Skip to main content

My friend Mets102 has posted a couple of diaries recently about Mormons converting dead Jews to their faith, including Daniel Pearl, who was murdered for no reason other than that he was a Jew, and survivors and victims of the Holocaust, including such notables as Anne Frank and the families of Elie Wiesel and Simon Wiesenthal.

All four of my grandparents were posthumously converted too. They were all Holocaust survivors, each of whom had a very large extended family before the Holocaust. Between them, they had but a single living relative after the Holocaust.

And repeatedly, Mets102 and I and several other Jews who have a problem with this have been told we're whining, or "feigning anger," or crying over something that doesn't matter, or complaining for the sake of complaining, or otherwise making a big deal about nothing.

So first, a brief message to many (if not all) of those people who have said some version of this:

Go. Fuck. Yourself. Preferably with a rusty metal implement.

Yes, I know saying that will turn some of you off. I couldn't care less if that bothers you, though, not if you're going to side with the folks saying this doesn't matter.

My grandparents, as I said, were all Holocaust survivors whose entire families were wiped out. My grandparents lived as Jews, they were proud to be Jews, and they went to their graves as Jews. Their relatives who died in the Holocaust were murdered for no reason other than that they were Jews. And indeed, we Jews have a long history of being sent to our deaths for no reason other than that we are Jews and someone else gets it into their head that their religion makes it ok to wipe us off the face of the earth.

We Jews also have a long history of being forced by members of other faiths to abandon our Jewish identity and convert to their faith. They think they're doing us a favor, that they're saving our souls. Because, of course, all Jews are condemned to burn in hell for all eternity. (I can't tell you how many times I've heard that from people who can only be described as "Christian-of-a-certain-variety." Never mind that Jesus was a Jew, and if you insist that all Jews are condemned to burn in hell for all eternity, well, I can't imagine condemning your savior to eternal hellfire would score you any points in the afterlife. But I digress.)

There's something these oppressors of Jews have in common, whether they prefer to murder us all for no reason other than that we are Jews or whether they prefer to harass us or even force us to convert to their faiths when we would not choose to do so on our own. Both groups have decided that there is something so superior about their ideology that makes it not only acceptable but even a moral imperative to wipe any semblance of Jewish identity off the face of the earth.

It really doesn't take a genius to see this for the antisemitism that it is.

And now we have this specific group of assholes who have decided that it's not only acceptable but even a moral imperative to wipe any semblance of Jewish identity even among dead Jews off the face of the earth via this forced conversion of the dead. (Do you want to dispute my characterization of this naarishkeit as "forced conversion"? Hate to break it to you, but when you convert someone who didn't give their consent, that's forced.)

And yet we Jews who voice our displeasure at this are told we're whining. We're feigning anger. We're crying over something that doesn't matter. We're complaining for the sake of complaining. We're making a big deal about nothing.

Which is why I suggest to those of you who say such things that you go fuck yourself with a rusty metal implement.

All too frequently, Jews on this site who complain about antisemitism are told that we're making a big deal about something that doesn't matter, or that the antisemitism we're complaining about isn't antisemitism at all, so we should just sit down and shut the fuck up about it already.

Who the fuck decided that converting Jews to another faith without their permission isn't antisemitic? Who the fuck decided that imposing your faith on another group of people just because you believe your faith is superior isn't a big deal? (Or is it only not a big deal when we're just talking about Jewish victims, living or dead?)

And on a personal level, who the fuck gave you the right to decide that the forcible conversion of my grandparents -- something that they never would have acceded to under any circumstances -- is no big deal, or that complaining about it is just so much faux outrage?

What gives you the right to decide what we as Jews find offensive to us? What gives you the right to tell me that my grandparents' names and legacies aren't threatened when someone substitutes their parochial religious ideology for what my grandparents wanted and lived?

I don't know, maybe you simply don't get it. Maybe you don't understand that, like any other group, there are certain things that are just sacred to Jews, and that attacking those things the way the Mormons who are posthumously and forcibly converting our people to their faith are doing isn't acceptable under any circumstances -- and so much more so when they've admitted wrongdoing for this exact same behavior in the past, they're repeatedly apologized for it, and yet they keep doing the exact same behavior for which they so falsely apologized in the first place.

Maybe this doesn't hurt you, but there are plenty of us who are hurt by it. Just because you aren't hurt doesn't make it ok. And when you so dickishly claim that we are whining, feigning anger, crying over something that doesn't matter, complaining for the sake of complaining, or otherwise making a big deal about nothing, at best you're being an ignorant twit. But you're also defending antisemitism, and there is simply no excuse for that.

So if it's just a matter of ignorance, try learning something instead of insulting us for having the audacity to complain about antisemitism to which you were blind. Ask us why it bothers us rather than imposing your uninformed and obnoxious judgment upon us.

But if it's not just ignorance? Find yourself a rusty implement, putz, and get to work.

Originally posted to וויסקמס on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:08 PM PST.

Also republished by Elders of Zion.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Sideways. (21+ / 0-)

    The add-on we used to use was sideways...

    Go fuck yourself with a rusty chainsaw. Sideways.

    And you're right, anyone who doesn't get this is offensive and totally wrong should be engaging in some rust inspired self mutilation ritual.

    Sideways.

    "What profit a man, if he gain the world, but has to pay taxes on it?" Paul 8:36

    From the Gospel of St. Ron Paul in the Teachings and Misunderstandings of the Words of Adam Smith

    by ontheleftcoast on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:11:24 PM PST

  •  Choosing one's religion is extremely personal (20+ / 0-)

    It's a choice people should make for themselves and their choice should be honored while they're living AND after.

    "The two pioneering forces of modern sensibility are Jewish moral seriousness and homosexual aestheticism and irony." Susan Sontag

    by Shane Hensinger on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:12:49 PM PST

    •  What's really wierd about this to me is the Mormon (18+ / 0-)

      religion claims they are some how connected to the 12 tribes of Israel in the first place. And that Native Americans are as well. They've got some rather odd ideas about what Judism is from the get go and have decided to double down on the mistakes.

      Of course that makes them perfect Republicans and repulsive people to boot. Though I'm repeating myself with that comment.

      "What profit a man, if he gain the world, but has to pay taxes on it?" Paul 8:36

      From the Gospel of St. Ron Paul in the Teachings and Misunderstandings of the Words of Adam Smith

      by ontheleftcoast on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:17:49 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  In The Book of Mormon natives had horses (16+ / 0-)

        and wheeled instruments too - despite the fact none of those things existed in the Americas until the Spanish brought them here.

        Shows you how seriously to take their dogma.

        "The two pioneering forces of modern sensibility are Jewish moral seriousness and homosexual aestheticism and irony." Susan Sontag

        by Shane Hensinger on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:26:45 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think there were some round toys with axles (7+ / 0-)

          in Incan culture but that's about as far as the wheel went. And technically there were horses in the Americas when the first people arrived here though they were all extinct for several thousand years by the time the Spanish introduced them. But I'm sure the Mormons don't have that view of history either. Wow, they're as bad as the Jesus riding dinosaur morans.

          "What profit a man, if he gain the world, but has to pay taxes on it?" Paul 8:36

          From the Gospel of St. Ron Paul in the Teachings and Misunderstandings of the Words of Adam Smith

          by ontheleftcoast on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:33:00 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  To be completely fair... (13+ / 0-)

          ...there's plenty of stuff in our religious texts that I'd say you can't take too seriously either, or at least not literally. Granted, there's a difference in the age of the texts and we have more of a tradition of interpretation, but still...

          They can have whatever dogma they want for all I care so long as they don't use it to harm anyone or forcibly impose it on anyone. In this situation, they've done both.

          Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

          by wiscmass on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:33:32 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  The Book of Mormon is literal - not interpretive (8+ / 0-)

            that's now how the LDS religion works which is just one huge difference between Judaism and the Saints. Read through the lens of Joseph Smith's knowledge at the time it makes perfect sense. Joseph Smith didn't know the Spanish brought horses and wheeled instruments to the Americas - he thought they were always here and thus he put that in his book.

            "The two pioneering forces of modern sensibility are Jewish moral seriousness and homosexual aestheticism and irony." Susan Sontag

            by Shane Hensinger on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:46:29 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Yeah, but the anomalies in the old and new test (4+ / 0-)

            aren't exactly that easily disprovable. I mean some pretty important sounding stuff just blatantly contradicts other also important sounding stuff. And no one seems to know or care that barabbas means sone of god. But the fucking wheel? Horses. I mean if we know that information and we are much further from the event than they were... I mean... And how do you not notice that now? Why do we need to take them seriously? Politeness? Maybe if we were less polite we might help some of them be a little less delusional? Is it so wrong to want to help them? I just want them to find the salvation of a knowledge based existence. A place where science and facts and reality are taken seriously. So in the spirt of their post mortem baptisms I will ridicule (softly, in a fatherly "i'm only doing this for your own good" gentle kind of way) and I will speak openly to them about the fallacies of their belief system, in the hopes that I can save them from I life of blind worship of ridiculous fantasies of a con artist on the run from the law in western New York. At least until they publicly disavow themselves from the practice of baptizing my and thousands if not millions of peoples family post mortem.

            Lo que separa la civilizacion de la anarquia son solo siete comidas.

            by psilocynic on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:51:24 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  Yep. (5+ / 0-)

          When someone tells me their mormon the first thing that pops into my head is: aw fuck, your a crazy person. That being said, almost all of the mormons I know are nice and I like them all. I worked for a mormon company. All super nice people. So damn baffling to think they question the validity of their religion after reading the first few chapters detailing the vivid whiteness of jesus' and his ankles. It's also got a penthouse letters feel to it. Just a bit. I bet if I really cared I could find a similar phrase in some cheesy romance novel.

          He had on a loose robe of most exquisite whiteness. It was a whiteness beyond anything earthly I had ever seen; nor do I believe that any earthly thing could be made to appear so exceedingly white and brilliant. His hands were naked and his arms also, a little above the wrist, so, also were his feet naked, as were his legs, a little above the ankles. His head and neck were also bare. I could discover that he had no other clothing on but this robe, as it was open, so that I could see into his bosom. Not only was his robe exceedingly white, but his whole person was glorious beyond description, and his countenance truly like lightning. The room was exceedingly light, but not so very bright as immediately around his person.

          Lo que separa la civilizacion de la anarquia son solo siete comidas.

          by psilocynic on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:39:55 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  I can't remember who said this... (11+ / 0-)

    But effectively this was the point:

    Almost anybody who wants to bring paradise on earth needs everybody on earth to buy into their version of perfection.

    As long as the Jews exist, there are people who are very obviously NOT buying into their version of the truth.

    Therefore, the Jews must be either exterminated or converted before the world will be perfect.

    So yeah, this LDS crap is just another "Stealth" method to bring about a perfect world.   Whaddya know, after the perfect world is brought about...  look at the records of our church!  There never WERE any Jews....

    I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

    by detroitmechworks on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:14:34 PM PST

  •  I Understand the Outrage But I Still Feel the (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jgelling, SquirrelWhisperer

    most effective response, in public, is ridicule.

    Offense aside, it's a completely preposterous claim.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:20:28 PM PST

  •  Interesting, isn't (12+ / 0-)

    when you think about it: the Mormon church sends out missionaries all over the world, without much real impact that I at least am aware of.

    The posthumous 'conversion' of the defenseless dead may drive up their total numbers, but targets who aren't corpses don't seem all that impressed. And of course, the dead can't really argue, can they?

    Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

    by MBNYC on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:20:32 PM PST

  •  You have made a convincing (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gravlax, TimmyB, splintersawry

    argument that conversion is antisemitic- And certainly actual "conversion" is so. The saying of someone's name long after they are dead  is not actually a forced conversion, since the dead person certainly doesn't know about it.  Is it disrespectful- well yeah.   The Mormons would argue that they are not converting- just giving the dead one last chance...

    That said, I personally don't find the batshit crazy beliefs of Mormons much more batshit crazy than any of the stone age religions that result in people killing each other.  

    What I find remarkable is the incredible hubris of one nutty sect believing that not only is their religion so superior that dead people would want to sign up but that you don't need to follow a religion while alive and can still get out of hell free if someone says your name decades or hundreds of years later.
      Also, I thought baptism required pouring water on a body...

    The whole geneology thing with Mormons started as a way to "save" their forbears- after all, there were a lot of people who lived before Joseph Smith.  It has gotten even nuttier with their attempts to allow other dead people to "save themselves".

    Is it offensive to religious people of other persuasions? Of course.

    Does it actually change the lives or beliefs of people who died decades ago? Hardly.

    Is it nuttier than transsubstantiation or Virgin birth or the sun standing still in the sky or the walls of jerico falling to the sound of a trumpet?  I leave that for you to decide.

    As my father used to say,"We have the best government money can buy."

    by BPARTR on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:22:10 PM PST

    •  I readily concede... (10+ / 0-)

      ...that any religious ritual having anything to do with a deity or a soul is "nutty" in the sense that it's not rational or in any way concrete. In fact, I made the same argument using the same examples (transsubstantiation, virgin birth, and the sun standing still in the sky) in a private conversation with a friend offline recently. But that's hardly the point.

      Let me break it down into somewhat oversimplified terms: what you believe and do or don't believe and don't do in the privacy of your home and in the comfort of your community is the business of no one outside your home and community provided that you're not hurting anyone else or imposing your will on others. The second you hurt someone else or your beliefs or actions become anything less than voluntary for all involved, you've crossed the line.

      What LDS is doing both harms others and imposes their belief on others who don't want it. That is the point. That and that the people who tell us to STFU about it can go fuck themselves with a rusty metal implement.

      Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

      by wiscmass on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:29:08 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  on the bright side (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Tamar

        unless they know your grandparents names, they haven't baptised them .

        (The flip side of that is that many of the relatives of those baptised- and certainly the baptised themselves have no knowledge of the secret ceremony, and so are only harmed in absentia.)

        I do understand your umbrage.  Personaly, i have more anger about the actual physical harm done to living people by the Mormon church ( blacks, gays, women, children) than the harm done to the memories of thoses murdered by others.  Of course, that is not a reason to not also call them out on this.

        As my father used to say,"We have the best government money can buy."

        by BPARTR on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:34:24 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  There are records (12+ / 0-)

          They have baptized my grandparents.

          And it's not a contest or a zero-sum game. The fact that they're disrespecting Jews and hurting people in this situation doesn't in any way absolve them for any other evil they've done.

          Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

          by wiscmass on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:38:53 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Are they not Jewish anymore? (0+ / 0-)

            does this "baptism" hold weight with anyone but the Mor(m)ons?

            In my experience, adult baptism requires the consent of the baptized, and that was clearly not given.  The action was an imposition and in execrable taste, but does them no harm here or hereafter.

            None of this makes what they did right.

            You may think that. I couldn't possibly comment.-- Francis Urqhart

            by Johnny Q on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:56:50 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  It doesn't matter if they're still Jewish or not (12+ / 0-)

              What matters is that they forcibly converted people. They took action intended to wipe out Jewish identity. That they acted on dead people makes it no less antisemitic, nor is it any more defensible.

