The other day on RfM I saw a link to a story that had a link to a secretly recorded video of part of the LDS temple ceremony. After "Liking" the post on Facebook I was chastised by a "friend" for my lack of respect of something he holds to be sacred. Personally, I find the LDS temple ceremony to be extremely offensive and I would never have participated in it had I known what it was before going.

If someone claims that incest is sacred do I have to respect that as well?

What are your thoughts?

Personally, I stay away from politics and religion on facebook.

This is part of the secret/sacred debate with mormons. This is what I would have said --

Just because something is sacred, does not mean it can't be discussed. More importantly, the lds church has over 50,000 missionaries selling mormonism to people all over the world, and those people have a right to know what goes on in a mormon temple before they join. I didn't have this information and was appalled when I later found out about the temple ceremonies. You say sacred; I say lying by omission. We'll have to agree to disagree.

But it's silly for him to expect you to respect his beliefs if they're senseless and/or fraudulent.

Respect individuals and their rights.

As for beliefs? Respect the ones that are respectable.

Mormons do not respect beliefs that don't match their own or they wouldn't have a missionary program to change those beliefs.

Another argument against the sacred claim:

The lds church believes everyone should hear about mormonism (hence, missionaries, every member a missionary and baptism for the dead). The temple ceremonies are part of their "restored" gospel. I would argue the church has an obligation to talk about the temple ceremonies. If the church won't talk about the temple ceremonies, then others will, and the church leaves itself open to ridicule.

Other religions may have sacred ceremonies or clothing, but they're not selling their religions to others the way mormons do.

When you look at how the church sells its product, just how sacred can it be?

This is what I ended up posting as a response:

Had I known what goes on in the temple before I went I would have never, ever, ever, gone. It's too bad the video doesn't show the pre-1990 verson with everyone taking blood oaths and swearing to slit their throats and disembowel themselves before revealing the secrets of the temple ceremony. Are you going to send the Danites to "Blood Atone" me like Brigham Young would have done? Once again, though, you're killing the messenger.

I also added:

Why do you feel the need to run to the defense of your church all the time? Why can't your god defend his own church?

Normally I say we should respect all beliefs, including weird ones.

But in the case of the temple ceremony the cat is out of the bag. It is on the internet and is therefore fair game for discussion.

There's no reason to respect ridiculous beliefs; one need only respect the person who holds them and his/her right to hold them.

Nothing you do or say will ever make them happy unless you publicly agree with them, and even then they'll find fault.

I Nazi Germany some people felt they were Divinely called to shove Jews in ovens.

Should you "respect" that?

Southern White Churches preached straight from the Bible that Negroes were inferior creatures, and that slavery was a Divine Commandment of God designed so that the righteous Master could rescue these ignorant inferiors through Christianity.

Should you "respect" that?

Until late in the 1970s, "no African-American could stay at the LDS church-owned Hotel Utah. . . . America's beloved contralto . . . Marian Anderson 'was allowed to stay . . . on condition that she use the freight elevator.' . . . Nobel Peace Prize recipient Ralph Bunche was allowed to stay . . . only after [he] agreed to use the freight elevator, 'have his meals in his room & not come to the dining room.'"
"1st Presidency secretary informed a white Mormon that 'The LDS Hospital here in Salt Lake City has a blood bank which does not contain any colored blood.'"
Then-Apostle Ezra T. Benson "approved the use of one of his talks as the forward to the overtly racist book 'Black Hammer' . . . . Subtitled 'White Alternatives,' [it] warned about the 'well-defined plans for the establishment of a Negro Soviet dictatorship in the South'. . . . [He] instructed BYU students about 'black Marxists' & 'the Communists & their Black Power fanatics.'"
http://exmormon.org/d6/drupal/Racist-history-of-the-Mormon-Church-and-Mitt-Romney

Should you "respect" that?

In a practice that takes place during a ceremony known as the bris, a circumcision practitioner, or mohel, removes the foreskin from the baby's penis, and with his mouth sucks the blood from the incision to cleanse the wound.

