"Midnight Mormons" Profanes Temple

[Lem]

The explanation given above for the Mormon baptism for the dead makes my point exactly. I understand that is a believer’s point of view, but it is still a rite that is openly disrespectful of the beliefs of others, and that disrespect obviates any need to “respect” it. Obviously we can respect the people who believe, but that doesn’t require one to accept the ritual without discussion or even spirited objection, “as the price of being considered 'civilized and humane' “ as Chap noted.

[Kishkumen]

I saw it, but what about it answers my question, if that indeed was your objective?

When Bill and Consigliere mock the temple, you don't voice concern. When Midnight Mormons use Bill and Consigliere's temple mockery (in a distasteful way, of course) for rhetorical and visual points, you express concern.

Is there a double standard here?

FFS, Sledge. Don't just make a blanket accusation. First, establish that they have done what you accuse them of doing, and then ask me whether I was aware of it. Don't come out of the gate half-cocked accusing me of not being consistent. You really just don't know. That is rhetorical BS.

[Kishkumen]

Like I said - I make my views plain without concealment or concession in the public square of a discussion board. And so do you. And like you said, if we had the time and inclination to continue this discussion, we would have to argue out our views and neither one of us would expect our say-so alone to establish anything. What's not to like?

You say:

I expect civilized and humane people to respect the sacred rites of all people.

Permit me to say that don't believe that you really expect me (for instance) to respect the sacrificial rites of the Aztec sun-cult (OK, the priests of that religion were massacred a while back, but don't dead people get their rites respected?), or the religiously motivated mutilation of girls' genitals - as the price of being considered 'civilized and humane'. Some rites are more respectable than others, are they not?

To the contrary, you don't make silly little jokes about human sacrifice and genital mutilation, do you? I think that is why the idea of respect and making light are bundled together in this instance. There is nothing funny about the prospect of human sacrifice or genital mutilation, and that is why we respect what is at stake even when we express criticism and disagreement. We can talk about human sacrifice and genital mutilation as being objectionable in principle and in fact with out watching videos of human sacrifice and genital mutilation. Right?

[Kishkumen]

Speaking of dead people getting their rites respected, an example that involves the Mormon temple comes to mind, that is, baptism for the dead. I would assume Mormons consider that to be one of their sacred rites, but in my opinion it is a rite that is openly disrespectful of the beliefs of others. Simply because a rite is considered sacred by some is not sufficient reason to respect it. And especially so if that sacred rite causes harm.

I believe it is possible to disagree and to criticize without mocking and profaning. We can disagree with LDS people about the impact of baptism for the dead, but that does not give us a free pass to mock and to profane. Furthermore, I think it is a tacit acknowledgment that what is at stake is sacred that issue is taken with the practice. Now, I would disagree with you that baptism for the dead is intentionally disrespectful, if that is what you are saying. It is received as disrespectful, despite the fact that it is not intended to be so. That is a sticky issue, and it is not clear to what degree anyone can claim ownership of the dead. If I were a convert to Mormonism from Judaism, and I desired baptisms to be performed for my Jewish ancestors, should I not act on my belief because others among my people are offended by it?

It seems to me this is a much more difficult issue that such simple prohibitions allow for.

[Analytics]

In general, I believe we shouldn't be rude to other people. But it seems that laughing at something is healthier than scouring the Internet for things to be offended at.

I happen to follow @abrahampiper on TikTok. He has about 1.2 million followers right now. He is a wicked-smart guy that is the son of a bigshot Evangelical preacher in Minnesota. As a teenager he wanted to follow in his father's footsteps and be a minister, but became a free thinker around the age of 20. IMHO, he really has his head screwed on straight with his attitude about life and is worth following. "Come along if you feel like it!"

A few days ago he said the following, which I think is so good I'm going to transcribe it below.

If you want to get the full effect, here is a link to the 59-second video:

https://www.tiktok.com/@abrahampiper/vi ... _webapp=v1

We haven't had a good laugh at white evangelicalism for a while and we're not gonna today either. BUT I wanted to share a couple of reasons why if we felt like it, it would be totally fine. First, if the topic of this video interests you, it's not at all unlikely that you either used to be or are a white American evangelical, in which case laughing at it is just laughing at yourself. I can laugh at Minnesotans guilt free. I can laugh at people who moved to LA and gave up within two years. I can laugh at people who live in their van and try to make a living playing their guitar even though they drink too much to remember any of their songs. I can laugh at all of that because that's either me or used to be me. So if you're an evangelical or you used to be, laughing at it is just laughing at yourself. Nobody should get on your case about that.

And here's the second reason for everyone. When you're laughing at white American evangelicalism, you're always punching up. No matter how much they fetishize being persecuted, they're not.

Lastly, and this is the third reason, Evangelicalism is a system. It's a set of beliefs. It's a culture. So laughing at it is not laughing at a person.

Whether or not you make fun of an individual, that's a totally different question.

With all that said, we will have a good laugh at it here soon. Come along if you feel like it!

[consiglieri]

Great stuff, Analytics!

Thanks for sharing!

[Kishkumen]

In general, I believe we shouldn't be rude to other people. But it seems that laughing at something is healthier than scouring the Internet for things to be offended at.

Sure, it is unhealthy to scour the internet for things that cause offense. The fact that Midnight Mormons scoured the internet to throw together a random selection of offensive material in order to stir up their audience to hate Bill Reel and RFM is more offensive to me than the fact that people seek to offend. What they were doing was both dishonest and offensive, not to mention demagogic.

That said, laughing at a system not a person is frankly an unconvincing dodge.

[Dr Moore]

I would think you must first establish where RFM has mocked the temple.

I have read one article by RFM in which he makes a very respectful, indeed a faith-promoting, case that the temple ceremony represents a metaphor for one's own journey through life.

Is Sledge hypothesizing that you two must surely be temple mockers? My experience with RFM is that he is, if anything, a temple protector.

[Sledge]

Bill and Consig no longer believe.

Kwaku and his gang are still pretending to.

So huge enormous double standard, then? Okay. I guess as long as you acknowledge that.

[drumdude]

Bill and Consig no longer believe.

Kwaku and his gang are still pretending to.

So huge enormous double standard, then? Okay. I guess as long as you acknowledge that.

Why should we care when self professed Mormons are not holding themselves to the standards of their own religion?