Hmmmm.....Maybe Anne Frank.

Queen Elizabeth (the first, not the current queen)

My wife, my mother and grandmothers.

Mother Teresa.

Was she the only person to do the likes of what she did?

Grrrr...

Make the poverty situation in Calcutta desperately worse by not teaching the women about birth control? Yes, I believe she was the only one.

One who visits qual.

I need to do some research on her.

So what you did is look at the flaw in her and forget about how much she helped? No matter what happens, when you help someone, you hurt someone. It just happens. People do make mistakes.

I hate qual. I don't think that should necessarily deprive me of my right to occasionally have a case of the grammar police! Believe me, most of the time I shut up about grammar errors! (And I don't vote surveys bad because of them.) I'm allowed to make a snide comment every now and then, aren't I? It's nothing personal...

I think ultimately it's a toss up whether she helped or hurt more. There are plenty of missionaries who help people; the Catholic Church brings medicine and (Catholic) education to places all over the world. But they just create the need for more medicine because they don't teach people to use condoms. Not only do they encourage population growth that many of these areas can't support, but they also encourage the spread of STDs. Something like 30% of African males are infected with HIV. Not that this is all the Catholic Church's fault, but I don't see them really helping, either.

Can we have an answer at some point though!

Deborah Samson.

ty

np

I don't see how they are creating the need for more medicine by neglecting to teach about birth control. They are there to take care of certain problems. That doesn't oblige them to take care of everything. If you were to open a safe house for teenagers, and you don't teach them about safe sex, are you to blame for their pregnancies? I don't think so. If you give food to the homeless and don't teach them about alcoholism, are you to blame when they get drunk? I must be missing something. If they didn't go in there at all, there would still be as many pregnancies and STD's, wouldn't there?

Rosa Parks

Eleanor Roosevelt

My mom... and Lizzie Borden.

Well, you could certainly argue that the Church teaches them just not to have sex at all. But years of the Church teaching this hasn't changed the fact that people have sex with multiple partners, that they have unsafe sex, and that they frequently contract diseases as a result. The types of shelters you mention are aware of the reality, and they counsel people accordingly. They provide condoms and counseling. They provide the morning-after pill and abortions. They provide clean needles and methadone. Yes, it's true, it's nobody's fault that people behave irresponsibly anyway. But the Church is at fault for their blindness to reality.

Aung Sung Suu Kyi, Dorothy Day

Radha.

My mother.

My Mom.

Mother Teresa

Kate Bush. For bringing me joy. Very selfish. (well Romkey likes her too so not too selfish)

I don't.

Why do they encourage population growths? Do you mean they preach abstinence and it doean't work? Or do they just not teach about safe sex?

This information is very interesting.

I can kind of see where you are coming from, but in my opinion, you can't fault someone for neglecting to do something that's not their responsibility to begin with.

Some teen shelters don't provide condoms, clean needles and whatnot. You can't blame them when teens get diseases and get pregnant.

Mother Theresa

Your HTML tag got messed up or something?

Yes! Very much so! I tried to fix it a few times...then I just got tired of it and gave up...I was trying to post a picture of Brigitte Bardot. I haven't been successful at that yet...

I think you had the originating web page URL in there instead of the URL for just the picture.

Both, I think.

Essentially we've had this conversation before; I think we just disagree about what kind of responsibility people have towards each other. It's certainly not anybody else's fault when someone behaves destructively. Individuals are ultimately responsible for themselves. And not every organization can provide the means for people to take care of themselves. But the Catholic Church is huge, way bigger than any shelter or other humanitarian organization, and they have way more influence, and I think as a result they have a greater responsibility to be realistic about what is needed to take care of the people they are trying to help. They're are making these people's health their responsibility by telling them not to use birth control.

My mom.

I hadn't realised they were actually telling those people not to use birth control. That changes things. I was imagining them not saying anything about it at all. In one case, they would bear some responsibility, in the other case, they wouldn't.

Hey! That was the one! How did you do that?!

Right clicked on the survey page, went to view source, then scrolled down to your attempt at posting an image. The URL is in there.

unless you meant, how did I post that picture... Right click on the picture from the web page it came from, then go to properties, where it gives the URL for the picture. Put that URL in the IMG SRC tags.

Funny...it doesn't show up on my screen. It is just blank.

I think I was using the wrong HTML code.

Yeah, the Church opposes the use of any form of birth control. They tell you not to have sex unless you are married, and then only to have sex with your spouse. This absolves them of guilt in their own minds, since if you're living by their rules you aren't having unwanted pregnancies and you're not at a high risk for STDs, although you could always end up marrying someone who has them. But their rules are completely unrealistic, and they refuse to face the fact that people just don't live by them. I believe it is their responsibility to advocate the use of condoms in this case. It's just idiotic not to.

