Or that they strictly follow waiting periods or any other rules of propriety when they dead dunk, when they do sealings and other proxy rituals, or for that matter when they submit names for the temple prayer ritual.

There is no comprehensive oversight to see that any consistent rules are followed. There are no consequences for those who don't follow expectations. And there is absolutely no program to teach these name submission rules to the membership. And no one even prtends that members should get permission before turning in names for the temple prayer list.

Good grief, if they dead dunk the same names multiple times (which is common) they certainaly don't draw any solid lines when it comes to getting permission from people while they're alive to dunk them later. No one loses ward standing or is called on the carpet for submitting too many names or for not waiting a full year to dunk someone, as if such a short wait makes it more acceptable.

Mormons were paying a few cents a name so they could dunk Russian Orthodox churchmembers in Moscow. Museums needed the funds and mormons needed the names for their dead dunking mills.

Mormons have agreed to stop dunking unauthorized Jewish names many times, but they go right back to the practice dunking Jews and anyone else willy-nilly. This includes redunking exed and resigned dead former members.

Don't explain to me how there are rules and that means mormons must be following those rules. The morg can't even force everyone to follow "commandments" with serious consequences of exing and difellowshipping. So it silly to assume that members strictly follow obscure fluctuating name submission rules which fewer than half of the members know.

The fact is that mormonism is the only church I know which is dependent on dead non-members for its existence. The morg couldn't extort tithes without the temple recommend requirements hanging over everyone's head. Getting and keeping that temple status is key to controlling the members and getting their money.

Of course the morg isn't going to clamp down or shut off the name supply. This is a major source of revnue for the coffers and power to control members

If there was an enforceable law they were breaking, like a privacy law or something, that people called them out on, there would be oversight. TSCC lawyers would be on the job fast creating oversight, but only some Jewish groups have tried to hold them accountable.

There are classes, and handbooks that instruct members on the rules. Conscientious researchers stay to the rules. I did. Some members do not care, and have their own motivations for doing what they do when they evade the rules. Sometimes it is even mistakes or ignorance, not deliberate.

No permission is required to add someone's name to the prayer roll.

They do not purposely recycle names. Names have been done repeatedly in the past by well meaning relatives who did not know the work had been done. Over the years databases were made accessible to members so they could check, and not redo work. TSCC put checks into TempleReady. If you put in an identical ancestor the program asks you if it is the same person as their match. Honest members will say yes, and not redo the work.

They do not buy names. They film records, and the records benefit people like me who want to know their family's history. It is because of filming in Russia I was able to research my family to the 1500's, and 1600's. I am still not done researching yet. I would never have known their ancestry past Russia, and the 1850's, if I did not have those records. The FHL is the only archive outside of Russia to have them, although there may be an archive in Germany now. The vast majority of those names have not been through the temple, and likely will not.

The FHL is the only library of its kind in the world. The genealogy program benefits people from all over the world, not just LD$. Genealogy groups, who are mostly nonmembers, meet here in conventions, and fly here from all over the U.S., and from around the world to research their family. They also order library films that are shipped to them.

I do agree with you that the temple is the revenue source of TSCC. All of xstianity holds salvation over the heads of its members, because they convince them they have the answers. TSCC takes it a step further. The genealogy program is not the source of the problem. The lying about salvation of the dead, and JS is the problem. Convincing people that the priesthood are the only valid representatives of gawd is the problem. Members would not be paying 10% if they did not believe in the priesthood, and in the lie. The temple tithing money machine will not go away until TSCC is revealed as a fraud.

I don't believe in your cause, and effect. Access to names is not driving TSCC. Doctrine, and belief in that doctrine is.

Other than what the people representing Holocaust survivors have done by holding TSCC accountable, it is nonsense to attack them for this, because they have freedom to practice their religion. Their involvement in politics seems shady to me. A challenge to their nonprofit status may have promise one day. There is plenty of evidence of TSCC being a fraud. That is a more compelling reason for TSCC to not exist than getting angry at the genealogy program, which is neutral, legal, and helps a lot of people who are not members.

