Skip to main content

View Diary: Elie Wiesel Suffered Incomprehensibly, Haley. Mitt Didn't. Knock it Off. (114 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  That is all true but you haven't answered (0+ / 0-)

    the question, and I really want to know.    Of course Jews suffered terribly, not just in the Holocaust but in Pogroms all across Europe and Russia before and even after the Holocaust.   Some of those killed had children who survived and eventually came to America.   Some of their children decided to become Mormons.   Why should those children be denied to participate in a silly Mormon ritual simply because their great-grandparents were Jewish?   It is not a trivial matter to tell the religion of somebody born back in the 1600s, especially if they were Jewish.  Do you want the Mormons to deny the rite of parental baptism on the basis of "Jewish sounding" names?

    Yes, I understand the parallels with the forced baptisms of Pope Gregory or whoever the hell he was but those were baptisms of people who were alive.   It had consequences to them.   This is just some stupid ritual for those who are dead and gone, and it makes the people (who are of Jewish ancestory) feel better.   It is not a minor thing to the Mormons, as far as I can tell the baptism of the dead is their main thing.  

    I'm sure that if the Mormons said "screw it" and blacklisted everybody who had a Jewish ancestor there would be outrage, and I would help fan the flames of it.   But to be a good Mormon you have to baptise your ancestors, so if you are denying a Jewish person who becomes a Mormon full rights in that religion.   This issue has to be thought about -- a ghetto is still a ghetto whether it is imposed from the outside or the inside.

    I'm not defending Issa because I don't think that the discomfort with the Mormon practices rises to the level of bigotry -- but I certainly see a lot of anti-Mormon bigotry and uninformed commentary here.     That is not the kind of thinking that we should be encouraging for obvious reasons.  

    •  Not playing nt (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      elwior, Mets102, NonnyO

      In our sleep, pain which cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart until, in our own despair, comes wisdom through the awful grace of God ~RFK

      by vcmvo2 on Fri Apr 27, 2012 at 08:42:36 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  false equivalence? (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      askew, elwior, Mets102, NonnyO, vcmvo2
      Suppose that the Mormon church said that no relatives of Jews could particpate in the proxy baptism (which is one of their most sacred things, 1/3 of the temple is devoted to it.)   I think we would all see that as anti-Semitic.
      are you saying that all the post-mortum baptisms are only of relatives or direct ancestors? If not your example of anti-semitism don't hold water.

      a previous commenter said...

      Daniel Pearl? His parents were upset, as was his wife. Is he a bigot? Are they?

      Ann Frank? Is she a bigot?

      Simon Weisenthal and his wife - a famed Nazi hunter who brought criminals to justice. Is he a bigot?

      are you claiming it was their grandchildren who did the baptisms? They are very obviously Jews, no guesswork is involved. Why were they posthumously baptised?

      As I stated above, I'm no expert so perhaps someone who is can shed some light on the whole thing.

      America could have chosen to be the worlds doctor, or grocer. We choose instead to be her policeman. pity

      by cacamp on Fri Apr 27, 2012 at 09:09:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes (according to Mormons) only relatives baptize (0+ / 0-)

        That is the whole point.   I used to wonder if they were trying to baptize everybody in history and how they planned to do it before the universe expired (it is one physical baptism per person.)   But it turns out that this is a family ritual; you spend time figuring out who your ancestors were and then you go and get baptised for each one who is not living and is not a Mormon.   That is what the genealogy is about.  Then you get sealed to them so that you are one big happy family.   (And now you know about all that goes on at a temple, at least as far as they will tell a non-Mormon.)

        I do not believe that it is limited to the "direct" family line, so you can be baptised for Uncles, cousins, etc.   I do not know if there are limits (I didn't think to ask when I visited the temporarily-open temple in Missiouri) so in theory since everybody is related... but practically it is difficult to get too far removed from your direct line because the uncertanties exceed even the levels that the Mormons will accept.   Many family trees are pretty much fiction because they are created from such indrect evidence.   Women are very hard to track.

        So I believe that you could be baptized for a great-Uncle by marriage and if his parents were murdered in Germany by the Nazis, you could end up baptizing a Holocaust survivor.

        Honestly it would be difficult for them to ensure that they never baptized a Holocaust victim (although some here seem offended that they baptize any Jewish person.)   The Germans didn't keep records of everybody that they killed, some were just lined up and shot in ditches.    One could try to infer from where they lived that they might have been shot but now you are casting a wide net and denying many people with ancestors from Germany and Poland the right to baptize their ancestors based on a possibility.   Obviously, they will be upset..

        Now posthumous baptism is a real issue, but if you want to use it in an argument (and I think it is a bad idea and morally suspect to boot) you have to be able to defend it -- especially a hell of a lot better than I have the argument supported here.   You are up against two of the best groups of arguers in the planet -- the Israeli right wing (Netanyahou is Romney's BFF from way back) and Mormons.    If it becomes all about religion, then Romney probably wins.

        Barbor calling Weisnenthal a "bigot" is pure gold for us but keep it focused on that.

      •  so you're saying Pearls relatives did it? (0+ / 0-)

        as a young Jew he didn't have many direct decendants, it all sounds as if there's a lot of "justification" going on for the practice of baptising famous Jews and other people. In fact I don't believe it at all now, it seems to be a construct of lies.

        As for the politics of it I think it's very good politics for Jews to loudly object both to the lies and to the practice. It's a mean spirited exercize in hate imo and should be stopped. Having a Mormon run for President is the perfect opportunity to expose both the practice and him. The fact that white evangelicals (Rmoneys base) will also be offended is another political bonus.

        America could have chosen to be the worlds doctor, or grocer. We choose instead to be her policeman. pity

        by cacamp on Sat Apr 28, 2012 at 02:53:12 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  you use a lot of words (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      elwior, Purple Priestess, Mets102, vcmvo2

      background on 1995 agreement

      the treatment of whistleblowers and watchdogs also says a lot.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (156)
  • Community (66)
  • Baltimore (48)
  • Bernie Sanders (37)
  • Civil Rights (36)
  • Culture (30)
  • Elections (24)
  • Freddie Gray (23)
  • Law (22)
  • Hillary Clinton (21)
  • Economy (21)
  • Education (21)
  • Rescued (20)
  • Racism (20)
  • Texas (19)
  • Labor (19)
  • Environment (18)
  • Politics (17)
  • 2016 (16)
  • Media (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site