If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   Mitt may go to Israel to explain why Mormons posthumously baptize Holocaust victims   (nytimes.com) divider line 271
    More: Fail, romney, Mormons, Holocaust victims, Holocaust, US Ambassador, eyes, Israel lobby in the United States, Boston Consulting Group  
•       •       •

7357 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Jul 2012 at 12:49 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



271 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-03 02:17:41 PM

ringersol: Silly Jesus: "Street corner preachers scream at random people that they'll pray for them. Do you get deeply offended by that too?"

Praying for someone is different than compiling a database of lies, suggesting that everyone who passed you on that corner believed what you believed and then using that database to further market your nonsense, claim validation of it and indoctrinate new members into your alternate history.

In the end, we're all dust and we can't control what others say. But to use that logic to imply that people *shouldn't care* when others lie about your family to defend and justify things that your family would have disagreed with in the strongest of terms, is to deliberately mis-understand the human condition.


What you said is pretty rational, and I really want to be in your camp, but I just can't make it past the "competing sky wizards" nonsense.

"You said that your imaginary friend now accepts my dead relative into his kingdom, but my dead relative's imaginary friend works differently than that, so I'm offended."
 
2012-07-03 02:18:55 PM
I'm still trying to figure out why we're allied with Israel in the first place, much less why we're at their beckon call like some kind of guard dog.
 
2012-07-03 02:20:09 PM

OhLuverly: Theaetetus - if your reading comprehension is so limited that you can't figure out someone who died in 1995 and was baptized in 2008 wasn't done by proxy there really isn't anything anyone can do to help you. :-(


That wasn't what our Mormon apologist said. He said: "The baptized dead are... only tallied as having had the ordinance done for them."

Clearly, that's not true. Now yes, anyone can figure out that Obama's mother wasn't a Mormon, but does that excuse the dishonesty from the Mormons? Additionally, those death dates don't necessarily show up on every screen.
For example, if I publish the Grand History of the KKK with descriptions of prominent KKK members and Grand Dragons Brigham Young and Joesph Smith, but mention in a footnote on page 128 that they were only elevated to those ranks posthumously in recognition of their great deeds, is that the same as noting that they were never actually members?
 
2012-07-03 02:20:36 PM

Theaetetus: [wonkette.com image 494x346]
I think this one means that Fartbongo is Mormon, so Sarah Palin gets to return to govern Alaska.



Nah, Mormonism isn't passed on via matrilineal descent like Jewishness.

But Romney THINKS he's an "adopted Jew".

Set him straight, Theaetetus
 
2012-07-03 02:21:19 PM

Silly Jesus: Perhaps I just can't comprehend it because I don't have a sky wizard, other than the tasty, tasty FSM, of course.


No Sky Wizard? I darn you to Heck!

dilbert.com
 
2012-07-03 02:22:42 PM

Keizer_Ghidorah: I'm still trying to figure out why we're allied with Israel in the first place, much less why we're at their beckon call like some kind of guard dog.


Probably because you are the type of person who says "beckon call".
 
2012-07-03 02:24:09 PM

Dr Dreidel: It's one religion "I'm not touchiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiing yoooooooooooooou" another. They may both need to grow up, but the fact remains that the LDS Church could end this mishuga'as now if they wanted (and as they agreed to at least 3 separate times).

Sure, the Jews could ignore it, but the fact that it's now a more open "secret" than Anderson Cooper's sexuality kinda makes that hard. Mormons should not be allowed to co-opt (essentially trading on the names/reputations of) Anne Frank, Stanley Ann Dunham, George Washington and millions of others less famous, at their own will. Private citizens are private citizens. Are you saying that it should be some sort of law? Like slander? Would it be illegal for me to have a website listing all of the celebrities that I think are aliens?

If freedom of religion means anything, it's the freedom to worship as you please - freedom of conscience, as Ben Franklin put it. Baptising someone else who can't choose not to be baptised is usurping their freedom to choose. Dead people don't have freedoms. If someone were forcing live Jews to dunk their head in a bucket and listen to a chant from a crazy Mormon, then you'd have a valid point.

 
2012-07-03 02:25:47 PM

Theaetetus: OhLuverly: That being said, some times a name will slip through that shouldn't, in such cases the ordinances have been deemed null and removed from the records.

That makes no sense and seems to be hypocritical. If the Mormon church truly believes that they're merely offering the opportunity for salvation in the afterlife, then why would they ever remove ordinances from the records? First of all, they've been performed, so theoretically the dead soul has been asked, so it's a matter of historical fact, right? Second of all, if you believe you're saving someone from eternal hell, then wouldn't you feel your actions were entirely justified, and why would you ever retract them?

No, the very fact that the Mormons are retracting them when people complain means that they're acknowledging that it's purely politics and has nothing to do with their beliefs of salvation.
It's much the same as when the Mormons stopped engaging in bigamy so that Utah could become a state, while at the same time retaining the concept of celestial plural marriages. Pure politics.