New York City is now investigating the death last September of a baby who contracted herpes after a "ritual circumcision with oral suction," in an ultra-Orthodox Jewish ceremony known in Hebrew as metzitzah b'peh.

After a German court ruled that that circumcising young boys on religious grounds amounts to bodily harm, conservative Jewish and Muslim groups banded together to protest this assault of logic on their "holy" traditions.

Should you "respect" that?

These people don't have a higher moral code. They wrap themselves in power and tradition and heritage and with those practice terrorism on reason and logic.

Respect a person's right to believe whatever bullshit nonsense they want to believe, but that doesn't mean you have to respect the belief.

This is why I couldn't make it work with the JW I dated a few years ago. He expected me to respect his belief system. I could respect his right to believe in it, but I couldn't respect JW doctrine. No way that was ever gonna happen. And, the respect didn't go both ways. He could spout off whatever he wanted, but if I tried to talk about my beliefs I'd be shouted down or he'd just shut down and go on attack mode about how I didn't respect his beliefs.

Meh. He wasn't worth trying to make it work.

I think you can respect a person's right to believe stupid things but you don't have to respect the stupid thing itself. Religion though, especially Mormonism, is easier to understand if you think of it as the person's lover - not the person's religion. Mormons have the same, irrational love for the "bad boy" religion that teenagers have for the boyfriend their parents hate. Therefore, you can't make the comments you want to make about the religion/boyfriend - because you'll just drive the Mormon/teenager further into their lover's arms. They will defend their religion/lover the way a teen would make excuses for the exact behaviors they themselves told their "boyfriend" to knock off. But it's one thing to be mad at your significant other - it's another thing for someone else to criticize them. Mormonism IS the significant other for Mormons and some of them are just head over heels in love. So while you don't have to respect or like the bad boyfriend - heck, you probably deplore the bad boyfriend - you have to realize your Mormon is in love and handle their weird obsession with that in mind.

I figure if, as Mormons say, they can hate the sin but love the sinner, then I should be allowed to love the friend but hate their beliefs.

Actually, I don't buy into the claim that we should respect other people's beliefs, sacred or otherwise. We can criticize non-religious beliefs and opinions, so why should religion be exempted? I think it's a BS defense believers created to keep the foolishness or craziness of their beliefs from being pointed out. They have no defense, so they place it all out of bounds. And it's totally F-ing hypocritical to demand unquestioning respect when the fundamental principle of proselytizing is that everyone else's beliefs suck.

You didn't disrespect their beliefs. You expressed an opinion that they can easily ignore.

It's not like you sucked this person in to a conversation that they found offensive, or sent them an email link to the video in question. You liked a post, fer cryin oulloud. If someone finds that offensive, they have too much time on their hands. Seriously, they can just block your feed and move on with their life.

I think you address the content of that belief, and you tell them that just because that belief is important to THEM, doesn't make it moral or right, or beyond contestation.

Mocking is rude. But saying "wow, I think this is scary or wrong, or opens up possibility for abuse" is acceptable."

The whole "sacred" thing is something that religions hide behind so their followers won't talk about the weirdness of the belief. Secrecy opens up the possibility for abuse and control.

Sorry, I don't give special privileges to any religion or religious belief. And respect is earned, not simply granted because someone whines about wanting it.

... as your Facebook friend has to be offended by your "liking" something displayed there. You have only expressed your opinion in an open forum just as your friend has.

In your friendliest voice possible, inform your freind that he has a right to find things sacred that you find offensive and that you have the same rights as him/her to express yourself on the subject.

Some beliefs are nonsense no matter what anyone thinks or believes. No one should be required to treat Scientology beliefs or Moonie beliefs with respect no matter how many people are drawn into believing them or how much they feel offended by others who criticize their mindless devotion. No one need respect incest or child molestors simply because they choose to justify these action with a religious kind of furvor or association.