Are they going down there and teaching abstinence to the people they are helping, or are they just giving them food and medicine? I am personally not opposed to condoms, but I really wouldn't expect them to advocate something if it goes against their beliefs.

Sue

Well, if they're converting them and/or setting up schools and teaching them, then they're advocating abstinence. I'm not sure if they teach abstinence to people that they just give medical care to, but I think they probably mention it if they get the chance. I don't really expect them to teach something that goes against their beliefs either, except in a case like sex where there's a serious problem with spreading diseases like HIV and their teaching is so obviously not helping the problem; if anything, I think they're just making it worse, because people are still having unsafe sex and are likely to keep doing so no matter what the Church says. In some cultures there may be other stigmas attached to using condoms (I know this is the case in certain African countries), but just think what difference they'd make if the Catholic Church started advocating using condoms. It's just responsible parenting: you know your kids are going to do things they shouldn't and you should just make sure that they know how to be as safe as possible when doing so.

I did abstain because I can't choose just one.I tell you about a woman I admire,but I don't know if she is the one I admire the most:

Patti Smith-I wouldn't say I'm a big fan of Patti,tough I like her music,I'm really not a fanatic.But she is the epitome of what a REAL woman must be for me.She is complete.She rebelled,sang bad words,didn't fit in the stereotype of the pretty dumb gal.She married,stayed with her man trough hard times,raised children.She sang and wrote straight from her heart.She showed that you can do what men do (being an artist,freethinking etc...)but in your own womanly way.The very essence of Patti for me is at the end of "Privilege (Set me Free) on her "Easter" record.The way she transforms a swearing in a prayer.She just goes on chanting "gosh darn" for a while,and suddenly you feel that the "gosh darn" has still in it the request of help,is still a calling for god,that the word god is at least an half of the word "gosh darn".I don't believe in god.It doesn't matter,I believe in the energy that believing in something gives you.And...BTW..."Because the Night" for me is the most sexy song of the world.

My mom - this is similar to another survey I answered.

I admire every strong woman.

You rock!

Thanks!

Anne Bolyen
Margaret Tatcher (if that's the way you spell her last name)

Boleyn and Thatcher I think

Why admire them?

Well Margaret I like because I always admired women in politics. You know, it kind of a time for men to give them some positions. You know, like Hilary Clinton, I think she is more fit to the president than Bill.
And Anne Bolyen, I don't know, I just think she is cool. Like I like Friedrich Nietzsche for no reason. I dont' even know anything about his philosophy.

I suppose she - Thatcher - was a very strong and powerful woman. She made an impression on everyone. People still despise her

the dead ones

dunno

I was really moved when I read about the courageous history of Deborah Samson. She was a strong woman who was also a patriot!



However, in your quest for a woman to most admire, I fear you may have overlooked a more recent person who is even more deserving of your attention:



Note that Demi Moore's breasts are significantly larger than Samson's! She inspired me to become a busty navy SEAL.

I do actually think that the Catholic Church can be faulted for its approach to aid in the developing world. I believe that if you help somebody in a limited way, but you know how to help that person in a better way, you are behaving negligently. I think that's what the Church is doing in a lot of developing countries. They teach children English, for example, which is very helpful. But if they know that teaching those children about sexually transmitted diseases would help them and they choose not to do it, they could die! I don't think it's right for them not to talk about stuff like that.

That said, in the only developing nation I know anything about at all, India, the impression I've gotten is that the Church schools are the equivalent of private schools here in the states. The kids going to them aren't the most likely to end up shooting up heroin in an alley. So there's plenty of blame to assign to the state schools and religious schools, for example some of the new Hindu nationalist schools showing up in Gujarat.

You might need some progesterone for that.

It's nice to have you cracking-wise around here again...

I don't think that people who are helping in one way should be obligated to help in another way, especially if it goes against their beliefs. I'm not against birth control or anything, I just think that saying it's their responsibility to do something just because they can is a bit faulty. If I saw someone operating machinery in an unsafe way, and I chose not to tell them how to do it right, and they got hurt, I wouldn't feel the slightest tiniesy teensy bit responsible. Lack of action doesn't make people negligent.

I understand your point but I think in some cases it doesn't work. If I'm a doctor and I find a guy who's bleeding to death and has a broken ankle, and I set his ankle, I'm not really helping him - not in a meaningful way. I think a situation like that could be considered negligence. The situation we're discussing is a lot less clear than my example, of course. That's the problem with the real world - right and wrong are always a little fuzzier out there. Just to nit pick, it is exactly a lack of action, when action is required, that makes people negligent.

I realized that after I typed it. My mistake. You're right about right and wrong being fuzzier in the real world.

CHER!!!!!!!!!!

Missed you! ((((hugs))))