So you're pissed when they do something and pissed when they try to make something right? Are you just trying to find things to be butthurt over at this point?
 
2012-07-03 02:27:23 PM

heap: Dr Dreidel: Baptising someone else who can't choose not to be baptised is usurping their freedom to choose.

i agree, but you have to admit that's the case for a vast swath of them. kinda hard to let anybody know your choice in the matter when you can't even talk yet.


Ah, this is also an excellent point. An infant is no more a Christian / Jew (religious, not ethnic) / Muslim etc. when born than he is a Republican / Democrat or Red Sox fan. Those things are imposed on him, usurping his freedom to choose.

So, taste of their own medicine? Eh?
 
2012-07-03 02:28:08 PM
Can someone see if the Mormons have blessed, baptised and processed Andy Griffin yet?

I'm picturing a 24 hour turnaround on celebs. Can't leave them parked in Purgatory with the rabble.
 
2012-07-03 02:28:33 PM

PluckYew: Silly Jesus PluckYew: Silly Jesus: heap: Silly Jesus:
on a side note..a technical question..how do you link to a certain spot in the video as you did?

Add #t= to the end then put where you want the video to start, in this case 2m57s so you add #t=2m57s to the end of the original YouTube video.


Awesome. Gracias!
 
2012-07-03 02:28:59 PM

liam76: Keizer_Ghidorah: I'm still trying to figure out why we're allied with Israel in the first place, much less why we're at their beckon call like some kind of guard dog.

Probably because you are the type of person who says "beckon call".



static01.mediaite.com

^What Beck on call might look like^


/That Beck, fine Mormon guy!
//LOVES him some Xrael
///Prolly Bibi on the Red Line, no?
 
2012-07-03 02:31:56 PM

falcon176: how many electoral votes does Israel have?



All of them.
 
2012-07-03 02:32:38 PM

Dr Dreidel: And who is empowered to make decisions (in areas of healthcare, religion, child-rearing, education - which sometimes overlap - and just about everything else, too) for their kids?


i'm not saying it's something i want altered societally or anything, it's just what the situation is.
a whole swath of indoctrination/induction into religion is done w/out the choice of the person involved. it's kinda the default.

and yah, i think it'd be spiffy if people would wait until their kids could think, but parents see religious instruction as teaching their kids how to think - it's circular, but then again, me thinking something would be spiffy doesn't mean i actually expect it to happen, either.

Dr Dreidel: I just want to know what the extent is of metaphysical "damage" one group can do to another before they've run afoul of some arbitrary standard.

// my standard: if they're not (and were never) part of your group, leave them the fark alone


same here - it just isn't too much to ask to keep our collective crazy to ourselves.
 
2012-07-03 02:32:58 PM
"Mr. Romney, who has pledged to "do the opposite" of the Obama administration on matters pertaining to Israel,"

So he'll try to stop providing aid to an apartheid state and recognize Palestine?
 
2012-07-03 02:34:29 PM

liam76: Silly Jesus: ph0rk: To be fair, it isn't as if you can demonstrate unequivocally that what the Mormons or Jews believe is false. If you think you can, you aren't half as clever as you'd like to think you are.

[www.atheistmemebase.com image 640x391]

Odd that you claim to be a big fan of Christopher Hitchens, and follow his reasoning when it comes to religion (or at least appera to from repeated copy/paste of his comments), yet on this the only religious reaction you seem to have a problem with is that of the jews.


Oh, I'm an equal opportunity despiser of religion. I didn't mean to indicate otherwise. The subject here is the Jewish folks being offended, so that's what the topic has mostly been. The Mormons are fools too, but that wasn't the direction that the conversation went in. Want to go down that path too?
 
2012-07-03 02:38:07 PM

BunkoSquad: Silly Jesus: I'm not clear on why people care. They are dead. Do they fear that the Jewish sky wizard will be confused about the fate of the Jewish folks if the Mormons start talking to their sky wizard about them?

It lays the groundwork for 100 years from now, teaching kids that 6 million Mormons died for their faith.


THIS. They are trying to increase membership numbers from the grave.

Don't believe a word they say about membership numbers. They make you file a formal letter to the office in SLC to be removed from the church membership rolls, plus endure a visit from a bishop trying to change your mind. Most people don't bother, and are never officially removed from the membership totals, despite thinking the whole thing is a bunch of shiat.

/Its a scam
 
2012-07-03 02:38:42 PM

OhLuverly: Theaetetus: OhLuverly: That being said, some times a name will slip through that shouldn't, in such cases the ordinances have been deemed null and removed from the records.

That makes no sense and seems to be hypocritical. If the Mormon church truly believes that they're merely offering the opportunity for salvation in the afterlife, then why would they ever remove ordinances from the records? First of all, they've been performed, so theoretically the dead soul has been asked, so it's a matter of historical fact, right? Second of all, if you believe you're saving someone from eternal hell, then wouldn't you feel your actions were entirely justified, and why would you ever retract them?

