Post by meshaliuknits on Jun 22, 2012 11:21:02 GMT -5
Nope. Had no idea. But I also just learned that Jesse "The Body" Ventura is also atheist today, so I'm clearly behind the game.
ETA: If that's true, it does explain why his Mormonism wasn't a big deal when he ran for office, like caden indicated in the other thread. Does not explain why his atheism wasn't.
I actually don't think this is a big deal at all, esp. compared to, say, baptizing deceased Jewish persons.
The reason I feel that way in this specific case, is because he was ATHEIST. He had no ties to any organized religious beliefs. This would have meant nothing at all to him. A ritual with no meaning.
Ok, that didn't quite come out the way I meant. It's disrespectful, but not in the same way as doing it to someone who had religious beliefs (other than LDS).
I actually don't think this is a big deal at all, esp. compared to, say, baptizing deceased Jewish persons.
The reason I feel that way in this specific case, is because he was ATHEIST. He had no ties to any organized religious beliefs. This would have meant nothing at all to him. A ritual with no meaning.
Ok, that didn't quite come out the way I meant. It's disrespectful, but not in the same way as doing it to someone who had religious beliefs (other than LDS).
As an Atheist I would be PISSED if my kids decided that I was going to become their religion after I was dead. I mean, obviously he is dead so he literally doesn't care, but to claim he wouldn't because he just a non-believer anyway doesn't float.
I actually don't think this is a big deal at all, esp. compared to, say, baptizing deceased Jewish persons.
The reason I feel that way in this specific case, is because he was ATHEIST. He had no ties to any organized religious beliefs. This would have meant nothing at all to him. A ritual with no meaning.
Ok, that didn't quite come out the way I meant. It's disrespectful, but not in the same way as doing it to someone who had religious beliefs (other than LDS).
As an Atheist I would be PISSED if my kids decided that I was going to become their religion after I was dead. I mean, obviously he is dead so he literally doesn't care, but to claim he wouldn't because he just a non-believer anyway doesn't float.
I agree with this. Atheists do believe in something- that there is no God. It's not like we just haven't picked a religion yet or that we don't really care.
The article made it sound like the Romney family did this, not the Davies family, which pisses me off more for some reason. I could almost be OK with it if it were his wife (Ann's mother) doing it (so that she could be sealed to him, at least according to her belief system), but something about the fact that it was his daughter/son-in-law makes it worse for me. This may be over-reading it, though, since the article says it's unknown who actually performed the ceremony.
I actually don't think this is a big deal at all, esp. compared to, say, baptizing deceased Jewish persons.
The reason I feel that way in this specific case, is because he was ATHEIST. He had no ties to any organized religious beliefs. This would have meant nothing at all to him. A ritual with no meaning.
Ok, that didn't quite come out the way I meant. It's disrespectful, but not in the same way as doing it to someone who had religious beliefs (other than LDS).
I have all the books I could need, and what more could I need than books? I shall only engage in commerce if books are the coin. -- Catherynne M. Valente
This atheist would laugh and laugh. To get pissed is to put any stock in their faith. Baptize me as anything. If it helps you sleep better, I'll be a Xenu fucking princess---it literally changes nothing and only further proves that religion is arbitrary and meaningless.
Meh, I think for people who don't really get the idea behind baptisms for the dead, this seems offensive, but if you understand why it's done, you understand why it would be done, especially by a family member. Not doing it is essentially barring your family member from entering a higher kingdom in heaven...I mean, look at it from the perspective if a believer. Someone dies, gets to heaven and has some heavenly missionaries come knocking on their door (you never escape them). And, because you're dead, they are like, the most bad ass missionaries ever, not just some 19 pimple dork, but like Moses and Joseph smith or some shot like that. Who's going to not believe at that point? If you don't get baptized for your family, they are going to be forever stuck even though they accept the gospel in heaven.
Why should a non-believer have to look at it from the perspective of a believer?
I was just about to ask this too. MIL wants to baptize DS (catholic) and she figures since I'm an atheist I wont care. It's for "her comfort". I said no and reminded her that as the parent we do things from my (and Dh's) beliefs/viewpoints.
Why should a non-believer have to look at it from the perspective of a believer?
All I was saying that if looked through the lens of a person who believed in the church and all it's tenents, then it is only rational to baptize a loved one posthumously. If you are a real believer, and you didn't do everything to save everyone, especially your own family, that kind of makes you a major asshole...right?