You have a right to be angry, but I do not agree with where the anger is directed. It seems like a futile anger to me, when you could direct it towards things that really do harm - like the missionary program, involvement in politics, brainwashing, coverup of the fraud at its foundation, etc.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/24/2011 05:18AM by atheist&happy:-).

atheist&happy:-) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If there was an enforceable law they were
> breaking, like a privacy law or something, that
> people called them out on, there would be
> oversight. TSCC lawyers would be on the job fast
> creating oversight, but only some Jewish groups
> have tried to hold them accountable.

What nonsense. No made such a claim about some "law." This discussion is about moral decency and honesty.
>
> There are classes, and handbooks that instruct
> members on the rules. Conscientious researchers
> stay to the rules. I did. Some members do not
> care, and have their own motivations for doing
> what they do when they evade the rules. Sometimes
> it is even mistakes or ignorance, not deliberate.

Rules and handbooks mean very little. Few mormon "researchers" are as conscientious as you suggest.


>
> No permission is required to add someone's name to
> the prayer roll.

Of course no persission is required. That's the point. It ought to be.
>
> They do not purposely recycle names. Names have
> been done repeatedly in the past by well meaning
> relatives who did not know the work had been done.
> Over the years databases were made accessible to
> members so they could check, and not redo work.
> TSCC put checks into TempleReady. If you put in
> an identical ancestor the program asks you if it
> is the same person as their match. Honest members
> will say yes, and not redo the work.

Some of this recycling is inadvertent. Some of it is done merely to keep temples operational and thus buck up tithes.
>
> They do not buy names. They film records, and the
> records benefit people like me who want to know
> their family's history. It is because of filming
> in Russia I was able to research my family to the
> 1500's, and 1600's. I am still not done
> researching yet. I would never have known their
> ancestry past Russia, and the 1850's, if I did not
> have those records. The FHL is the only archive
> outside of Russia to have them, although there may
> be an archive in Germany now. The vast majority
> of those names have not been through the temple,
> and likely will not.

I don't care about your family any more than you care about me or my concerns.
>
> The FHL is the only library of its kind in the
> world. The genealogy program benefits people from
> all over the world, not just LD$. Genealogy
> groups, who are mostly nonmembers, meet here in
> conventions, and fly here from all over the U.S.,
> and from around the world to research their
> family. They also order library films that are
> shipped to them.

Most people in the general public have no idea that the mormon geneology program is all about descecrating the dead in mormon temple rituals. Satisfying curiosity about relatives is secondary.
>
> I do agree with you that the temple is the revenue
> source of TSCC. All of xstianity holds salvation
> over the heads of its members, because they
> convince them they have the answers. TSCC takes
> it a step further. The genealogy program is not
> the source of the problem. The lying about
> salvation of the dead, and JS is the problem.
> Convincing people that the priesthood are the only
> valid representatives of gawd is the problem.
> Members would not be paying 10% if they did not
> believe in the priesthood, and in the lie. The
> temple tithing money machine will not go away
> until TSCC is revealed as a fraud.
>
> I don't believe in your cause, and effect. Access
> to names is not driving TSCC. Doctrine, and
> belief in that doctrine is.

Access to names is very important to temple activity, to building revenue, and to keeping members in line. That's how the doctrine works for the morg.
>
> Other than what the people representing Holocaust
> survivors have done by holding TSCC accountable,
> it is nonsense to attack them for this, because
> they have freedom to practice their religion.
> Their involvement in politics seems shady to me.
> A challenge to their nonprofit status may have
> promise one day. There is plenty of evidence of
> TSCC being a fraud. That is a more compelling
> reason for TSCC to not exist than getting angry at
> the genealogy program, which is neutral, legal,
> and helps a lot of people who are not members.

I have as much right to practice *my* beliefs and express my opinions as mormons do.
>
> You have a right to be angry, but I do not agree
> with where the anger is directed. It seems like a
> futile anger to me, when you could direct it
> towards things that really do harm - like the
> missionary program, involvement in politics,
> brainwashing, coverup of the fraud at its
> foundation, etc.