              And while neither my grandparents nor any of the other victims can experience the harm of this action themselves, that doesn't make it any less hurtful or harmful. It is still a grotesque imposition of one groups faith on another simply because they feel entitled to do so, it is still antisemitic, it is still disrespectful, and it is still insulting. And that they know that this is against their own policies, that it is wrong, that it is offensive, and that they've had to apologize several times for doing it in the past and yet they still choose to continue doing it is more than enough to condemn them and any asshole who would come to their defense.

              Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

              by wiscmass on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 06:08:16 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  This. (8+ / 0-)

                Even though it's clearly an exercise in "let's pretend" --

                Even though the specific individuals are in actuality untouched (though relatives/survivors/descendents count, too) --

                Even though the entire thing flat-out only exists in the realm of the mind --

                It's still an act of intellectual violence against the idea of Jews as Jews, unlinked to and independent from those who define themselves as the inheritors of the Jewish legacy.

                Especially when considering the histories involved.

                ...........

                I was wondering what those so aggressively uninterested in the situation that they have to proclaim how uninteresting it is think of Billy Crystal's blackface routine the other night. Just a thought.

              •  It was a dick move by a crazy cult (0+ / 0-)

                that has no meaning outside that cult.  I can empathize with you but I will never be able to really feel how much this has hurt you, and for that I apologize if i come off as a bit glib.

                If you feel something must be done about this, you could always gather family and friends to rededicate their tomb and celebrate their life and faith.  

                I apologize if I'm only digging myself deeper here

                You may think that. I couldn't possibly comment.-- Francis Urqhart

                by Johnny Q on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 06:29:55 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I'm not in "that cult," as you call it... (6+ / 0-)

                  ...but isn't it readily apparent that it has meaning to me? Same with quite a few others here. So it's demonstrably false that this "has no meaning" outside of "that cult."

                  Quite the contrary, this is hurtful and harmful. That it isn't to you doesn't mean that it isn't at all, and that you are not personally offended does not mean that it's not offensive.

                  I appreciate that you're at least trying to understand, but try to put yourself in my shoes and let's take it a step farther. Now let's say that someone has done something that does hurt, harm, and offend you personally. And now someone says to you that it's just not a big deal, that it doesn't have any real effect, that it just doesn't make sense to them that this bothers you so much. Because, you see, it doesn't hurt, harm, or offend them.

                  But you are still hurt by it. You are still harmed by it. You are still offended by it. And they just dismissed your hurt, the harm you suffered, and the offense you took.

                  What these people have done is bad enough. But the folks who defend them or pretend that what they've done isn't such a big deal because they aren't hurt by it? That's not much better. And that's exactly what's going on in this diary and Mets102's.

                  Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

                  by wiscmass on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 06:42:20 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  You could say the same thing about those (3+ / 0-)

                  soldiers who pissed on those corpses (and are facing serious disciplinary action because of it).  After all, that doesn't actually change the lives or beliefs of people who died either so who cares, right?

                  There is no saving throw against stupid.

                  by Throw The Bums Out on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 08:43:53 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

            •  It's not about the magic. (5+ / 0-)

              Which we all agree is irrelevant.

              It's about cultural appropriation and erasure, a kind of disrespect that goes beyond disrespect because something crucial in the appropriating culture depends on the viewpoint of another culture not existing. And this is especially hateful when members of that actual culture, within living memory, were deliberately exterminated.

              Wiping out Jewishness, even in the context of an imaginary ritual, is antisemitic. Even if it was done with good intent.

        •  They know names (7+ / 0-)

          that's the point.  They go through records of the dead looking for people to convert and then include those names among their baptized.

          If I were Jewish and they were my family members, I'd consider filing a lawsuit.  It probably wouldn't go anywhere but at least it might shame them into changing their behavior.

          "There once was a union maid..." Political compass: -9.75 / -8.72

          by mijita on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:54:38 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  I agree about harm done to the living, but I (3+ / 0-)

          think what they're doing to the deceased fits in that category because they are hurting the surviving relatives.
          In addition, the hubris involved in assuming that converting dead people to Mormonism makes them better off is related to the hubris involved in saying that gay marriage is against god's law or that blacks are inferior (which they used to say not all that long ago).

          We're not perfect, but they're nuts! -- Barney Frank

          by Tamar on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 09:15:15 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Maybe the crazy LDSers (4+ / 0-)

    ...should have their looney-tune involuntary baptisms of various dead people quietly.  In their own church.  Without talking about it.  Without rubbing peoples' noses in it.

    There's nothing wrong with quietly praying for someone else, but there certainly IS a LOT wrong with treating others with disrespect.

    I presume Jewish folks could not care less what these goofballs do if they didn't have to hear about it.

    And the folks who say they should "get over it" or "quit whining" are displaying incredible ignorance and thoughtlessness...

    "Ronald Reagan is DEAD! His policies live on but we're doing something about THAT!"

    by leftykook on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:25:42 PM PST

  •  So . . . (21+ / 0-)

    Catholic Bishops can whip the GOP into a frenzy over having to provide insurance coverage for constitutionally protected medical procedures/devices but it's OK by them for some sect to forcibly convert devout Jews to another religion without their consent?  Just unbelievable.

    Totally wrong.  Standing with you, wiscmass.  

  •  I was raised as a Catholic (16+ / 0-)

    However, my father was Mormon. I was raised by my mother and to the horror of my Mormon relatives I attended 16 years of Catholic schools from 1st grade to a Catholic women's college. My cousin keeps saying that she will baptize me when I'm gone. She has absolutely NO understanding of my anger over this. When I have repeatedly asked that this not be done and not be brought up again I get a giggle and some comment about being thin skinned and not being able to take a joke. As Chaucer said, "many a true word spoken in jest." I know she's not joking.

    I no longer practice any religion and regard them as nothing but glorified lodges/clubs - kind of like the Elks, the Moose, the Boy Scouts, the Rotary, the Lions - you get the drift. However foolish I think religion is, I would never make fun of anyone's belief system. Maybe they know something I don't. But, don't, don't, don't make me out to be a believer when, in life, I am not and never will be.

  •  On the bright side.... (5+ / 0-)

    The practice isn't actually to convert people, it's to "give them a choice," after they die, to accept the CJCLDS's teachings. So, while I agree that this practice is offensive, the upside is that if you believe in an afterlife, and the LDS church baptizes you, you are free to look at Joseph Smith and all of the LDS prophets and say

    Go. Fuck. Yourself. Preferably with a rusty metal implement.
    while on your way to the afterlife.

    P.S. I am not a crackpot.

    by BoiseBlue on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:31:39 PM PST

  •  It's Fred Phelps-level Offensive. Colbert Has A (5+ / 0-)
  •  I would tell them to go self-fornicate... (7+ / 0-)

    with said rusty metal implement.  However, as is apparent from the behavior of their leaders, and their attempts to control the behavior of others, it seems they have an issue with most fornication.

    I don't know the first place to go and look to see if they pulled this crap with any of my relatives.  I'm scared about what I would find out given how much we all know about what has happened.

    wiscmass' grandparents Z"L.  They lived their lives as proud Jews and from you it is clear that their memory is very much a blessing.

    Preserve sanity in our government. Re-elect and strengthen and recapture. Proud to be a Democrat!

    by Mets102 on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:32:12 PM PST

  •  glorius rant! i'm with you 100%. (18+ / 0-)

    It pisses me off to think that my NA ancestors have probably been baptized, as well.  You know, after they were slaughtered.

    202-224-3121 to Congress in D.C. USE it! You can tell how big a person is by what it takes to discourage them. "We're not perfect, but they're nuts."--Barney Frank 01/02/2012

    by cany on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:32:12 PM PST

  •  Interesting how (0+ / 0-)

    you say 'The Mormons' as a blanket statement. I expect that you'd scream to high heaven if someone started saying 'The Jews' they did this or that.

