[MysticCat]

Originally posted by RACooper
Now to put this in context - if they are determined to "baptize" Jews who have died... does that mean that they are "baptizing" Jews that died during the Holocaust? I'd hope that no one thinks that that is even remotelt acceptable - even a proxy baptisim insults the faith of those that died for their faith and those that died as firm believers.

Yes. It was the Jewish community learning that proxy baptisms were being performed "for" victims of the Holocaust that lead to this dispute to begin with and to the agreement that apparently is now not being honored.

Personally I'm looking into this here in Canada - if the Mormons are participating in this reprehensible act I will be more than happy to lend my voice to those advocating that the 'church' be charge for violating the tenents, if not the legality, of the freedom and respect of religious freedom here.

I'm sure you'll find that they do it in Canada, too. It's a religious obligation for observant Mormons. Which means that by seeking to have them "charged" for violating religious freedoms, one would have to violate their religious freedoms.

And while I'll agree that, particularly as regards some groups, such as the Jews, this particular practice is beyond insensitive, I simply don't see a basis for charges that the practice violates any non-Mormon's religious freedom. As has been said before, unless you believe that what they are doing has some effect -- which I think only an observant Mormon would believe -- it's a meaningless act.

It saddens me that these "people" have taken it upon themselves to assume that they are the final arbitor of what is the correct faith - and then force that belief upon others, in life and in death... this even surpases the decidely criminal actions of my own Church (Catholic) during the Crusades - at least the Catholic Church allowed the dead to remain true to their faith. These assholes haven't even afforded the dead that....

Proxy baptism doesn't "force" anything, even if the Mormon understanding of it is accepted. Again, the Mormon belief is that the dead person must both accept the Gospel (as understood by the LDS) and be baptised in order to enter to "higher" levels of paradise. Proxy baptism satisfies the second requirement but not the first. So if Observant Mormon undergoes a proxy baptism for John Doe, who has been dead for 20 years, but John Doe, "on the other side," still does not "accept the Gospel," the proxy baptism alone has not done anything. Even under Mormon theology, the choice is still up to John Doe -- it's just that the fact that he was not baptised (according to Mormon rites) while on Earth is not an impediment should John Doe, after death, choose to "accept the Gospel." On the other hand, should John Doe "accept the Gospel" after death, that alone will not do him any good until a proxy baptism is performed for him.