Hitchens in the current decade when hes been repeatedly shown to just make shit up? I'm sure there are people here right now that think Mother Teresa forced baptisms on people. I'll just sit here and wait for any sort of evidence for that.

Mother Teresa was fast-tracked for canonization as soon as she died, you stupid pol-baby.

No, it boils down to not over-glorifying mundane achievements (often through desinformation) and thus devaluing sainthood itself

>defending Pope Francis

Goddamn Cathocucks, I swear...

Nope. Mother Teresa was an intentionally created hype aimed at vaguely 'spiritual' useful idiots. Worked like a charm. Round the corner from her death hotel, one of India's most modern hospitals was doing far better work in terms of actually helping people rather than endorsing deterministic social theses. I say this as a Christian.

Could you imagine seeing a man save a child from an oncoming train and snidely making this remark? How pathetic are you that you have to denigrate the good actions of others and look for secret motives?

>cathocucks

He's not popular among European Catholics. Only those from shithole countries.

Hitchens was a moderately intelligent journalist who consciously chose to hang around with less intelligent people so he'd feel smarter. No wonder he drank.

Mother Teresa was not part of a medical order, nor did she pretend to be, they were just taking in the terminally ill people that were rejected from hospitals and left to wander the streets to die alone. That's how it was until her order came along and picked them up and gave them a bed and somebody to talk to until they did die. That's the purpose of the a hospice. This sort of treatment of the terminally ill by Indian hospitals probably would have continued for a long time if it weren't for Mother Teresa using her fame to tell the world exactly what was happening in Calcutta.

I dont know if its the same hospital, but i remember reading that hospitals in calcutta and certain places in India rejected the poor for treatment.

>this thread

Mother Teresa concerned herself with the poorest of the poor. Not just the poor or those struggling to make ends meet, but those who were beyond extreme poverty. The bottom of society with no chance of achieving prosperity in this life. If she created hospitals instead of hospices, and perhaps provided state-of-the-art care, by default her facilities no longer become places for the poorest of the poor. People who are better off already would flock there, because they feel deserving of their care. Even if she changed the facilities only slightly, the people seeking care would no longer be just the poorest of the poor. In a similar vein, in my town there are two hospitals and one is known to provide better (and more expensive) care than the other. People who can afford it would go to the better hospital because they wouldn't risk "sketchy" medical care. So who goes to the sketchy place? Well, the ones who can't afford anything better.

I don't know if Mother Teresa was actively thinking about this asymmetry of information in her ministry. She just served the poor. But it's an important reality: The structure of her facilities allowed the poorest of the poor to not die alone. Any changes to her plan would have necessarily abandoned these people, unless there was a way to treat literally everyone.

Is this the same reason why you browse Sup Forums, oh wise one?

see
Some hospitals today won't even touch lower caste people, and you think 'modern' hospitals of the 60s and 70s would take in smelly, stinking old beggars?

The fact that you think belonging to some shitty little denomination lets you talk shit about a woman who devoted her life to helping others is laughable.

Probably jona fuckn hill

>helping others
you mean funneling the money she got for her ""charity"" straight to the vatican? Accepting money from dictators who most certainly were not "helping others" is acceptable? hmmm it seems you're a cathocuck who feels so threatened he has to go out of his way to defend that devilish hag

Nope. The only limits on poor patients are their finances, as in America.

>He's not popular among European Catholics

Poles love him

No, I'm here to discuss cinema.

Let's cast Sersha, guys

Michael B. Jordan

>An "untouchable" woman who gave birth outside an Indian hospital because doctors would not treat her has died, a day after her baby, officials say.

>Devi was only put in intensive care after giving birth but she died of a heart attack early on Thursday morning.

Several doctors, including the hospital's chief medical superintendent, had refused to touch her or provide medical care as she delivered her baby, the Press Trust of India reported.

And this was 2008. Don't believe everything you read on r/atheism.