You think that any claim has to be honored on its face. I don't.
I’m unsure as to how you’ve reached that very broad conclusion about what I think outside of my views on the topic at hand. That is, a person’s ancestors' details being harvested so that Mormons can do Mormon things without consideration for how those living relatives might feel about it. I think people who feel harmed, offended, put out etc by that process being done using their deceased relatives details should have those feelings honoured.
To act on that standard would result in absurd outcomes. I have tried to point that out, but you have ignored these attempts for the most part. There is no way to operate in this world to the satisfaction of everyone with an opinion. You do the best you can, but there comes a point where you have to be true to yourself and not just cede ground anytime someone demands that you do.
We’re not talking about people being offended by having to pay taxes.
I’m unsure as to how you’ve reached that very broad conclusion about what I think outside of my views on the topic at hand. That is, a person’s ancestors' details being harvested so that Mormons can do Mormon things without consideration for how those living relatives might feel about it. I think people who feel harmed, offended, put out etc by that process being done using their deceased relatives details should have those feelings honoured.
Because your views, if consistently held, lead to certain outcomes. If they aren't, then one has to ask what your special beef against the Mormons is.
We’re not talking about people being offended by having to pay taxes.
We may as well. At least they ended up with less money as a result of paying them.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
By comparison, I find LDS vicarious ordinances in the temple to be almost humorously benign. Let's stick with worrying about more substantive harms than a bunch of religious people doing rituals you don't believe in behind the closed doors of their religious buildings. Rituals that cause no injury and have no efficacy if you don't believe in them.
You’re fine with it. You don’t feel injured by it. Okay. That’s great. No need to discuss your feelings about it any further. Let’s get back to talking about those people who do feel harmed by it. Should the church ignore the thoughts and feelings of those people (not you) and press on with harvesting names and having members ritually and symbolically baptise them into Mormonism?
You’re fine with it. You don’t feel injured by it. Okay. That’s great. No need to discuss your feelings about it any further. Let’s get back to talking about those people who do feel harmed by it. Should the church ignore the thoughts and feelings of those people (not you) and press on with harvesting names and having members ritually and symbolically baptise them into Mormonism?
My argument is a general plea to everyone to concern themselves with more substantive harms. It is not just about my feelings on one issue, IHAQ.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
I’m unsure as to how you’ve reached that very broad conclusion about what I think outside of my views on the topic at hand. That is, a person’s ancestors details being harvested so that Mormons can do Mormon things without consideration for how those living relatives might feel about it. I think people who feel harmed, offended, put out etc by that process being done using their deceased relatives details should have those feelings honoured.
Because your views, if consistently held, lead to certain outcomes. If they aren't, then one has to ask what your special beef against the Mormons is.
Nope. Not having that. You’re suggesting that, if I take a view that the feelings of relatives who object to their loved ones names being used without permission in Mormon rituals should be respected, then I must also take the view that people who are offended by paying taxes should receive equal empathy from me. You can’t be serious.
Let me play it back to you - if you take the position that people who feel harmed by Mormon rituals using their ancestors names without position are wrong to feel harmed, then you must equally take the position that anyone run over by a car has no right to feel harmed.
You’re fine with it. You don’t feel injured by it. Okay. That’s great. No need to discuss your feelings about it any further. Let’s get back to talking about those people who do feel harmed by it. Should the church ignore the thoughts and feelings of those people (not you) and press on with harvesting names and having members ritually and symbolically baptise them into Mormonism?
My argument is a general plea to everyone to concern themselves with more substantive harms. It is not just about my feelings on one issue, IHAQ.
You've done it again. It’s not about what you feel is a more substantive harm. You’re making a general plea to everyone to concern themselves with what you have decided are more substantive harms.
You've done it again. It’s not about what you feel is a more substantive harm.
Indeed, it is a recommendation that we have a discussion about what constitutes the level of harm we should actually be concerned about. My entry in that discussion is that the LDS temple ritual does not rise to the level of something we really want to bother with. I do not accept as a rational response that whatever someone claims harms them should be respected and change the behavior of everyone else.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
Nope. Not having that. You’re suggesting that, if I take a view that the feelings of relatives who object to their loved ones names being used without permission in Mormon rituals should be respected, then I must also take the view that people who are offended by paying taxes should receive equal empathy from me. You can’t be serious.
Let me play it back to you - if you take the position that people who feel harmed by Mormon rituals using their ancestors names without position are wrong to feel harmed, then you must equally take the position that anyone run over by a car has no right to feel harmed.
Bonkers.
LOL!!! No, I would say that anyone who pays taxes or is run over by a car has a lot more claim to feeling harmed than someone whose great-great grandfather's name was used to perform vicarious ordinances in the temple. If we can agree on that, then we are making some progress.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
You've done it again. It’s not about what you feel is a more substantive harm.
Indeed, it is a recommendation that we have a discussion about what constitutes the level of harm we should actually be concerned about. My entry in that discussion is that the LDS temple ritual does not rise to the level of something we really want to bother with. I do not accept as a rational response that whatever someone claims harms them should be respected and change the behavior of everyone else.
Okay. You don’t think “we” should be bothering to discuss the thoughts and feelings of people who feel harmed by having their ancestors' names harvested for Mormon rituals. So don’t bother discussing it then. Nobody is forcing you to discuss it.
Nope. Not having that. You’re suggesting that, if I take a view that the feelings of relatives who object to their loved ones names being used without permission in Mormon rituals should be respected, then I must also take the view that people who are offended by paying taxes should receive equal empathy from me. You can’t be serious.
Let me play it back to you - if you take the position that people who feel harmed by Mormon rituals using their ancestors' names without position are wrong to feel harmed, then you must equally take the position that anyone run over by a car has no right to feel harmed.
Bonkers.
LOL!!! No, I would say that anyone who pays taxes or is run over by a car has a lot more claim to feeling harmed than someone whose great-great grandfather's name was used to perform vicarious ordinances in the temple. If we can agree on that, then we are making some progress.