No, the very fact that the Mormons are retracting them when people complain means that they're acknowledging that it's purely politics and has nothing to do with their beliefs of salvation.
It's much the same as when the Mormons stopped engaging in bigamy so that Utah could become a state, while at the same time retaining the concept of celestial plural marriages. Pure politics.

So you're pissed when they do something and pissed when they try to make something right? Are you just trying to find things to be butthurt over at this point?


I know, right? It's as unreasonable as being pissed when someone says a racist or sexist slur, and then says "things were said, and I'm sorry if anyone was so sensitive as to be offended." Like, OMG, they tried to make it right, you know?
 
2012-07-03 02:43:03 PM

heap: Dr Dreidel: And who is empowered to make decisions (in areas of healthcare, religion, child-rearing, education - which sometimes overlap - and just about everything else, too) for their kids?

i'm not saying it's something i want altered societally or anything, it's just what the situation is.
a whole swath of indoctrination/induction into religion is done w/out the choice of the person involved. it's kinda the default.

and yah, i think it'd be spiffy if people would wait until their kids could think, but parents see religious instruction as teaching their kids how to think - it's circular, but then again, me thinking something would be spiffy doesn't mean i actually expect it to happen, either.



"If religious instruction were not allowed until the child had attained the age of reason, we would be living in a quite different world." - Hitchens
 
2012-07-03 02:44:07 PM

Sticky Hands: Famous Thamas: For me it isn't so much that they perform some silly rite for a dead person. The issue I have with it, is they then claim that person is a member of the church.

Benjamin Franklin? Well he was a member of the Mormon church, it says right there in our records! Same with George Washington, Abe Lincoln, and Pauly Shore.

It reminds me of the spin that gets put on history over the course of time. You know "Benjamin Franklin - First Fireman".

Just because offended people SAY that's what they are doing doesn't mean that IS what they are doing.

They claim the "work" has been done for the person, they do not count the deceased as a convert.


And its farking creepy no matter how you slice it.

/Love these threads so I can fav the apologists in a nice blue shade
 
2012-07-03 02:46:26 PM
Theaetetus many people before me have tried to explain it (and have done a far better job, I am no debater) and I'm sure many people after will as well. You've made up your mind that it is an apple regardless of countless people showing you it's an orange. So enjoy your apple sir.
 
2012-07-03 02:46:45 PM

Silly Jesus: I'm not clear on why people care. They are dead. Do they fear that the Jewish sky wizard will be confused about the fate of the Jewish folks if the Mormons start talking to their sky wizard about them?


Because history is a fragile thing.
 
2012-07-03 02:47:43 PM

Theaetetus: [wonkette.com image 494x346]
I think this one means that Fartbongo is Mormon, so Sarah Palin gets to return to govern Alaska.


In both of your examples the death date is clearly shown, the ordinance date is also shown to be after that date. It's quite obvious that this is not the same thing as a choice made by a living breathing person.

I can understand people getting offended by this, I just prefer they attack it on what is is, not what they imagine it to be.

Much like downloading songs and movies from the torrents is not stealing, this is not a conversion.


Theaetetus: That makes no sense and seems to be hypocritical. If the Mormon church truly believes that they're merely offering the opportunity for salvation in the afterlife, then why would they ever remove ordinances from the records? First of all, they've been performed, so theoretically the dead soul has been asked, so it's a matter of historical fact, right? Second of all, if you believe you're saving someone from eternal hell, then wouldn't you feel your actions were entirely justified, and why would you ever retract them?


I'm with you 100% on this.

I suspect one of the following:

Either the names aren't actually removed from the database, just blocked somehow, or if they do remove them, it's because they consider the important part done and the recording of the incident to be secondary.

I've compared them to internet providers (google and others) before, and for what I feel is very good reason. While google does take steps to block copyright violators, they can't get them all, and they run into the issue where it's difficult for them to tell if a new site is legit or not. When they are informed, they take steps. But maybe a better comparison is to Fark. Like that database, Fark content is user generated. There is some code in place to block the most obvious abuses, but by and large the moderators and user reporting to keep us in line. Occasionally one of us gets a vacation, or in the case of those that go way to far, (like he that shall not be named) a banination.

Others seem to be indicating that getting caught doing this can result in a disfellowship. It's my understanding that that would be the second most sever punishment that the church hands out, ranking only after excommunication. How often they actually go that far is a valid question that I don't have the answer to, and since enforcement is everything, that would do more to tell us if the church takes the issue seriously or not.
 
2012-07-03 02:50:24 PM
Hmm... let me thumb through my Republican playbook from 08 and see what we've got...

Hey Obama Mittens, the election is over here in the USA, this isn't an international popularity contest!
 
2012-07-03 02:52:07 PM

Silly Jesus: RexTalionis: Silly Jesus: RexTalionis: Silly Jesus: I'm not clear on why people care. They are dead. Do they fear that the Jewish sky wizard will be confused about the fate of the Jewish folks if the Mormons start talking to their sky wizard about them?