I know most people don't feel the same way, but for me, whenever someone comes a knocking on my door trying to spread their particular brand of Juju...be it the Mormons, JW, or who ever else wants to try (no one else has for the records) I am always polite, thank them for their time, but tell them I am not interested, because really, they are not doing their work to spite me, offend me, hurt me, or harm me. They are at my door because they believe what they believe and they want to share that because they believe it will lead to eternal salvation. I disagree, but hey, thanks for taking time out of your day to try to save my soul in your eyes. If I knew the secret to true happiness, I would hope that I would also share that with people I cared about...and hell, I hope I'm not so selfish that I could also share it with people I don't know. So far, all I got is live a good life, do what makes you feel good inside.
To me, this is so not a big deal, mostly because its a ceremony that means nothing if you don't believe it. It only has power if you give it power. But it does mean something to the Romneys, and in their belief system, it makes total sense for them to have done this. I am all about people doing what is in line with their beliefs and all that jazz.
Why should a non-believer have to look at it from the perspective of a believer?
All I was saying that if looked through the lens of a person who believed in the church and all it's tenents, then it is only rational to baptize a loved one posthumously. If you are a real believer, and you didn't do everything to save everyone, especially your own family, that kind of makes you a major asshole...right?
I know most people don't feel the same way, but for me, whenever someone comes a knocking on my door trying to spread their particular brand of Juju...be it the Mormons, JW, or who ever else wants to try (no one else has for the records) I am always polite, thank them for their time, but tell them I am not interested, because really, they are not doing their work to spite me, offend me, hurt me, or harm me. They are at my door because they believe what they believe and they want to share that because they believe it will lead to eternal salvation. I disagree, but hey, thanks for taking time out of your day to try to save my soul in your eyes. If I knew the secret to true happiness, I would hope that I would also share that with people I cared about...and hell, I hope I'm not so selfish that I could also share it with people I don't know. So far, all I got is live a good life, do what makes you feel good inside.
To me, this is so not a big deal, mostly because its a ceremony that means nothing if you don't believe it. It only has power if you give it power. But it does mean something to the Romneys, and in their belief system, it makes total sense for them to have done this. I am all about people doing what is in line with their beliefs and all that jazz.
Well said, and I totally agree.
If by some weird chance one of my kids converts to Mormonism and decides to baptize me after I'm dead, I would hope the rest of my family wouldn't find it disrespectful. That kid would be doing it out of love. If I believed as they do, you can bet I'd baptize every dead family member I could.
I've never understood the outrage over this practice. It's done out of love and hope. It does no harm to the dead person (obviously ). The intent of the baptizer is to save. Why the heck does it matter?
It's offensive because it's utterly disrespectful to the dead person's beliefs. The Jews in the Holocaust died because of their religion. To baptize them as Mormons is effectively saying they died for nothing, because Mormonism is the real deal. Sorry about those Nazis, Jews! Guess you were gassed for nothing!
Fucking asshole Mormons. I would be livid if some cocksucking asswad baptized me after I died because even though I wouldn't know, it would go against everything in which I believe.
This atheist would laugh and laugh. To get pissed is to put any stock in their faith. Baptize me as anything. If it helps you sleep better, I'll be a Xenu fucking princess---it literally changes nothing and only further proves that religion is arbitrary and meaningless.
As a baptized Catholic, I would render the Mormon baptism meaningless and ineffective for me. Generally, I don't understnad why anyone would care if they see the Mormon baptism as meaningless (whether they were of a different faith or of no faith).
To me it makes me question if he can respect anyone elses belief. the FIL did not want to be saved, to do so later is pushing your agenda on someone else. It is disrespectful to the dead and makes you more of an ass then letting them go to your "hell".
To me it makes me question if he can respect anyone elses belief. the FIL did not want to be saved, to do so later is pushing your agenda on someone else. It is disrespectful to the dead and makes you more of an ass then letting them go to your "hell".
But it really isnt because there is no one to push an agenda on, or even respect at that point. The person in question is dead. Gone. No longer capable of receiving respect. Given they really and truly believe it is the only way for them to get in to heaven, it's not about the deceased at all. It's an (empty, to anyone not of the faith) ritual for the survivors. Making it more than that only lends credence to their beliefs. And sure it is selfish to us for them baptize someone after they are gone, but in their eyes, it isn't.
