|
|
Post by stormwarden on May 6, 2009 23:57:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by ironbite on May 7, 2009 0:13:36 GMT -5
In the two minutes it took me to....gonna kill you next time Stormwarden. I have to ask this of our resident Mormon apologist but....if this practice still contiues after it's been declared bad idea numero-uno...why the fuck is it still going on? You gave this link www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vg....000176f620a____ to help some people out with understanding this issue but it doesn't really answer shit. Ironbite-so I ask again...if this practice is so stupidly corrupt...why is it still allowed to continue? |
|
|
|
Post by stormwarden on May 7, 2009 0:19:13 GMT -5
Sorry about that 'Bite, premature enter button. It was bad typing, and I had to fix it fast.
And I would like to know that to: why DOES that continue?
|
|
|
|
Post by antichrist on May 7, 2009 0:54:57 GMT -5
I thought they changed the rules so that you could only baptize for the dead for a direct relative. Or is that put aside for famous people?
|
|
|
|
Post by Yaezakura on May 7, 2009 1:10:28 GMT -5
I thought they changed the rules so that you could only baptize for the dead for a direct relative. Or is that put aside for famous people? It's "put aside" basically for anyone who's name happens to come up. In other words, they never changed a damned thing, and they're still sick, sick motherfuckers. I don't care what you say when you find this topic, skyfire. I don't care who you say it's done for, or the reasons behind it. Defiling the memory of the dead is simply one of the most heinous acts someone can commit. |
|
|
|
Post by Paradox on May 7, 2009 1:36:43 GMT -5
Can't they just say that everyone goes to heaven and spend their time and energy on something more important? I'm sure that there are homeless shelters or something that could use the manpower, as opposed as spending so much time and effort baptizing dead people in proxy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yaezakura on May 7, 2009 7:10:43 GMT -5
Can't they just say that everyone goes to heaven and spend their time and energy on something more important? I'm sure that there are homeless shelters or something that could use the manpower, as opposed as spending so much time and effort baptizing dead people in proxy. Of course not. Then the living don't get to play god by picking and choosing who gets into heaven via their postmortem baptisms. They also wouldn't get to piss off anyone with an ounce of decency or reverence for the dead. |
|
|
|
Post by schizophonic on May 7, 2009 7:41:13 GMT -5
they're still sick, sick motherfuckers. |
|
|
|
Post by m52nickerson on May 7, 2009 7:42:46 GMT -5
I think we should start pissing on Mormon graves......or burn pentagrams on them.
Since they feel they can do that shit, I can baptize their people in my own ways right?
|
|
|
|
Post by skyfire on May 7, 2009 8:56:47 GMT -5
I thought they changed the rules so that you could only baptize for the dead for a direct relative. Or is that put aside for famous people? My guess is that one of two situations happened: 1. Someone didn't get the memo. 2. Someone decided to be a douche. |
|
|
|
Post by Yaezakura on May 7, 2009 9:05:22 GMT -5
My guess is that one of two situations happened: 1. Someone didn't get the memo. 2. Someone decided to be a douche. Or, far more realistically, the cult simply decided to say they were going to stop to soothe public outcry, and simply grew more secretive about the practice while never actually changing anything. |
|
|
|
Post by mistermuncher on May 7, 2009 9:07:55 GMT -5
Those bloody bad apples, eh?
|
|
|
|
Post by wackadoodle on May 7, 2009 9:13:26 GMT -5
1. they never mean for anyone but the media to read the memo.
2. they have the full support of the church because its been proven time and time again non-mormon's rights dont mean jack shit to them.
|
|
|
|
Post by dasfuchs on May 7, 2009 9:20:57 GMT -5
I thought they changed the rules so that you could only baptize for the dead for a direct relative. Or is that put aside for famous people? My guess is that one of two situations happened: 1. Someone didn't get the memo. 2. Someone decided to be a douche. My guess is uh....yeah, bullshit. The church still supports it, they just fancied the text up |
|
|
|
Post by ausador on May 7, 2009 9:29:37 GMT -5
The entire idea is just plain creepy.
What gives them the right to induct someone into their church after the person is dead?...especially someone who never had anything to do with their beliefs?
|
|