There's a long history of Christians forcibly converting Jews or otherwise converting them against their will, sometimes under threat of death or torture. In the late Medieval period, the Catholic church kidnapped a bunch of Jewish boys and forcibly baptized them and sent them to live with Christian families.

So, with that cultural background, you might see how Jews might not exactly warm to the idea of some Christian offshoot posthumously baptizing Holocaust victims.

But they're dead...Can you enslave dead people?

Perhaps I just can't comprehend it because I don't have a sky wizard, other than the tasty, tasty FSM, of course.

No, but it's not just about the dead is it? What if I decided to dig up your dead relatives and start using them in my art installation? That might be a bit distressing to your family and friends, perhaps?

Personally, and honestly, that really wouldn't bother me. My belief is that upon death you start decaying back into dirt. No soul floating around. No hocus pocus associated with the body / bones. It's just a sack of cells waiting to compost.

I can, however, see more easily how someone else would have a problem with that. Are the Mormons using Jewish skeletons in art installations?


I call dibs on this guy's sternum.

One of the legs on desk is just a wee bit to short and I need something to wedge down there.

/TWSS?
 
2012-07-03 02:53:11 PM

OhLuverly: Theaetetus many people before me have tried to explain it (and have done a far better job, I am no debater) and I'm sure many people after will as well. You've made up your mind that it is an apple regardless of countless people showing you it's an orange. So enjoy your apple sir.


No one has ever yet tried to show me it's an orange. People have denied those screenshots exist; claimed that even though they do exist, they're so incredibly clearly distinguishing those ordinances from those performed for the living, like yourself; and finally, like yourself, have claimed that anyone who's upset by the practice must be wrong and walked away from the debate.

Look, it's no skin off my nose. I think your religion is based on lies and hypocrisy, but that's just my opinion, supported by demonstrable facts and evidence. So, no worries.
 
2012-07-03 02:53:29 PM

Morpheses: Sticky Hands: Famous Thamas: For me it isn't so much that they perform some silly rite for a dead person. The issue I have with it, is they then claim that person is a member of the church.

Benjamin Franklin? Well he was a member of the Mormon church, it says right there in our records! Same with George Washington, Abe Lincoln, and Pauly Shore.

It reminds me of the spin that gets put on history over the course of time. You know "Benjamin Franklin - First Fireman".

Just because offended people SAY that's what they are doing doesn't mean that IS what they are doing.

They claim the "work" has been done for the person, they do not count the deceased as a convert.

And its farking creepy no matter how you slice it.

/Love these threads so I can fav the apologists in a nice blue shade


Call it creepy or disrespectful, I can totally understand that point of view.

Just don't call it a conversion.
Because they will just say "it's not a conversion", and since it technically isn't, they will be technically right, and everyone will just run in circles yelling at each other.
 
2012-07-03 02:55:10 PM

Silly Jesus: Corvus: Silly Jesus: Corvus: RexTalionis: Silly Jesus: I'm not clear on why people care. They are dead. Do they fear that the Jewish sky wizard will be confused about the fate of the Jewish folks if the Mormons start talking to their sky wizard about them?

There's a long history of Christians forcibly converting Jews or otherwise converting them against their will, sometimes under threat of death or torture. In the late Medieval period, the Catholic church kidnapped a bunch of Jewish boys and forcibly baptized them and sent them to live with Christian families.

So, with that cultural background, you might see how Jews might not exactly warm to the idea of some Christian offshoot posthumously baptizing Holocaust victims.

What!?!? Everyone must play by Silly Jesus's rules of being offended. No one can be offended different than him. It's not allowed.

[images3.wikia.nocookie.net image 450x338]

That's exactly what you are saying. You are saying you are not offended by it so no one else should be.

That's stupid.

I'm offended by air. Don't you dare think I'm nuts though. All opinions are equally valid. Amiright?


Well you could do us all a favor and stop breathing it.
 
2012-07-03 02:59:21 PM
Silly Jesus: "What you said is pretty rational, and I really want to be in your camp, but I just can't make it past the "competing sky wizards" nonsense."

That's just it: you don't have to 'get' anything. You don't have to understand faith (I sure don't). And you don't have to pick a team.

You just have to recognize that most of your fellow humans, across most of the world, for essentially all of recorded history, feel very strongly about their sky wizards and will inflict wholly self-defeating and pointless grudges, blood-feuds and wars upon each other over the topic. And thus it greatly behooves society to recognize limits to acceptable behavior among these groups, when it comes to practice and recognition of their faith and in their interaction with others. Because they will eventually start murdering one another over this shiat. And the people who get hit the hardest in those squabbles are those of us without a sky wizard in the fight.
 
2012-07-03 03:00:44 PM

Sticky Hands: In both of your examples the death date is clearly shown, the ordinance date is also shown to be after that date. It's quite obvious that this is not the same thing as a choice made by a living breathing person.


Yes, but it's not what the Mormons said is there. They've repeatedly claimed that the records say that the ordinances are performed by proxy. But they don't. They've repeatedly claimed that the records say that the ordinances were done for the deceased. They don't. They've repeated claimed that the records even look different than those of regular Mormons. They don't.