The holocaust victims are a somewhat different story, mostly because of intent. I still don't personally find it horrific, but I can understand why some, specifically the victims' families, find it gravely offensive.
To me it makes me question if he can respect anyone elses belief. the FIL did not want to be saved, to do so later is pushing your agenda on someone else. It is disrespectful to the dead and makes you more of an ass then letting them go to your "hell".
But Romney wouldn't see it as pushing his faith on someone else...he baptized (if it was him, let's assume for sake of argument it was) his FIL as to give him the chance for salvation. FIL still has the opportunity to reject Mormonism in heaven in romneys belief system. But without this, and other endowments that can only be performed here on earth, FIL has no chance at salvation. He can take it or leave it, just as he did here. But as a child, would you not hope that your parent would accept the gospel and then spend eternity with you?
I don't agree. Why is one belief system more important than another? As an atheist and semi-Semite who had relatives who were gassed, I'm equally offended for the Jews and the non-believers, even though they're dead. The point is, it's a slap in the face to the family and friends of the deceased. It's rude and it's fucking pushing their religion on people who would never have consented in life.
I don't agree. Why is one belief system more important than another? As an atheist and semi-Semite who had relatives who were gassed, I'm equally offended for the Jews and the non-believers, even though they're dead. The point is, it's a slap in the face to the family and friends of the deceased. It's rude and it's fucking pushing their religion on people who would never have consented in life.
It's not making one belief system more important than the other. It's recognizing that the belief system of a dead person is completely irrelevant and unaffected by that of a living person's whose very faith depends on a meaningless acknowledgement.
From my POV, it's stupid all the way around. I don't actively endorse the Mormons doing this sort of thing, because it is beyond a waste of time, but I don't see the need to get up in arms about it, either. It means literally nothing.
I don't agree. Why is one belief system more important than another? As an atheist and semi-Semite who had relatives who were gassed, I'm equally offended for the Jews and the non-believers, even though they're dead. The point is, it's a slap in the face to the family and friends of the deceased. It's rude and it's fucking pushing their religion on people who would never have consented in life.
It's not making one belief system more important than the other. It's recognizing that the belief system of a dead person is completely irrelevant and unaffected by that of a living person's whose very faith depends on a meaningless acknowledgement.
Therein lies the power dynamic. A person works her whole life toward self- definition, and an important part of that is negated when her belief system is rendered irrelevant because some people think that is the best way to honor and love her. Bah.
I think what rubs me the wrong way about it is that it seems like a power dynamic at play. They "claim" you-- and rather sneakily-- when you cannot reject it.
Again, Mormons believe the dead person can reject it, and could even keep the faith that they had in life (ie Jews) but without the endowments, the dead person could never reach the highest exhalation of heaven after accepting the true gospel of Christ. Why would someone who believe that condemn some they love to that fate?
It's not making one belief system more important than the other. It's recognizing that the belief system of a dead person is completely irrelevant and unaffected by that of a living person's whose very faith depends on a meaningless acknowledgement.
Therein lies the power dynamic. A person works her whole life toward self- definition, and an important part of that is negated when her belief system is rendered irrelevant because some people think that is the best way to honor and love her. Bah.
Meh. It's not rendered irrelevant because of the survivors. It's rendered irrelevant by the fact that they are dead. No matter what, any baptism is going to change what happened when they died.
Post by heightsyankee on Jun 23, 2012 7:45:01 GMT -5
OK, maybe a different anecdote will work.
My grandmother (was Catholic) and didn't want any kind of funeral or viewing. She had cancer and was a shell of herself by the time she died. Instead, we had a few friends to her house for a "party" and that was it. She was cremated and her ashes were buried next to my grandfather, per her last instructions to us.
So, now imagine that I came on her, independent of this conversation,a and posted:
My grandmother died. She didn't want a funeral or viewing and didn't want to be buried in a casket. My family discussed it and we don't care that those were her dying wishes. Instead, we're going to have a big Catholic mass and then, after the viewing, we're going to bury her in a casket. I know this isn't what she wanted but we feel we know better than her. We know that her after life will be more rewarding for having a final mass and having her body buried, rather than ashes. She thought that cancer had already destroyed her body but we disagree. We just want to do it our way because, after all, she's dead so it doesn't matter what she chose in life. We get to do whatever we want.