    Plenty of 'The Mormons' don't care to baptize anyone but their own family and mind their own business.

    utahgirl
    'The Gentile'

    •  Like Ann Romney and her family that had her (12+ / 0-)

      proudly atheist father baptized after his death?  If that's how much respect they had for a member of their family, expect it is less for those not related to them.  

      As the LDS church permits this practice and its not condemned by those that choose not to engage in it, it's fine to say "The Mormons" when discussing this issue.

      •  No argument from me (0+ / 0-)

        assholes are assholes no matter what their religion, but not everyone in any specific religion is an asshole, no matter what some might claim.

        utahgirl
        The Gentile

    •  As a matter of fact... (10+ / 0-)

      ...the only place in the diary where I said "the Mormons" was in this line:

      Maybe you don't understand that, like any other group, there are certain things that are just sacred to Jews, and that attacking those things the way the Mormons who are posthumously and forcibly converting our people to their faith are doing isn't acceptable under any circumstances -- and so much more so when they've admitted wrongdoing for this exact same behavior in the past, they're repeatedly apologized for it, and yet they keep doing the exact same behavior for which they so falsely apologized in the first place.
      Emphasis added.

      That's not saying "The Mormons" as a blanket statement. It's saying "those Mormons who are doing this antisemitic thing."

      So do you want to try that again?

      Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

      by wiscmass on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 06:13:23 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  And who was the They who apologized? (0+ / 0-)

        the Mormons who are posthumously and forcibly converting our people to their faith are doing isn't acceptable under any circumstances -- and so much more so when they've admitted wrongdoing for this exact same behavior in the past, they're repeatedly apologized for it, and yet they keep doing the exact same behavior for which they so falsely apologized in the first place.

        The people doing this are individuals and nuts. There's no they, The Mormons.

        utahgirl
        The Gentile

        •  Speak much English? (3+ / 0-)

          "They" frequently refers to a grouping of people previously identified.

          As in "the Mormons who are posthumously and forcibly converting our people to their faith."

          They -- that is, "the Mormons who are posthumously and forcibly converting our people to their faith" -- have admitted behavior for this exact same behavior in the past.

          They -- that is, "the Mormons who are posthumously and forcibly converting our people to their faith" -- have repeatedly apologized for it.

          They -- that is, "the Mormons who are posthumously and forcibly converting our people to their faith" -- keep doing the exact same thing for which they -- that is, "the Mormons who are posthumously and forcibly converting our people to their faith" -- so falsely apologized for in the first place.

          They refers to exactly who I said, not all Mormons. I did not so generalize, and it is simply not true to claim that I did.

          Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

          by wiscmass on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 06:30:44 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  "If it's not about you, (5+ / 0-)

          then it's not about you."

          First thing to remember in any discussion of privilege, sexism, racism, etc. Those with whom you might identify (or feel yourself identified with) might do things based on that identity which you disagree with.

          We haven't seen it much lately, but there was a while when any discussion about nasty things "the republicans" did, meaning "those elected officials and others controlling the political party known as the GOP and their message",  was met with "my neighbor/dad/etc is a republican & isn't evil like that."  Right. But that doesn't mean that the organization "GOP", colloquially known as "the Republicans", wasn't batshit crazy and trying to do some very vile things.

          Substitute "LDS" and "Mormons" as needed. By all accounts, mormons are very nice people. But the entity that is the LDS church (and any associated corporate entities), colloquially known as "the mormons", has done some nasty things.

          •  It's definitely not about me. (0+ / 0-)

            But I work surrounded by The Mo. and I had to listen to them rant about assholes who bring the LDS church into disrepute by doing boneheaded things today.  Then I get to DK and get to read rants about The Mormons. Sigh.

            No argument that the LDS and Mormons have done bad things -- probably pretty much in line with every other religion that has ever been. But in this instance, it's like saying the individual Meyer Lansky did bad things and his rabbi was responsible for it.

            It will be amusing if this entire fiasco is found to be a power play pitting The Mormons against The Jews since many Jews support democrats.

            utahgirl
            The Gentile

    •  i disagree. If the Mormon leadership wanted this (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Purple Priestess, AnnieR, Egghead

      stopped I believe they could do it.
      I think they just don't care what other people think of the practice.

      Which bothers me no end. They have taken away the free will of people they don't even know. People whose religious practices were not theirs.

      I have no problem with giving the Mormon church a blanket statement on this. It  seems as though it is their religious belief. Not just one member going off on their own

  •  I am an atheist (7+ / 0-)

    And I am absolutely disgusted by this practice. The absolute hubris that this takes... to think they know "the way" to salvation is just.... so unfathomable to me. To have no respect for another's beliefs, to think you can baptize them, convert them.... makes me so pissed off.

    And yes. You are thinking that people are whining? That they should sit down and shut up? Yep, Go fuck yourself. You need some serious work on your empathy skills.

  •  Very well said, wiscmass (9+ / 0-)

    As if it weren't disrespectful enough to presume to baptize the dead of other faiths...... they PUBLICIZE their own bigotry. And bring great distress to the families of the dead. Does that earn them extra points with their God, I wonder?

    I am so glad you wrote this diary.

  •  Agree that this matter shows disrespect... (5+ / 0-)

    and should be stopped.

    Pearl’s parents said it was "disturbing news" and "uncalled for," but also that it was done with "good intentions." I agree.

    That said, I don't think it should be used as political fodder by partisans, and it's good to see the diarist did not make it so.

    Kudos.

    •  I don't give a damn what their intentions were (6+ / 0-)

      Their intentions are the same as all those people in the past who forcibly converted Jews to their religions -- they all did so because converting us would "save" us from Hell or spare the world some calamity. Those may be "good" intentions, however misguided and insulting and antisemitic in context, but that doesn't excuse bad behavior.

      Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

      by wiscmass on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 06:16:42 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  and then there is this: (9+ / 0-)

    How Diana Has Been Baptized a Mormon

    This list of those who have already been posthumously baptised includes film stars such as Charlie Chaplin, Marilyn Monroe and Rita Hayworth.

    They have also baptised Diana Frances Spencer, whose address was listed as the family seat of Althorp, Northamptonshire. Her file also includes her birth and death date.

    And within two hours of her death, Whitney Houston’s name had been entered into the computer, too, without thought for the feelings of her grieving Baptist relatives.

    If true, what's not to be offended?

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/...Yea, when i first heard, a number of years ago, of the Mormon practice of posthumously converting Native Americans I was offended. I've been offended ever since.

    "Show up. Pay attention. Tell the truth. And don't be attached to the results." -- Angeles Arrien

    by Sybil Liberty on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:54:08 PM PST

  •  I respect your anger, but... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BoiseBlue, wiscmass, thestructureguy

    I'm not sure how I'd feel about this if it were done to me and my relatives. We're not Mormons in my family, so I think the idea of Mormons converting my Methodist late grandmother would probably just make me laugh. It's ridiculous, the notion that a person can change religions or be baptized after they're dead. It's the religious version of alchemy or supply-side economics: say whatever you like, but in the end it's all bullshit and you're not accomplishing anything.

    However, I'm not Jewish. We WASP's are an oppressed minority absolutely nowhere. I'm prepared to sympathize with Jews who are angry about this bit of Mormon idiocy, but I can't empathize with them. I guess I should be grateful that nothing in my past and nothing in my family's history makes me susceptible to feeling personally offended by this. But again, I totally understand why others might be furious.