And of course, anyone can look and tell that Anne Frank was baptized after her death... provided they look at that one page. Flip to any of the other pages and it's not evident anymore.

Either the names aren't actually removed from the database, just blocked somehow, or if they do remove them, it's because they consider the important part done and the recording of the incident to be secondary.

I've compared them to internet providers (google and others) before, and for what I feel is very good reason. While google does take steps to block copyright violators, they can't get them all, and they run into the issue where it's difficult for them to tell if a new site is legit or not. When they are informed, they take steps.


Sure, but as I said, if they're deleting records based on what's equivalent to a DMCA complaint, then they're acknowledging that the ceremony has no religious meaning, since they can't retract an offer of salvation. In other words, this is closer to the people who claim abortion is murder and that abortion doctors are murderers... but then condemn clinic bombers. If they truly held those beliefs, then they're condemning people they believe are heroes and saviors. Accordingly, it's unlikely they truly hold those beliefs.

Others seem to be indicating that getting caught doing this can result in a disfellowship. It's my understanding that that would be the second most sever punishment that the church hands out, ranking only after excommunication. How often they actually go that far is a valid question that I don't have the answer to, and since enforcement is everything, that would do more to tell us if the church takes the issue seriously or not.

Agreed. It's like a police internal investigation that consistently never finds any wrongdoing.
 
2012-07-03 03:00:47 PM
The Road to Hell Heaven is paved with good intentions.

As I understand it, the Mormons believe, along with many Christians, that you can repent your sins and accept Salvation and Lord Jesus right up to Judgment Day. Since all will be resurrected to be judged in the flesh as well as the spirit, this belief entails that you may become a Christian (Mormon) after death. This does away with the theological problem of the righteous heathens who did not hear the gospel in their lifetimes, as well as unbaptized babies, the hard to convert, and people who leave everything important to the very last minute. Without "post-humous" baptism, one of the essential criteria for Salvation (baptism) would be missing for many, while others would not even have the chance of a snowball in Hellfire of being saved due to never accepting the Lord Jesus as their personal Saviour.

It's a nice thought that salvation will be offered retroactively, so to speak, to faithful Jews and righteous heathens, not to mention many indviduals who, through no fault of their own, are damned to perpetual torment because of negligence or ignorance or even malice and aforethought for which they would be very, very sorry if they were given a proper chance to see the errors of their ways.

Atheists for example, have proven extremely hard of hearing which it comes to the gospel for some reason. Standing nekkid before the Throne of God is a last ditch ressort, but better than nothing. Like paying your taxes, you are still OK if your paperwork is time-stamped one second before midnight on Tax Day.

Of course, this is not how people who have their own religious beliefs or no religious beliefs see it. To them, it looks like good-old-fashioned fishing in another man's pond.

I don't think we really have to worry about the details. If the Mormons baptize your ancestors, or even you, it isn't likely to count unless the Mormons are right. You can just ignore them. Be careful not to tick that box, by the way, if you are using Mormon genealogical software. There is a tick box (I don't recall if it is pre-ticked or not) which authorizes them to baptize everybody in your family tree and another which authorizes them to add your ancestors to their non-church data banks, which are the largest store of genealogical information in the world and are buried in a mountain in Utah to be safe from nuclear war and Armageddon.

I suppose that you might be committing a sin if you intentionally allow the Mormons to baptize you or yours posthumously just to be on the safe side. Some religions, like some countries, don't approve of dual citizenship in the Kingdom of God, so to speak. Your lack of faith would appal them.

Personally, I would sooner that the Mormons don't baptize my ancestors unless I choose to become a Mormon and take on the duty of saving my ancestors as well as anybody else who comes to hand.

Jews have a particularly long history of being baptized by force, as noted above, and so they are most likely to object to being christianized without their consent. Muslims no doubt are also learning to resent forced christianization, although they have forced Islam on many peoples in accordance with their own evangelical urges and urgings dating back all the way to Mohammed and the Quiran (spelled variously).

Heathens, of course, are fair game for everybody to exploit, torture, kill, forceably convert, etc., especially the blacker varieties armed with fruit.

According to a certain type of religionist, we are all God's Chillun, but some of us are more God's Chullun than others. His stamp of approval is the whiteness of our skins, not the whiteness of our hearts, so these people think.

Personally, I am more inclined to William Blake's party on this one. It may be a bit maudlin, but the poet meant well when he wrote:

The Little Black Boy
By William Blake 1757-1827

My mother bore me in the southern wild,
And I am black, but O! my soul is white;
White as an angel is the English child,
But I am black, as if bereav'd of light.

My mother taught me underneath a tree,
And sitting down before the heat of day,
She took me on her lap and kissed me,
And pointing to the east, began to say:

"Look on the rising sun: there God does live,
And gives his light, and gives his heat away;
And flowers and trees and beasts and men receive
Comfort in morning, joy in the noonday.

