I'm posting this despite my belief that discussing, or even thinking about, the entity known as Paris Hilton can be dangerous to one's mental health. Apparently an Indian filmmaker known as T. Rajeevnath wants to cast Paris Hilton as Mother Teresa in his biography of the nun that he will begin filming next year. He claims that Paris's facial features closely resemble those of Mother Teresa, and that Paris has "expressed delight" at being considered to play the nun. 
Comments
No, but there are a lot of people who think Mother Teresa probably would. For example:
http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/religion/mother-teresa/
They make their money off shock and cynicism, maybe we could do a bit better than rotten.com
These guys only update very 6 years as it is. And really even Snuffx.com has become a pardoy of itself
I don't think anyone could seriously argue that this is not one of the most inspired casting ideas in the history of the cinema.
Okay... how about this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_Teresa
or this:
http://are.berkeley.edu/~atanu/Writing/teresa.html
or this:
http://website.lineone.net/~bajuu/chatlet.htm?13,11
This is like an oxymoron.
To me paris doesnt look close to mother teresa
Read the links Captain Al provides for some discussion of this.
Her "homes for the dying," which constituted her main life work, didn't offer any serious medical treatment to their inmates, and notably, gave little or no pain medication to dying people. She saw suffering as being holy and redemptive, and so provided hospitality to suffering people, but didn't try very hard to interfere with their suffering. Meanwhile, she received modern medical treatment herself, at least in her later years.
She was also autocratic in her management of her order and secretive when it came to finances (not unlike the Vatican itself). The money donated to her and her order, which probably amounted to hundreds of millions of dollars, was never publicly accounted for. Her political views were reactionary in the extreme, and she was quite chummy with a number of murderous right-wing dictators. Her vigorous campaigning against contraception arguably lead to millions of unwanted pregnancies, and abortions, that could have easily been prevented.
What I've said here sounds pretty negative, but most of the positive things you here about Mother Theresa are also true-- they've just been so well-publicized already that I don't need to repeat them. All in all, I think of her as an admirable person-- but not, in my view, a saint.
thing you hear, I mean.
The bulk of those hundreds of millions of dollars were donated on the belief they WOULD be used to help alleviate the suffering of the sick and poor. It seems Mother Teresa gladly accepted the money, let thousands continue suffering and used the money for other purposes. Considering the amount of money involved, that's fraud on an astromomical scale. Definately not the stuff of saints and hardly even admirable. Imagine how much good all that money could have done.
As if obtaining the money fraudulently wasn't dastardly enough, she also used these helpless people to further her own cause by pressuring them to convert to Christianity. It is said many death-bed baptisms were performed, sometimes without the person's consent (few of the nun's spoke the local language). Sometimes food or treatment was withheld until the victim recited prayers or took part in Christian religious services.
I really hope none of this is true so that all that alleged suffering did not take place. But since I have come across the same story from several unconnected sources, I'm not optimistic at this point. Mother Teresa had plenty of opportunity to answer for these allegations while she lived. She could have gave a full account of what happened to the money but she refused all inquiries into the operation of her Missionaries of Charity organization.
I've been collecting information and thinking about starting a thread on this subject in the Hoax Forum for a few months. Now that this has come up, maybe it's time.
Since she herself said that she and her sisters routinely performed deathbed baptisms, however, I don't doubt that this charge was true.
On the other hand, you could argue (plausibly, in my opinion) that if a person doesn't understand or consent to being baptized it has no effect on that person's spiritual state, and so the practice didn't harm the people being "baptized." It would seem to cheapen the sacrament of baptism itself, though.
Withholding food or other necessities from people until they take part in religious ceremonies is clearly against Christian teaching, as well as commonplace secular morality. I have heard before of this charge against Mother Theresa and many other missionaries, but I am not aware that she or any other Missionary of Charity ever admitted to having done this.
While I'm on the subject of dogma, it's worth noting that Pope John Paul II suspended the regular rules for beatification and canonization in Mother Theresa's case in order to put her on a fast track to sainthood following her death. He never really gave any good reason for doing this.
I do respect your opinions on Mother Teresa, for it is freedom of speech and respect we have in this country.
But to actually say that she fraudently used money to further her own cause and basically calling a nun who lived a life of poverty is amazing. I hope that you have the research and physical evidence to say such a thing.
Unless you have done the hours and have visited India and every other country in the world, and ate with the hungry people of Calcutta, fed by her very hands, and most amazng, touched the skin of a leper wish she did, I don't think any of us earns the right to say such a thing.
I hope you don't take this the wrong way, but remember this world doesn't like us very much and it takes alot for the press, specially from the forties and fifities and today, to iconicise and canonize a little old woman, Who according to you "stole money."
P.S don't go to India with this comment.
Specially Calcutta.
Andres
I meant Captain Al, from Alberta.