    The Bush Family: 0 for 4 in Wisconsin

    by Korkenzieher on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:55:46 PM PST

    •  That's about how I feel about it (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wiscmass, Korkenzieher

      I completely understand why it's offensive and I would never try to minimize that, but I can't empathize with it in any real way.

      I was swarmed by evangelicals a few years ago who were doing group prayers for my salvation, putting my name on "prayer walls" and such, and I just laughed at them (mostly- I was furious that one online "prayer wall" included enough information about me to identify me. The others only included my full name. I'm the only person with my name in Boise, but it's a common enough name that there are plenty of others throughout the US).

      Anyway, I just shrugged and said if that's how you want to spend your time, go for it.

      But I am 100% certain that if I had faith, and that if that faith meant a lot to me, I would be a lot less apathetic about it.

      P.S. I am not a crackpot.

      by BoiseBlue on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 06:03:12 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Fair enough (9+ / 0-)

      I'm willing to settle for your recognition of why it would be offensive to myself and others and for your not dismissing us as just so many malcontents. After all, our experience is not yours.

      But the fact of the matter is that their intent is to wipe out the Jewish identity of these people who were murdered or targeted for murder for no reason other than that they were Jews. They are, like antisemites of the past, forcibly converting Jews to their faith -- because that's what it is when you don't have permission: forcible -- because they have decided their way is superior and gives them the right to impose it on others.

      And can we at least agree that there's something fundamentally fucked up about trying to impose your faith on others who don't want it? How often do we complain about politicians trying to do that? It may be counterintuitive to say so, but it's not any better that in this case, they're targeting dead people.

      Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

      by wiscmass on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 06:21:31 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's disgraceful (4+ / 0-)

        and upsetting to relatives. It's like grieving all over again, because it's another loss. It makes me sick! I have Jewish relatives, I better not find out that they were baptized as LDS because I will not shut up about it.

        How do we check?

        In our sleep, pain which cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart until, in our own despair, comes wisdom through the awful grace of God ~RFK

        by vcmvo2 on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 06:30:53 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  That I'm not so sure about (4+ / 0-)

          In one of the previous times when the folks doing this apologized and then turned right around and went right back to doing what they had to apologize for in the first place, my sister had a friend look into whether our grandparents were forcibly posthumously baptized. Her friend found the records that indicated they had been.

          Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

          by wiscmass on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 06:44:57 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  "apologized and then turned right around ..." (5+ / 0-)

            I said this on the other diary.

            If they meant their apology, the Mormon hierarchy would order the names erased off the computers.

            If there's a religious reason why it's irreversible, then the "eternal truth" wouldn't be affected by having the data deleted.

            My opinion, if they really believed, then they would defend their actions, instead of trying to weasel out and pretend they're not doing what they insist on doing. And if the hierarchy lets the data stay in their records and still try to weasel out of admitting what their doing then I think that spokesperson is a moral coward.

            OK, I haven't researched this. I don't KNOW what top Morman leaders have promised and I don't know that records haven't been erased when family has asked ... but all I've read are complaints and no indication of a substantive apology & records purge. So I'm ready to believe the accusations.

            Giving birth (giving life) should be a gift not an obligation or women and poor people are 2nd class by definition

            by julifolo on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 07:08:28 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Well I do know that Elie Weisel (5+ / 0-)

              had some agreement worked out with them several years or a decade ago, but recently he blasted them on it because he found out he had been re-listed and Simon Weisenthal and his wife had either been rebaptized or never erased from their system as they had agreed.

              It's a bleeding sore with these forced baptisms and they just keep reneging on previous agreements. So how can you trust them?

              In our sleep, pain which cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart until, in our own despair, comes wisdom through the awful grace of God ~RFK

              by vcmvo2 on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 07:41:33 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  Agreed (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wiscmass, hikerbiker

        Jews are, understandably, sensitive to being targeted solely on the basis of their religion. This practice by the Mormons is just another calculated insult. But it has no practical effect other than to make the Mormons who do this seem creepy and twisted.

        In a bizarre way, it occurs to me that the reason I can't get as offended by this is because I actually believe in God, because I have faith in God. If I didn't, I'd view this practice as just another manifestation of religious zealotry. But because I do, I believe that while real baptism matters, fake baptism doesn't and this whole exercise is pure folly. It's utterly futile; it changes nothing at all, it serves no purpose other than to annoy the families of the "converted".

        The status of your relatives in God's eyes are unchanged. They weren't Mormon in life, and they didn't become Mormons. They were Jews while alive, and their souls in the hereafter are still Jewish, no matter what a bunch of weirdos from the LDS church might claim. Someone up there, God is looking down at this spectacle and saying "Oy vey".

        The Bush Family: 0 for 4 in Wisconsin

        by Korkenzieher on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 07:51:30 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not be a jerk about it... (3+ / 0-)

          ...because I really do appreciate the effort, but...

          In a bizarre way, it occurs to me that the reason I can't get as offended by this is because I actually believe in God, because I have faith in God.
          ...I doubt that's it if you dig a little deeper. Because quite a few of us Jews who are furious about this believe and have faith in God, so it's really not about belief or not. It's far more likely that you just don't understand. And that's ok -- I don't mean that as a character judgment. As I've said elsewhere, your experience is different from ours, so you can't be expected to see things the same way we do. But I would hope that all rational adults could agree that just because you aren't hurt by this doesn't mean it isn't hurtful. That so many folks on this site can't grasp that very simple concept -- that the world isn't actually all about them -- leaves me wondering whether they're that stupid or self-centered, if they think it's just fine when someone imposes their religious beliefs on others (or maybe just when they target Jews -- there's plenty of antisemitism here), if they're just assholes who think it's funny to fuck with people's families for shits and giggles.

          Point blank, whether you believe in God or not is nobody's business -- as Jefferson said, what your neighbor believes neither breaks your leg nor picks your pocket. But the second someone seeks to inflict their faith on someone else, that does figuratively break your leg and pick your pocket. It is disrespectful, offensive, and obnoxious.

          Frankly, I could care less if they believe their faith is superior to mine -- if they didn't, I'd expect them to choose to believe something else. It's the imposition of their faith combined with the long, antisemitic history of forcing Jews to convert to other faiths against our will that pisses me off.

          And in regard to that imposition? It also pisses me off when Rick Santorum campaigns for president by arguing that not imposing someone's private religious beliefs on every woman in the country somehow violates religious freedom. It's wrong when he tries to cram his religion down women's throats, it's wrong when anyone tries to impose their faith on others, and it's wrong when this group forcibly converts people to their faith whether they're alive or dead.

          Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

          by wiscmass on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 08:12:14 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  We're on the same page (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            wiscmass, hikerbiker, Mets102

            I'm ethnically eligible to join the Ku Klux Klan, but I hate the Klan because....well, don't get me started. By Hitler's reckoning, I'm an Aryan, but I hate the Nazis.

            I can't walk around in your shoes, but I'm prepared to respect the path you take while walking in them yourself.

            This is how it is to be a male heterosexual WASP in America. None of the vitriol and hate and phobias are directed at me, but I'm prepared to oppose those who target people who aren't just like me. And that's pretty much the mission statement for any liberal, isn't it?

            The Bush Family: 0 for 4 in Wisconsin

            by Korkenzieher on Thu Mar 01, 2012 at 01:54:13 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  It should be the mission statement for any liberal (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              hikerbiker, Korkenzieher, Mets102

              So here's the question: is the problem with certain site users that I've described here that they aren't liberals or is it that they're sabotaging the mission?

              Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

              by wiscmass on Thu Mar 01, 2012 at 04:54:46 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  What percentage of people... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mets102, wiscmass, Cassandra Waites, MBNYC

    converted during these ceremonies would've given assent, if asked during their lifetimes?
    I'm guessing less than 5%.