And we are put on earth a little space,
That we may learn to bear the beams of love;
And these black bodies and this sunburnt face
Is but a cloud, and like a shady grove.

For when our souls have learn'd the heat to bear,
The cloud will vanish; we shall hear his voice,
Saying: 'Come out from the grove, my love and care,
And round my golden tent like lambs rejoice.' "

Thus did my mother say, and kissed me;
And thus I say to little English boy,
When I from black and he from white cloud free,
And round the tent of God like lambs we joy,

I'll shade him from the heat, till he can bear
To lean in joy upon our father's knee;
And then I'll stand and stroke his silver hair,
And be like him, and he will then love me.

Indubitably this poem has been the joy* of English schoolchildren for nearly two hundred years. They really should make children memorize more poetry like they used to in former times. Everything I know by heart, I taught myself.

*And sport.
 
2012-07-03 03:01:37 PM

Dr Dreidel: If LDS had told everyone to fark off back iattractive and successful African-Americanather


O.o

"If LDS had told everyone to fark off back in nineteen ninety five rather than acquiesce..."

// Drew hates numbers now?
 
2012-07-03 03:02:47 PM

Sticky Hands: Morpheses: Sticky Hands: Famous Thamas: For me it isn't so much that they perform some silly rite for a dead person. The issue I have with it, is they then claim that person is a member of the church.

Benjamin Franklin? Well he was a member of the Mormon church, it says right there in our records! Same with George Washington, Abe Lincoln, and Pauly Shore.

It reminds me of the spin that gets put on history over the course of time. You know "Benjamin Franklin - First Fireman".

Just because offended people SAY that's what they are doing doesn't mean that IS what they are doing.

They claim the "work" has been done for the person, they do not count the deceased as a convert.

And its farking creepy no matter how you slice it.

/Love these threads so I can fav the apologists in a nice blue shade

Call it creepy or disrespectful, I can totally understand that point of view.

Just don't call it a conversion.
Because they will just say "it's not a conversion", and since it technically isn't, they will be technically right, and everyone will just run in circles yelling at each other.


All I called it was creepy. Because it is. It is also disrespectful and rude, especially since people are only supposed to be doing this for their ancestors, and we both know that's not happening.
 
2012-07-03 03:08:47 PM

DeltaPunch: Silly Jesus: DeltaPunch: Silly Jesus: Perhaps I just can't comprehend it because I don't have a sky wizard, other than the tasty, tasty FSM, of course.

It makes perfect sense for atheists, but try to imagine other religious people that DO believe in souls and the afterlife. Maybe for them there exists an uneasiness about people from one religion screwing around with the souls and afterlife of your beloved ones. Surely you can see how that might create some uneasiness...

Sort of. I have a very loose grasp on it. If I were able to fully grasp religion, I'd be religious...I guess. It's sort of the same concept. I can't really fathom spirit people floating around and other such nonsense, so it's hard for me to truly understand how one could insult a spirit and its family.

It's like if we were walking down the sidewalk together and happened upon a schizophrenic guy screaming random nonsense and I said "WTF?" and you said, "I know, but can't you at least sort of see where he's coming from?"

I don't think it's like that at all. You don't have to be religious to understand the importance of religion to others. I mean, take that absolutely unshakable faith you have that God Yhor doesn't exist and try to imagine how someone can believe that Thor DOES exist with that same unshakeable faith. Not having the same empathic connection with a certain subject doesn't preclude one from understanding arguments founded on that subject; it simply prevents you from believing in it the same way.


FTFY.

/thor
 
2012-07-03 03:09:35 PM
Mitt isn't going to Israel to apologize for anything. He doesn't give a shiat about Holocaust victims. He's going to Israel so he can come back and tell the nutty fundy Republican base that he believes their crazy end times crap (which will be a lie), so please donate to his campaign.
 
2012-07-03 03:10:49 PM
If the Mormons really believed they were offering eternal salvation, then (a) they wouldn't retract it, and (b) they wouldn't publish it.

This is more like the person who, knowing you disagree with their religion, tells you to your face that they'll "pray for your soul."
 
2012-07-03 03:13:59 PM

Theaetetus: Yes, but it's not what the Mormons said is there. They've repeatedly claimed that the records say that the ordinances are performed by proxy. But they don't. They've repeatedly claimed that the records say that the ordinances were done for the deceased. They don't. They've repeated claimed that the records even look different than those of regular Mormons. They don't.

And of course, anyone can look and tell that Anne Frank was baptized after her death... provided they look at that one page. Flip to any of the other pages and it's not evident anymore.


I'll have to check that out. I've seen regular member records (though I've never looked up someone who was a member on that site) and I remember them looking quite different. But days go by, things change, and I remember the 80s as awesome... so my memory isn't always perfect.


Theaetetus: Sure, but as I said, if they're deleting records based on what's equivalent to a DMCA complaint, then they're acknowledging that the ceremony has no religious meaning, since they can't retract an offer of salvation. In other words, this is closer to the people who claim abortion is murder and that abortion doctors are murderers... but then condemn clinic bombers. If they truly held those beliefs, then they're condemning people they believe are heroes and saviors. Accordingly, it's unlikely they truly hold those beliefs.

