Daniel Peterson wrote:In whatever games you folks ultimately decide to play with this new toy, I hope you'll remember that you could quite conceivably get some people killed.
Because there is no reasoning with religious fanatics? You are right.
I think baptism for the dead is harmless and it would extremely annoying to say the least, and maybe a bit ironic, if Mormons are forced to discontinue the practice because of fear induced by a competing religion.
by the way, who do you think would most be in danger and why?
when believers want to give their claims more weight, they dress these claims up in scientific terms. When believers want to belittle atheism or secular humanism, they call it a "religion". -Beastie
yesterday's Mormon doctrine is today's Mormon folklore.-Buffalo
Yong Xi wrote:Who could killed over this discussion?
Oh, I don't know. How about some unsuspecting 19-year-old from Brigham City walking down the sidewalk in Salman Rushdie's neighborhood?
Perhaps those 19 year olds should stay home in Brigham City.
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
The Nehor wrote:Read the thread brainiac. Someone was suggesting contacting CAIR and giving them the names of those who submitted Muhammed. Let's not only publicize an emotive issue but let's also give any violent reactionaries actual targets.
Maybe you need to read the thread--someone suggested contacting CAIR and telling them proxy work had been done for Muhammed. Nobody said anything about forwarding the names of those who submitted Muhammed and others. The only mention made of the suggesters was by me, and I was suggesting, probably in vain, that they be removed from familysearch.org.
Not forwarding specific names would be even more damaging, if you ask me. Then one can define targets with the simple description: "Young American males dressed in white shirts, ties, with a black name badge and a backpack, walking in pairs down an alley in Amsterdam."
antishock8:
Yes, we might get someone killed. We should curtail our freedom of speech so that Islamic psychopaths don't get offended, and then decide to kill someone. And if a Muslim kills someone then it's partially our fault... For... Get ready... Talking.
No doubt you are the kind of genius who, after too many shots of Cuervo, will inform the burly guy next to you at the bar that he's a stupid bastard, just to exercise your freedom of speech.
Brilliant.
Besides, what do you and your buddies here at the Scratchtang Ranch care about some 19-year-old Mormon hick from Brigham City getting targeted by some angry Muslim in Barcelona? After all, nits make lice, right?
I think young Mormons should be in school rather than pestering people in Spain. No doubt you would place them in potential danger before suggesting they stay home and attend school. Regardless, you're a big pussy because you won't finish your discussion with Dart, and I find it offputting to even respond to something like you.
Are there any Mormons, anti-mormons, atheists, skeptics, fundamentalist christians who would like to marry a young muslim woman? Well, thanks to google ads, it's your lucky day! They've got plenty of them, complete with hijab, who are "ready for matrimony"!
Just how did the Jewish groups learn that ordinances had been done on deceased Jews' behalf, if one needs to be LDS, with a membership number, in order to get to that part of the Family History site?
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
Daniel Peterson wrote:In whatever games you folks ultimately decide to play with this new toy, I hope you'll remember that you could quite conceivably get some people killed.
I have to agree with Dr. Peterson and BCSpace on this one. Middle Eastern Islam is not something to be messing with right now, as evidenced by the cartoon fiasco a few years ago. Those people are crazy. Religious freedom is such a luxury here that we can mock and joke and poke fun back and forth without causing any real harm. But history has shown that Muslims have no sense of humor AT ALL when it comes to mocking their beliefs. I'm sure the LDS church is aware that any perceived offense to the Muslim community, particularly in the Middle East, could cause huge problems for them. Joking about submitting the Prophet Muhammed for temple work is funny on this forum, but a joke like that could backfire badly. Maybe I'm overreacting, but the religious fanatics over there make the religious debates here look like a tupperware party.
"We of this Church do not rely on any man-made statement concerning the nature of Deity. Our knowledge comes directly from the personal experience of Joseph Smith." - Gordon B. Hinckley
"It's wrong to criticize leaders of the Mormon Church even if the criticism is true." - Dallin H. Oaks
Daniel Peterson wrote:In whatever games you folks ultimately decide to play with this new toy, I hope you'll remember that you could quite conceivably get some people killed.
