Skip to main content

View Diary: Mitt Romney ally: Elie Wiesel's campaign against posthumous conversion is a bigoted Democratic plot (197 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  They see it (or claim to see it) as an offer (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JesseCW

    Free will still exists, but you can't get to the good heaven (I think there are three of them) if you haven't converted.   I think it is also necessary for the dead relative to be sealed to the rest of the family; Mormons are very big on having everybody together for eternity.  

    It is like Thanksgiving except it goes on forever..

    (By the way, I'm an athiest but I hate to see people of any religion slammed for false reasons.)

    •  this isn't a false claim (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jds1978, vcmvo2

      in this life they hold a baptism by proxy that a dead person, who doesn't share their religion didn't consent to.

      If they want to invite a long dead person, they can do it in the afterlife, since they won't know anyhow.  Changing records to support an acceptance they don't know is made.   That is wrong on any level.

      This isn't a slam because of religious bigotry, this is a real problem of usurping people's religious freedom posthumously to something they never were and probably never wanted to be.  

      I am an atheist, how could I get them to unbaptize me if they do it to me because of some relative I don't know and don't care to know?

      This is not a question posed in the hypothetical, it is an action.  It is offensive.

      •  They don't change records and it not acceptance (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JesseCW

        Frankly as a fellow athiest, I don't give a damn.   If somebody thinks that they can improve my afterlife by waving chicken feathers over my grave they are welcome to.    I'd prefer that they not piss on it.   It is pointless but humans do lots of pointless things.

        They do not baptise living people (I'm told, I am not a Mormon and don't have close Mormon relatives.)   I have seen the LDS group sheets (go to ancestry.com) and they have a box for the date of the proxy baptism, called an LDS ordinance.    Recording that you did the pointless baptism is not quite the same as changing somebody's religion in some master record that doesn't actually exist anywhere (genealogy would be much simpler if it did.)

        Sure, you can criticize the practice but criticize what they actually do, not what some other reigious bigots think that they do.  

        •  I identify as an atheist. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Sue B, JesseCW, a2nite

          My response is usually to make fun of the stupidity.

          But the disrespect for those who believe and have died for their believes is horrendous.

          It is not just the belief, it is the right to it, and the expectation of respect from others.

          •  It is disrespectful. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            howabout

            Mostly, of the living relatives of the deceased.

            But it's not "forced conversion".

            As athiests who wish to have our right not to be pressured into following anyones religious beliefs, it's pretty easy to understand why this is so noxious.  

            But asthiests who routinely get accused of trying to deny others their right to practice their religions, it's also easy to understand why it's important to be accurate about what people actually believe.

            Your vote is your consent.

            by JesseCW on Fri Apr 27, 2012 at 03:12:20 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  You wouldn't *be* baptized in their (0+ / 0-)

        view if you rejected their offer.

        Your vote is your consent.

        by JesseCW on Fri Apr 27, 2012 at 03:13:33 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site