    Let The Wild Rumpus Begin!

    by dclawyer06 on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 05:56:48 PM PST

  •  Retroactive baptism? How about retroactive lawsuit (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wiscmass, Purple Priestess, MBNYC

    If you don't need to be alive (or to consent) to be baptized, then you shouldn't need to be alive to file a lawsuit against the extremely wealthy Mormon "church." I hope Daniel Pearl's family files the first lawsuit.

  •  In response to this sort of thing (0+ / 0-)

    perhaps the only just response is to go and do likewise.  Find yourself some dead Mormons and retroactively baptize them into the religion of your choice.  Hare Krishnas, Satanists, Snake Handlers, whatever.  The various religions may object to the new converts but the catechumens will be in no position to.

    My apologies if I'm not treating this with the seriousness it deserves.

    You may think that. I couldn't possibly comment.-- Francis Urqhart

    by Johnny Q on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 06:05:37 PM PST

    •  No, I'd rather get reparations (3+ / 0-)

      And in my tradition, that means they have to put right what they put wrong.

      So they should proxy-convert my grandparents back to Judaism. And part of conversion to Judaism for men is circumcision.

      If they want to keep fucking with us, let them at least feel some significant pain for doing so.

      Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

      by wiscmass on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 06:23:14 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  The whole idea of being "saved" (7+ / 0-)

    posthumously whether you want to or not is both ridiculous and extremely disrespectful -- whether you are a Jew, an atheist, a Buddist or any other hue of faith.

    It is arrogant to think that theirs is the only way and so they have to trick or force others.  It is also rather demeaning to their idea of the Supreme Being to think they have to go through these silly gyrations to "save" people -- as if he (I don't think they would use inclusive language here) were not powerful enough without it.

    I agree with you, but I would add that I find it extremely distasteful for every person to whom they have done this.  I don't think that it would be a laughing matter to me if someone were to "baptize" my mother to the LDS which she thought was a kooky and very wrong cult. It would feel as if someone had painted mustaches on all the pictures I have of her or desecrated her memory in a different way.

    So, rant away ... you doit so well.

  •  no, you are not whining. (8+ / 0-)

    this comment you posted in Mets diary pretty much shut that bullshit "whining" argument right down.

    I am glad you posted this diary and I don't think this issue is small or unimportant (I also had relatives in the holocaust).

    Toleration is the greatest gift of the mind; it requires the same effort of the brain that it takes to balance oneself on a bicycle. -Helen Keller

    by ridemybike on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 07:12:48 PM PST

  •  Who cares what they wanted? (0+ / 0-)

    We know better. In fact, we have all the answers, 100%.

    Our invisible fairy godfather in the sky can beat up your  invisible fairy godfather in the sky any day of the week.

    Don't let millionaires steal Social Security.
    I said, "Don't let millionaires steal Social Security!"

    by Leo in NJ on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 07:15:21 PM PST

  •  Great rant, wiscmass (7+ / 0-)

    I've got Jewish ancestors on my fathers side, who came to America in the 1870's. Even though I don't know for a fact that I had relatives killed by the Nazis, I think it is very likely. Which infuriates me. And adding to that crime would be the idea that they were then posthumously converted. I agree with you totally. The idea that they also baptize any non-Morons (oops!) Mormons shows they are anti-semitic and anti-black and anti-Catholic and anti-Native American and anti-gay and anti-everything else. Yes, some of them are very nice people, but this baptism shit has got to stop.

    The Buddha's teachings are not something to believe, they are something to do.

    by madame damnable on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 07:16:49 PM PST

  •  Tipped & Rec'd (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mets102, wiscmass, vcmvo2, NonnyO, hikerbiker

    I'm not Jewish, but agree with you.

    It is a terrible thing to see and have no vision. ~ Helen Keller

    by Pam from Calif on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 07:28:15 PM PST

  •  I think this is key: (6+ / 0-)
    Maybe this doesn't hurt you, but there are plenty of us who are hurt by it. Just because you aren't hurt doesn't make it ok.
    I'm not a believer.  But this isn't about me or other non-believers, is it?  It's about those who do believe, and about their families and friends.

    I am very sorry for what happened to your grandparents - before, during, and after the war.  And I'm very sorry for the pain it has caused those who love them.  I don't think there are words to describe the desecration.

    "If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.." - John F. Kennedy: Inaugural Address, January 20, 1961. We are the 99%.

    by IndieGuy on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 07:45:20 PM PST

  •  Poaching on other religions' souls is (4+ / 0-)

    a pretty rotten way to run a newly invented religion, isn't it?

    "Newly" being under 200 years, just like "scientology" invented by a fiction writer.

    What a Police State Looks Like: "On one side: soft human flesh, unprotected human skulls, cardboard signs, slogans they chant, armed with belief in 1st Amendment rights. On the other: helmets, body armor, guns, batons, chemical weapons." -- JanetRhodes

    by YucatanMan on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 08:13:55 PM PST

    •  New religion or millenia old... (5+ / 0-)

      ...it doesn't matter. Imposing your faith on people who don't want it is always a shitty thing to do.

      Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

      by wiscmass on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 08:20:17 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah, but making one up while scheming to steal (0+ / 0-)

        people's money by "digging for gold" is just especially .... suspect ... I think.

        What a Police State Looks Like: "On one side: soft human flesh, unprotected human skulls, cardboard signs, slogans they chant, armed with belief in 1st Amendment rights. On the other: helmets, body armor, guns, batons, chemical weapons." -- JanetRhodes

        by YucatanMan on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 08:33:12 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  A righteous rant in every way (5+ / 0-)

    I went to the LDS church for a couple of years as a teen. But once I really began to dig into their dogma, I backed away quickly. I'd really only joined to be among other teens and have friends and things to do. So, when I learned about the tithing, the magic underwear and this abhorrent posthumous baptizing, I left.

    One aspect of the LDS Church that pisses me off (even more) is what they've done to Pacific Islanders, Hawai'i in particular. They've converted so many... and posthumously baptized their ancestors, too. I don't think Kamehameha would have agreed to it.

    Arrogance, hubris, jackhattery... whatever you call it, it is WRONG. I'm with you on this, wiscmass, my friend.

    Keep holding on so long, 'cause there's a chance that we might not be so wrong. We could be down and gone but we hold on...

    by Purple Priestess on Wed Feb 29, 2012 at 10:03:36 PM PST

  •  The Colbert Report, Feb 23, 2012 (5+ / 0-)

    Stephen Colbert has a great suggestion about how to make Mormons into Jews.

    It starts a few seconds after 4:00 in to the tape, and Stephen at first references questions put to RMoney.

    The above is a link to the whole show on Hulu, and this is the link at the Comedy Central web site to just the one segment on Stephen's suggestion.

    IMHO, the whole concept of forced posthumous baptism is offensive and disrespectful not only to Jews (but particularly for/on behalf of those who perished in the Holocaust, and the Inquisition if any records exist for that period), but it's also disrespectful to everyone of any other religion or no religion if their names have been submitted for posthumous baptisms.  When people were alive, they made their own choices, and the choices living people made ought to be respected and remain in effect after they die since they can no longer freely change their minds!!!

    I have all kinds of ancestors of various faiths.  Separatists, Quakers, many Lutherans, Congregationalists, Church of England before they converted to Quakerism when they were alive, and presumably those who lived before the Reformation were even Catholic, et cetera.

