5/3 So I watched "Frontline/American Experience" this week. The topic
was "The Mormons". I always knew the Mormons were a cult, but
they are even more cultish than I thought. I especially liked
the part about baptising dead Holocaust victims, which for
some reason Jewish people are not too happy about. I wonder why.
\_ Hi troll. This is the same PBS which refuses to show the special
they produced about fundamentalist Islam without islamic watchers.
-emarkp
\_ You know emarkp, this guy is just trying to bait you. Why
feed the troll?
\_ Are you accusing PBS of fabrications? Why am I not surprised.
\_ Biased reporting hardly requires fabrication.
\_ I don't think "biased reporting" is an issue. Either
the show is telling the truth about the origins
and customs of LDS or it isn't. Please give an example
of an instance in which you feel knowing "the other
side of the story" would put the LDS in a better light.
\_ No idea, I haven't seen the show. pp stated that
emarkp accused PBS of fabrications. That's
obviously not what emarkp said. Just pointing that
out. -!emarkp -pp
\_ *ASKED* if emarkp was accusing them of fabrications
\_ I would say the second sentence makes it a
pretty obvious accusation. Whatever.
\_ Do you still beat your wife? Why am I not
surprised.
\_ "Do you still beat your wife?" has the
a negative connotation no matter what
sentence follows it. There is no right
answer. That is not the case with the
question I asked.
\_ Ok, fine. You're beating your wife now?
Why am I not surprised.
\_ Hi, emarkp, what parts of the PBS report on Mormonism were
inaccurate or reported in a biased fashion? --erikred
\_ Haven't watched it yet, however I was pointing out that it's
censoring a producer unless that documentary is vetted by the
very religion it was documenting. We nutty Mormons weren't
treated the same. I have the eps on DVR and will be watching
them later. -emarkp
\_ Huh? What producer was censored?
\_ http://csua.org/u/ilv
\_ What do you mean "vetted by the very religion it
was documenting"? I don't see any reference to
this. The article says the PBS wasn't happy with
the documentary and it was not produced for
"Frontline". I am having trouble understanding
your point here.
\_ That was about the Nation of Islam:
MARTYN BURKE, PRODUCER, "ISLAM VS. ISLAMISTS": Yes,
well, I`ll give you one example. We were doing an
investigative report on how the Nation of Islam, the
so-called black Muslims, in Chicago were being
funded by the Saudi Arabian fundamentalists through
the Saudi embassy in Washington, D.C. And PBS,
through WETA, the flagship station in Washington,
appointed an adviser to oversee our efforts, and
that adviser was from the Nation of Islam.
Interviewed on the Glenn Beck TV show.
http://csua.org/u/ilz
-emarkp
\_ Corroboration?
\_ That is an interview with the guy himself.
-emarkp
\_ Yes, understood. Now, is there
corroboration from anyone else? Any further
details? How can we fact-check this?
\_ Call PBS if you don't believe Burke.
-emarkp
\_ I googled "Martyn Burke PBS" and
haven't found one article or story
that can't be traced back to
http://azcentral.com. This is dangerous
and shoddy journalism. I'd like to
see a piece on this done by at least
one other source, preferably with an
attempt to ask PBS about it.
\_ Because that's the paper that
broke the story. I think you
confuse lack of interest from
other news source with lack of
journalistic integrity on the
part of azcentral. What is it
about the azcentral story that
makes it shoddy? (Beyond your
personal feelings, of course).
If anything, that lack of
interest from MSM is rather
telling.
\_ They "broke" the story in
an opinion piece.
\_ What is it with the trolls today?
\_ I am willing to believe that a couple of Mormons NOT
REPRESENTING THE ENTIRE MORMON CHURCH butchered some nice folk
in the 1800s, but I certainly do not believe the Mormons
run around axeing people anymore. Much like I don't think
the Pope is going to sack Istanbul. dunno what Islam has
to with this.
\_ I don't think the massacre was very controversial. It was
more a case of where the church is NOW that was scary.
That, and the bullpucky that it was founded on, which even
the LDS seems to regard as suspect. The attitude of the LDS
officials was one of "whether our religion is a steaming pile
of crap or not, it seems to work for people". I can see some
beauty and logic in that, but then call it what it is, which
is *not* Christianity or really much to do with Christians.