Yeah there is something to that. I guess it all depends on how much importance they put on recording of the event vs the actual event. An argument could be made that the recording of the event is more for man's benefit, to prevent him from doing the same thing over and over again. And that in God's eyes, the offering is there to be accepted if the person chooses. Religious people can get quite good at the mental gymnastics.
 
2012-07-03 03:15:16 PM

brantgoose: They really should make children memorize more poetry like they used to in former times.


Absolutely. It's good for the mind, develops your memory and impresses the girls. Well, as long as it doesn't begin, "There once was a man from Nantucket".

Also, the only acceptable form of prose poetry is Haiku. Anything else is like playing tennis without a net.
 
2012-07-03 03:16:52 PM

BunkoSquad: Silly Jesus: I'm not clear on why people care. They are dead. Do they fear that the Jewish sky wizard will be confused about the fate of the Jewish folks if the Mormons start talking to their sky wizard about them?

It lays the groundwork for 100 years from now, teaching kids that 6 11 million Mormons died for their faith.


Slightly off topic, but I find some irony in the fact that Jews were ~54.5% of the victims of Nazi genocide, yet we get all the attention, and then people biatch about how "the Jews" (or "Israel") "use" the Holocaust to avoid any responsibility for the shiatty things we/they do.

Perhaps if, instead of "6 million Jews", the refrain taught in schools was "11 million people", the world could abandon that stupid, stupid line of thought.

// yes, I've had people goggle when I reminded them of the rest of the victims
// as in, "had not heard of the other genocided groups"
// public school - whaddaya gonna do, 'mirite?
 
2012-07-03 03:24:09 PM

Theaetetus: If the Mormons really believed they were offering eternal salvation, then (a) they wouldn't retract it, and (b) they wouldn't publish it.


I'm not sure it's meant to be published so much as referenced.

It's a small difference I know, and I probably didn't use the exact right wording, but I think the point of the archive is more to let Nefi know that Great Great Great Great Grandpa Gonzales has had his work done, so check on Grandma Andersen's side and see what needs to be done over there.



This is more like the person who, knowing you disagree with their religion, tells you to your face that they'll "pray for your soul."


Yeah it is a lot like that, and I've heard more than a few stories of saying more or less that to their parents/spouses.
 
2012-07-03 03:26:03 PM

Sticky Hands: Others seem to be indicating that getting caught doing this can result in a disfellowship. It's my understanding that that would be the second most sever punishment that the church hands out, ranking only after excommunication.



Apparently you've never heard of "Blood Atonement".

QUOTE:

"In Mormonism, blood atonement is a controversial doctrine that teaches that murder is so heinous that the atonement of Jesus does not apply. Thus, to atone for these sins the perpetrators must have their blood shed upon the ground as a sacrificial offering...

[...]

"In a full Mormon theocracy, blood atonement practice would be implemented by the state as a penal measure."

[...]

"The blood atonement doctrine was the impetus behind laws in the territory and state of Utah allowing capital punishment by firing squad or decapitation. Though people in Utah were executed by firing squad for capital crimes under the assumption that this would aid their salvation, there is no clear evidence that Young or other top theocratic Mormon leaders enforced blood atonement for apostasy or non-capital crimes like miscegenation.[1] There is, however, some evidence that the doctrine was enforced a few times at the local church level without regard to secular judicial procedure.[2] The rhetoric of blood atonement may have contributed to a culture of violence leading to the Mountain Meadows massacre.[3]

END QUOTE


Is America ready for a Full Mormon Theocracy?
 
2012-07-03 03:31:48 PM

Silly Jesus: That bastard, shiatting all over all of those slave holders beliefs for his own political gain!

- All beliefs / opinions are equally valid and should be respected, amiright?


or maybe some of us think that it's not cool to shiat all over someone else's beliefs solely to forward your own political agenda

are you trolling or just stupid?
 
2012-07-03 03:40:02 PM

ringersol: Silly Jesus: "What you said is pretty rational, and I really want to be in your camp, but I just can't make it past the "competing sky wizards" nonsense."

That's just it: you don't have to 'get' anything. You don't have to understand faith (I sure don't). And you don't have to pick a team.

You just have to recognize that most of your fellow humans, across most of the world, for essentially all of recorded history, feel very strongly about their sky wizards and will inflict wholly self-defeating and pointless grudges, blood-feuds and wars upon each other over the topic. And thus it greatly behooves society to recognize limits to acceptable behavior among these groups, when it comes to practice and recognition of their faith and in their interaction with others. Because they will eventually start murdering one another over this shiat. And the people who get hit the hardest in those squabbles are those of us without a sky wizard in the fight.


Fair enough. Well said. Your position is reasonable, I'm just not quite there.
 