    I have ancestors from seven different nations, and while none of them have records that go back far enough to speculate about facts, I can't tell you how many times I've been asked if I'm at least part Jewish or Spanish or Italian (I was compared to Sophia Loren and Annette Funicello when I was young).  Is it possible I have Jewish ancestors?  Yes.  During the Inquisition some Sephardic Jews made it to Holland, which was the only place they could have some sort of freedom to practice their religion (later, my Separatist English ancestors went to Leiden before embarking on the Mayflower).  In 1630, a lot of Dutch people came to New Amsterdam, some of my ancestors among them.  There are Dutch Reformed church records in NY state for them.  What they were before coming to the US is anyone's guess, but Jewish is a possibility.

    Records for births, marriages, and burial were not kept by civil or church authorities until the 1600s, and only if one is very, very lucky can one find records that go back to the 1500s.  A few wealthy families kept sufficient records to prove familial links, but ordinary people were not kept track of to any degree until well into the 17th century most of the time.

    It doesn't matter much which non-Mormon religion is involved.  The fact that this practice attempts to rewrite the personal histories and biographies of so many people of so many different faiths is a travesty.  Mormons need to respect the decisions that were made by the dead when they were alive to practice whatever religion they freely chose to - or not, as the case may be.

    Forced posthumous baptism is a ridiculous notion, but because so many gullible people believe in it, the practice needs to stop, just as the men who enforce LDS practices outlawed polygamy.  Mormonism is a man-made faith that didn't even start until the 19th century, and some of the people they're posthumously baptizing lived loooong before it was invented...!!!  Religious rules and regulations made by men can be changed by men.

    The cognitive dissonance just thinking about forced posthumous baptisms is dizzying.

    The fact that Mormons believe "the dead have a right to refuse posthumous baptism" is a crock of hooey.  The dead can't refuse or accept anything.  That's the whole point: they're dead...!  Duh!  To Mormons, the dead person is converted to Mormonism whether they want to be or not because they didn't/can't refuse...!

    Where are Thor's lightning bolts when they're so vitally necessary to refuse these disrespectful forced posthumous baptisms?

    I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

    by NonnyO on Thu Mar 01, 2012 at 12:21:52 AM PST

    •  To be fair... (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mets102, TiaRachel, hikerbiker, NonnyO

      ...all faiths are man-made, and I don't think it really matters when they were made -- that's irrelevant. As I've said above, in Jefferson's words, what your neighbor believes neither breaks your leg nor picks your pocket, so as far as I'm concerned, they can believe whatever they want. But the second they try to impose their faith on others who don't want it, they do figuratively break your leg and pick your pocket, just as surely as do those politicians who insist that it is their right as a matter of religious freedom to impose their faith-based values on the rest of us.

      Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

      by wiscmass on Thu Mar 01, 2012 at 04:12:17 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, qute true... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wiscmass

        All faiths are man-made.

        Like you, I've adopted Jefferson's stance.  But, between my own historical studies over some 50 years (which is most of my library) and my genealogy research..., since so many of my ancestors washed up on these shores for both opportunity to get ahead and make a profit in business and for religious freedom..., I advocate absolutely strict separation of church and state..., and never, never, never allow a government or a church to impose a religion on anyone.  Ever.

        I'm a live and let live person..., until someone tells me I have to blindly believe some kind of religious belief (theirs, whatever that may be), or tells me (or other women) what they may or may not have in their bodies and when.

        I determined if I ever went to another faith (after a process of going from belief to atheism over some 25 years of historical studies and reading the Bible cover-to-cover twice), that I'd go for the faiths that don't proselytize.  That leaves me with Quakerism (which I've not investigated yet, in spite of knowing some of my ancestors were Quakers), or Judaism.  I was assisting with make-up at a temple in another state that put on their own production of Fiddler with the rabbi and his wife playing Tevye and Golda, attended Friday night Sabbath services for a while, and fell in love with the simple elegance of the services.  It helped, I think, that the rabbi was a naturally gifted storyteller.

        Right now where I'm at in my life, I'm comfortable with my existentialism and lack of faith.  I went through the angst years ago, got over it, so I'm fine with no faith.

        But I'm livid on behalf of my ancestors to think their names were probably put through this idiotic forced posthumous baptism ritual.  They had their own faith when they were alive.  In that case, leave the dead alone and respect their memories.

        I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

        by NonnyO on Thu Mar 01, 2012 at 10:01:59 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  and it's insulting and it's literally outrageous.. (0+ / 0-)

    but it all amounts to a hoax, doesn't it?

    it's intrusive and disrespectful and anyone upset by their personal involvement with the abused reputations of the deceased have their just causes to be upset

    but does the act, the effort, the illegitimate little game they play bear any more meaning than a tasteless joke?

    I think the more seriously they treat this accumulation pageant, the more intractable and duplicitous they appear, the more they mark themselves as a specifically anti-social organization.

    Wishing due solace to the aggrieved, still, I think they do this thing, ultimately, to their own detriment.

    It seems curiosity has killed the cat that had my tongue.

    by Murphoney on Thu Mar 01, 2012 at 03:58:56 AM PST

    •  But it's irrelevant (5+ / 0-)

      You ask whether it bears any more meaning than a tasteless joke, and maybe it doesn't to you. But didn't I just show you that it does to me, and to quite a few others as well?

      It's bad enough that these assholes have done what they've done. But what I'm talking about here is at least as much about the assholes who tell us it's not a big deal. That it's not a big deal to them doesn't mean it's not a big deal, full stop. It may come as a shock to them, but the world doesn't actually revolve around them, and for them to tell a bunch of Jews when we're allowed to be offended by antisemitism is no less hubristic or moronic than what this group of Mormons is doing.

      Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

      by wiscmass on Thu Mar 01, 2012 at 04:15:53 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •   The stench of this reminds me of what the (4+ / 0-)

    Carmelite nuns did @ Auschwitz, erecting a monstrous sized cross, which towered over the entire complex, to "commemorate" the Catholics who died there. Appropriating Oswiecim (Auschwitz) for their own purposes. It's claiming 'ownership' of what is sacred to some, and which they have no right to and it's deeply offensive and harmful.

    "Say little; do much." (Pirkei Avot: 1:15)

    by hester on Thu Mar 01, 2012 at 05:17:05 AM PST

  •  and they weren't converted... (0+ / 0-)

    they may have been baptised posthumously by proxy, but the rite as described by the LDS is not a forced conversion.

    There are plenty of reasons to take issue with the LDS on this isssue, but misrepresenting it as forced conversion undermines the critique.

    Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time. (Terry Pratchett)

    by angry marmot on Thu Mar 01, 2012 at 05:17:21 AM PST

    •  I disagree (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wiscmass, Mets102, hikerbiker

      because what difference does it make what the service was ?  It's still a violation of someone's beliefs and traditions - which IS the critique.

    •  Bullshit (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mets102, hikerbiker, livosh1

      Did they have the consent of the converted? No. That's coercive.

      Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

      by wiscmass on Thu Mar 01, 2012 at 04:56:27 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Again... Per LDS doctrine it is not a (0+ / 0-)

        forced conversion. There is admittedly a certain irony in suggesting a "reality-based discussion" of eschatology, but LDS doctrine proposes that the souls of the deceased resident in the spirit world possess agency and can choose whether to accept or decline the baptism. It is therefore not a forced conversion.

        Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time. (Terry Pratchett)

        by angry marmot on Fri Mar 02, 2012 at 08:26:54 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Really, that's your standard? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Mets102, hikerbiker

          According to the standards of people who are forcibly converting dead Jews, they're not forcibly converting people and you defend them?

          Get a rusty metal implement, jackass.

          Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

          by wiscmass on Fri Mar 02, 2012 at 11:32:35 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Funny. (0+ / 0-)

            I am not defending the rite. I am suggesting that your continued use of "forced conversion" is not correct. As I said in my first comment, there are lots of good reasons to take issue with the rite of baptism-for-the-dead-by-proxy. Misrepresenting it doesn't help...

            Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time. (Terry Pratchett)

            by angry marmot on Fri Mar 02, 2012 at 01:24:24 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Don't you have something better to do? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              wiscmass

              You're being a pesky mosquito.

              Enough, already.  Sheesh.

              Consider adopting a homeless pet at PAWS.org (Progressive Animal Welfare Society)

              by hikerbiker on Fri Mar 02, 2012 at 02:39:37 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  That's ridiculous (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              hikerbiker

              You're saying it's not correct because the people who are doing it say so.

              Thank God you're not a judge in criminal court. "Just because I killed that man for no reason other than to watch him die doesn't make it murder -- I say it isn't!"

              Your position is moronic in the extreme. Go be a dick in someone else's diary.

              Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

              by wiscmass on Fri Mar 02, 2012 at 02:47:29 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Trying to introduce an accurate (0+ / 0-)

                representation of a rite (per Talmage's The Articles of Faith and later doctrinary literature) is dickishness? Good to know that facts can't stand on the way of outrage. Cheers.

                Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time. (Terry Pratchett)

                by angry marmot on Fri Mar 02, 2012 at 03:24:43 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Bullshit, dick (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  hikerbiker

                  They're doing something wrong. They say they're not. And so you just accept it. So I repeat to you what I said in the diary: go fuck yourself with a rusty implement, asshole.

                  You're a fucking hypocrite, too, given how quick you are to whine when people post actual facts you don't like in diaries you agree with rather than bullshit justifications for bad behavior.

                  In any case, my diary means my living room, and you're being a dick, so get the fuck out.

                  Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

                  by wiscmass on Fri Mar 02, 2012 at 03:29:18 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I've tried to rec your latest responses to the (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    wiscmass, Mets102

                    asshole but unfortunately the rec isn't registering for some reason.

                    What a fucking jerk he is.  

                    Consider adopting a homeless pet at PAWS.org (Progressive Animal Welfare Society)

                    by hikerbiker on Fri Mar 02, 2012 at 03:36:25 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  No kidding (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Mets102

                      Fuck it. We all know that angry marmot is a whiny little twit any time someone posts actual facts that contradict the preferred narrative, rather than the bullshit justification for assholes' behavior that dick posted above. And we all know that kos simply ignores it most of the time no matter how often we report it.

                      Well, angry marmot can go get a rusty metal implement -- he'd go batshit if someone he cared about was posthumously converted and someone came at him with such nonsense. Fucking hypocrite. And if that's what kos wants on his site, he can go get his own rusty metal implement too.

                      Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

                      by wiscmass on Fri Mar 02, 2012 at 03:43:26 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  If? (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        wiscmass, hikerbiker, Mets102
                        And if that's what kos wants on his site, he can go get his own rusty metal implement too.
                        Actions speak louder than words, and we all know this already.

                        I'm still waiting to hear why I deserved to be permanently NR'ed for...

                        ...what, exactly, again?

                        Oh that's right, I said nice things about Jews and Israel.  I guess that was it.  Because I sure as shit have no clue what else it could have been about it.

                        Soon to be JayinPhiladelphia...

                        by JayinPortland on Fri Mar 02, 2012 at 03:47:05 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Apparently... (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          hikerbiker, Mets102

                          ...you should have defended forcibly converting dead Jews to other religions and just generally being a colossal dick in a diary about an issue of concern to a number of Jews. That would make you a trusted user.

                          Fucking ridiculous...

                          Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

                          by wiscmass on Fri Mar 02, 2012 at 03:51:30 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                  •  He's got a long history of this, too. (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    wiscmass, hikerbiker, Mets102

                    His defenses here are absolutely disgusting, but not at all surprising.

                    But you know as well as I do that the "dick" rule here only goes one way.  That's why I'm not sure why you're even surprised at his repeated actions here.

                    Soon to be JayinPhiladelphia...

                    by JayinPortland on Fri Mar 02, 2012 at 03:41:01 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I'm not surprised at all (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Mets102

                      Nor will I be surprised when kos continues to let it slide. Hence the invitation from the diary to collect a rusty metal implement and get to work.

                      Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

                      by wiscmass on Fri Mar 02, 2012 at 03:48:32 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Yeah, but they ignore that... (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        wiscmass, hikerbiker, Mets102

                        ...and pat themselves on the back and tell themselves they aren't really bigots.

                        Actions speak louder than words though, again.

                        Soon to be JayinPhiladelphia...

                        by JayinPortland on Fri Mar 02, 2012 at 03:53:08 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Come to think of it... (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          hikerbiker, Mets102

                          ...weren't you allegedly permanently NR'ed for an offense that is roughly equivalent to what that dick angry marmot has been doing in both my diary and Mets102's?

                          Curious, that, wouldn't you say? And yet you are permanently NR'ed and that dick is a TU. Hey kos -- way to apply your own fucking policies fairly!

                          Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

                          by wiscmass on Fri Mar 02, 2012 at 04:07:24 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  I don't even know... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            wiscmass, Mets102

                            Never heard back from my inquiries as to why.

                            Never had a hidden comment, never said anything that would justify same.

                            We don't need to be told what it's about, clearly.  I know one thing!  I'm proud that nobody will ever catch up to my NR record here.  Being cast out of a hate site by country club bigots is something I can smile about. :)

                            Soon to be JayinPhiladelphia...

                            by JayinPortland on Fri Mar 02, 2012 at 04:11:11 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I don't know (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Mets102

                            I can think of one person who was explicitly told by an admin he was banned for participating in a boycott for which none of the other over 100 announced participants received so much as a slap on the wrist. I think that person has you beat.

                            Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

                            by wiscmass on Fri Mar 02, 2012 at 04:16:02 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

  •  right. fracking. on. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mets102, TiaRachel, wiscmass, hikerbiker

    There is something deeply disturbing about an ideology that says they have it so right that is is ok to "convert" everyone to it. Freedom of religion means that I get to make my own choices about religion, without interference/imposition of anyone else's ideas about it. Daniel Pearl's life was his own, to do with as he wished. These people are sick.

  •  as an atheist I personally don't care (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TiaRachel, wiscmass, hikerbiker

    about baptizing the dead.

    However, i can see how incredibly offensive this is to many, many people, and it's creepy too. Peoples' afterlives are very important to them (even if I don't get it). This is a belief the Mormons, perhaps, could let go. They let go of polygamy and institutional racism, didn't they?

    [insert pithy sigline here]

    by terrypinder on Thu Mar 01, 2012 at 06:12:22 AM PST

  •  the whole thing is both completely and (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mets102, wiscmass, hikerbiker

    utterly outrageous and mind-bendingly arrogant on the part of the Mormons doing this  and also just plain ridiculous

    but mostly the first thing

  •  Plus the appropriation (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wiscmass, hikerbiker

    Baptizing dead Jews PLUS deciding that they are the real lost tribes of Israel to the extent that they call everybody else a gentile?

    Unbelievable.

  •  How did the ones responsible (0+ / 0-)

    find your grandparents in the first place? Why was this done?

    "If I could have one wish, I would have people accept the importance of our common humanity." --Pres. Bill Clinton, The Today Show, 09/21/06

    by desordre remplir on Thu Mar 01, 2012 at 07:58:29 PM PST

    •  As I said... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      desordre remplir

      ...my grandparents were Holocaust survivors. There are a million and a half different ways to track down information on Holocaust survivors, and such people were specifically targeted for this.

      Do you suppose Republican politicians hate people who work for a living because they've never done it themselves?

      by wiscmass on Fri Mar 02, 2012 at 11:37:49 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site