It is that aspect which, as a Christian, offends me. Don't
go baptising dead Jews. They're Jewish. If they want to be
LDS then they will be. Mormons do a lot more proselytizing
and act much more "holier than thou" than any other religion
I have ever encountered.
\_ Once I'm dead, I'm dead. If some Mormon or anyone else wants
to perform some ritual, what do I care? I'm dead. Let me
spell that out for you: D-E-A-D. Ok? --some random Jew
\_ Don't get out much do ya?
\_ I don't think the baptism for the dead thing works the
way you think it does. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptism_for_the_dead#Holocaust_victim_controversy
\_ What do you mean? It works exactly like they described
it does. You are posthumously baptising people who
may not want that. In fact, most don't.
\_ I was refering to the fact that the church itself
doesn't randomly do names, they have to be
submitted, usually by a descendant. If a mormon
decendent of holocaust victims wants to be baptised
for them, what right do you have to say they can't?
Beside that, how are you claiming to know what the
dead want? Are you John Edward or something?
Furthermore, see the last quote of that section,
the dead are not compelled to do anything in Mormon
theology.
\_ So says the LDS, but when their records are
examined it seems that that they are lying.
As for knowing what the dead want, if they
wanted to be Mormon then they would have been.
\_ Sigh, re-read wikiepdia and try again.
\_ Wikipedia is not the authoritative source
for this. Besides, did you read the part
about how they continue to find the names
of people like Hitler in the records?
\_ Ok, site an authoritative source.
Also still on the records != continues to
show up.
\_ Ok, site an authoritative source. Also
what exactly are you suggesting the
church do about this? Have a big list
of names no one is allowed to submit?
Talk about an intractable problem. I
guess it doesn't matter, I've seen
your opinion below, so I'm done.
\_ For crying out loud, we're not digging up bodies and
dunking them in water. We're not "posthumously
baptising" anyone. It's baptism **for** the dead, and
is an ordinance offered to them, which the person now
dead can accept or reject. -emarkp
\_ The whole concept is retarded and if you baptise
my dead relative without my consent I will personally
go over there and kick your ass. I don't mean to
resort to violence, but can't the LDS understand
why some people might not like this?! What if I
started baptising dead LDS members like Joseph
Smith and Brigham Young into Islam and created
altars to Mohammed with their names on them and
had suicide bombers paying homage to Joseph
Smith before they blew themselves up. I imagine
some LDS members would not care, but some probably
would not like that, right - and would ask the
question: "What the heck does Joseph Smith have
to do with Islam?"
\_ I wouldn't care one bit. I assume you think all
religion is retarded, so I really don't give a rip
what you think about one particular practice.
-emarkp
\_ I posthumously induct emarkp's great granddad
into the Ku Klux Klan. We'll be sure to list
him on our rolls of honor. -tom
\_ No, I don't think all religion is retarded.
I think baptising non-believers is
retarded and I think that even though the
Catholic Church did it to the Native
Americans. At least they were alive to
protest it, though.
\_ Again, we're not exuming someone and
baptizing their dead bodies, and you're an
idiot to keep claiming it. -emarkp
\_ What's the religious difference? There's
no difference as far as I can tell. So
there's a proxy body to make things
a little bit more sanitary.
\_ Ha ha. So, say your brother (or some such)
converts and wants to do baptisim for one of
your dead realatives, are you going to kick his
butt?
\_ Yes, I would.
\_ All right, cleared that up. Later.
\_ I usually ignore all of the 'Mormon theology is based
on a bunch of magic plates in a hillside arguments', who cares,
faith is faith, but putting stock in asking dead people
(emarkp, they're DEAD, they can't respond) their opinion
is pretty funny!
\_ In the context of religion, you do realize there's a concept of
life after death, right? -emarkp
\_ In traditional christianity, i don't think you have
any contact with dead people. maybe you hang out with them
in heaven. you don't get to ask them if they'd like
to be baptized into another religion. not too familiar
with what islam does. i think the ancestor worship
religions just worship the ancestors, they dont actually
talk to them.
\_ We don't claim to have contact with dead people to perform
proxy baptisms. -emarkp
\_ What's the name of your great grandparents? I'm going
to induct them into the Hashish Assassin cult I'm
starting up in my basement.
\_ Which proxy do you use? Squid? |