2012-07-03 03:45:18 PM

Voiceofreason01: Silly Jesus: That bastard, shiatting all over all of those slave holders beliefs for his own political gain!

- All beliefs / opinions are equally valid and should be respected, amiright?

or maybe some of us think that it's not cool to shiat all over someone else's beliefs solely to forward your own political agenda

are you trolling or just stupid?


Just stupid, evidently, because I don't know what you're rambling on about. And you're obviously my intellectual superior.
 
2012-07-03 03:48:20 PM

Dr Dreidel: BunkoSquad: Silly Jesus: I'm not clear on why people care. They are dead. Do they fear that the Jewish sky wizard will be confused about the fate of the Jewish folks if the Mormons start talking to their sky wizard about them?

It lays the groundwork for 100 years from now, teaching kids that 6 11 million Mormons died for their faith.


While I suppose such a thing might be possible, I don't think it is likely nor the intention. They were doing baptisms for the dead long before the war. (not with the names of Holocaust victims obviously)

Also, as I posted before, they have their own history with their own special brand of persecution, and while it has been exaggerated and the things they did to provoke such treatment ignored, it is very much enshrined in the myth of who they are.

If I may be so bold, I would compare it to Jews trying to co-opt the casualties of Maoist China. I suppose it would get some numbers up... but you have your own history filled with very real and independently verifiable persecution against you.. why bother?



Slightly off topic, but I find some irony in the fact that Jews were ~54.5% of the victims of Nazi genocide, yet we get all the attention, and then people biatch about how "the Jews" (or "Israel") "use" the Holocaust to avoid any responsibility for the shiatty things we/they do.

Perhaps if, instead of "6 million Jews", the refrain taught in schools was "11 million people", the world could abandon that stupid, stupid line of thought.

// yes, I've had people goggle when I reminded them of the rest of the victims
// as in, "had not heard of the other genocided groups"
// public school - whaddaya gonna do, 'mirite?


I think the schools actually do teach the 11-12 million number, or at least they used to. I know I knew about it long before I jumped on the interbubes. I'm not sure how much it would help, since the deniers are just going to move the goal posts, and don't really care anyway, but it's always good to have a properly informed population.
 
2012-07-03 03:49:20 PM

Amos Quito: Is America ready for a Full Mormon Theocracy?


As ready as it is for Sharia Law I wager.
 
2012-07-03 03:50:26 PM

Silly Jesus: I'm not clear on why people care. They are dead. Do they fear that the Jewish sky wizard will be confused about the fate of the Jewish folks if the Mormons start talking to their sky wizard about them?


I think I can explain this one for ya. Suppose that after Richard Dawkins dies some church posthumously baptizes him and records this in its files. In a couple of hundred years the "fact" that Richard Dawkins was a Christian is trotted out with documented evidence to discredit his atheist ideas. Does that thought annoy you?

Or suppose that an atheist soldier from WWI was drafted after the fact into some religion and they began to preach that he could only have done the things he did or survived the horrors of war because of his faith in God. Would that be vexing? Would it be worse if this happened many years after his death and there was no concrete way of refuting their claim?

Essentially this is a big deal because the person claiming the dead is hijacking their legacy, literally the only thing they have left on this earth, and twisting it to fit their agenda.
 
2012-07-03 03:57:40 PM
What the relatves who care about the stupid postmortem baptism want to happen to their deceased:

i3.kym-cdn.com


What the relatves who care about the stupid postmortem baptism are afraid will happen instead:

cdn.smosh.com


What most everyone else is doing:

www.lowbird.com
 
2012-07-03 04:05:10 PM

tarnok: Silly Jesus: I'm not clear on why people care. They are dead. Do they fear that the Jewish sky wizard will be confused about the fate of the Jewish folks if the Mormons start talking to their sky wizard about them?

I think I can explain this one for ya. Suppose that after Richard Dawkins dies some church posthumously baptizes him and records this in its files. In a couple of hundred years the "fact" that Richard Dawkins was a Christian is trotted out with documented evidence to discredit his atheist ideas. Does that thought annoy you?

So, basically, Mormons shouldn't do this because stupid people, and those too lazy to / unable to do research may be baffled at some later date?

If the Mormons were wiping the internet / libraries / various archives clean of Richard Dawkins' thoughts and replacing them with Mormon nonsense, I'd completely agree with you. Putting him on a list on a silly website is hardly the same.

 
2012-07-03 04:07:29 PM

RexTalionis: Silly Jesus: I'm not clear on why people care. They are dead. Do they fear that the Jewish sky wizard will be confused about the fate of the Jewish folks if the Mormons start talking to their sky wizard about them?

There's a long history of Christians forcibly converting Jews or otherwise converting them against their will, sometimes under threat of death or torture. In the late Medieval period, the Catholic church kidnapped a bunch of Jewish boys and forcibly baptized them and sent them to live with Christian families.

So, with that cultural background, you might see how Jews might not exactly warm to the idea of some Christian offshoot posthumously baptizing Holocaust victims.


this.
 
Displayed 50 of 271 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report