I have to agree with Dr. Peterson and BCSpace on this one. Middle Eastern Islam is not something to be messing with right now, as evidenced by the cartoon fiasco a few years ago. Those people are crazy. Religious freedom is such a luxury here that we can mock and joke and poke fun back and forth without causing any real harm. But history has shown that Muslims have no sense of humor AT ALL when it comes to mocking their beliefs. I'm sure the LDS church is aware that any perceived offense to the Muslim community, particularly in the Middle East, could cause huge problems for them. Joking about submitting the Prophet Muhammed for temple work is funny on this forum, but a joke like that could backfire badly. Maybe I'm overreacting, but the religious fanatics over there make the religious debates here look like a tupperware party.
I wouldn't advocate as a general principle making an overt issue of this to any other religious group, as I'm not prone to seek out conflicts where none need exist (in real life, not necessarily on internet discussion boards).
That said, and to paraphrase something someone said some time ago, "We're in trouble when we allow those with no respect for freedom of speech to dictate to us what its limits ought to be."
The Islamic fanatics s can go f*** themselves as far as I'm concerned. In my opinion, every newspaper outlet in the West should have published the cartoons in solidarity to demonstrate that those of us who value freedom will not be cowed into limiting it by those who don't.
God . . . "who mouths morals to other people and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, . . . and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites this poor, abused slave to worship him ..."
Daniel Peterson wrote:In whatever games you folks ultimately decide to play with this new toy, I hope you'll remember that you could quite conceivably get some people killed.
I have to agree with Dr. Peterson and BCSpace on this one. Middle Eastern Islam is not something to be messing with right now, as evidenced by the cartoon fiasco a few years ago. Those people are crazy. Religious freedom is such a luxury here that we can mock and joke and poke fun back and forth without causing any real harm. But history has shown that Muslims have no sense of humor AT ALL when it comes to mocking their beliefs. I'm sure the LDS church is aware that any perceived offense to the Muslim community, particularly in the Middle East, could cause huge problems for them. Joking about submitting the Prophet Muhammed for temple work is funny on this forum, but a joke like that could backfire badly. Maybe I'm overreacting, but the religious fanatics over there make the religious debates here look like a tupperware party.
Who joked about submitting Muhammad's name for temple work?
Why is it that people who enjoy the freedoms we have aren't willing to preserve them at all costs in the face of an enemy who is more than willing to use our freedoms against us in order to subjugate us.? I think it's cowardice. If anyone, for any reason, is willing to compromise themselves in the face of jihad, then he deserves what he gets.
I wonder what our founding fathers might say when faced with this kind of tyranny...
Regardless, Muslims need to be challenged. They have a sense of entitlement for respect that is undeserved. Muhammed should be rightly designated a pedophile, murderer, polygamist, and bigot to go along with conqueror, statesman, and leader. No one should fear for his life when discussing the irrationality of Islam, Christianity, Mormonism, or any ideology for that matter.
Daniel Peterson wrote: This is an interesting topic. I know a lot about it. A lot.
If civil, substantive, non-demonizing discussion had been possible on this message board, I would have been happy to discuss this topic.
Daniel Peterson wrote:In whatever games you folks ultimately decide to play with this new toy, I hope you'll remember that you could quite conceivably get some people killed.
Wonderful..... you know a lot about it, but won't discuss it, but will tell us that conceivably some people could get killed. I don't believe you. I (like many Jews) find the practice of proxy baptism grossly insensitive and feel like telling those who may not know about it the potential status of some of their religious leaders (again, maybe just names submitted and no work done, I don't know). Do you think they won't find out somehow?
Here's your chance to stop me. Tell us what "a lot" you know so that I won't. I've got to tell you though, that I find it bizarre (to use a phrase punctuated through many of your online writings) that you find culpability in me or other message board slouches and not the church.