I do have a right to be angry. But you have no right to claim to read minds. That's silly. Prove your claim of knowing my emotions and motivations. That's a flimsy way of diverting the discussion. Perhaps the anger is yours and you're blaming me for it. Who knows.

> What nonsense. No made such a claim about some
> "law." This discussion is about moral decency and
> honesty.

That is your opinion of moral decency, and honesty. There are no consequences like the ones you would like to see attached to *your* opinion. Laws have consequences, and can be enforced with results. I’m not stopping you. Be the change you want to be in the world. Why not campaign with members, and TSCC to hold them accountable to their own rules? If you are that outraged why not do something about it?

> Rules and handbooks mean very little. Few mormon
> "researchers" are as conscientious as you
> suggest.

That is an opinion. Personally in classes I took, and with other researchers, we frequently discussed the rules. Some enforcement is in the TempleReady program, because it does alert members to problems, before they can clear a name for work.

> Of course no persission is required. That's the
> point. It ought to be.

You want people to ask permission to pray for others?

> Some of this recycling is inadvertent. Some of it
> is done merely to keep temples operational and
> thus buck up tithes.

Names are not recycled to keep the temples open. That is what the extraction program is for.

> I don't care about your family any more than you
> care about me or my concerns.

I know you don’t care about my family. Some members, and former members like you have an intense hatred of genealogy that lingers. I said you have a right to be angry. I just think you are angry at something that is not productive, because freedom to practice religion exists in America.

> Most people in the general public have no idea
> that the mormon geneology program is all about
> descecrating the dead in mormon temple rituals.
> Satisfying curiosity about relatives is
> secondary.

This is a sweeping generalization. Most nonmembers I have met who know what temple work is are not offended. From my own family, my uncle, and cousin gave me permission to do temple work for two aunts of mine. One did not care, and the other was honored that I wanted to remember her, even though he does not believe. He was incredibly gracious for a nonreligious person to give me permission. He knew what ordinance work is about.

There is no desecration of the dead, just of the lives of the living.

You do not work at the library. Patrons are there to do actual family history research, because it is a central archive. Most archives are scattered, and you have to travel to each locality, and archive to do research. The FHL has records from all over the world in one place. IT IS THE ONLY ONE IN THE WORLD.

> Access to names is very important to temple
> activity, to building revenue, and to keeping
> members in line. That's how the doctrine works
> for the morg.

Once again I disagree. Temple work is not “inspired” or fueled by the existence of filmed records. If that were so all archives would be driving temple work by their existence. Do you want to destroy all records? Before the FHL, people did genealogy work from their own family records, by correspondence, and by traveling, and hiring researchers to travel in order to conduct research. Members did research the same way. The doctrine of eternal families, salvation for them, and the fact that it is all founded on a fraudulent priesthood is what drives them. They love their ancestors. You cannot stop that. You can only stop the reason they feel that way in the first place. I still care about preserving the memory of my ancestors, but I am an atheist, and do not do temple work, because I know it is garbage.

> I have as much right to practice *my* beliefs and express my opinions as mormons do.

Never said you didn’t.

> I do have a right to be angry. But you have no
> right to claim to read minds. That's silly.

I said you have a right to be angry at TSCC. What’s the point of your anger?
I never said I read minds. I said I do not agree with you.

> Prove your claim of knowing my emotions and
> motivations. That's a flimsy way of diverting the
> discussion.

I have diverted nothing. I never said I know your emotions, and motivations. I disagree with the wisdom of where you direct it, because I do not think it is productive to have anger at something you can do nothing about, and at something you know so little about.

I don’t think your wild assertions make exmos look credible. Members know about extraction. They know names are not recycled. If they read this they will think the exmos left, because they failed to understand what TSCC was about in the first place - because they were offended, and offended at things that do not exist. Claims like yours will make them feel very smug, and superior. I think it is important to get facts straight.

> Perhaps the anger is yours and you're
> blaming me for it. Who knows.

I have no anger, and am not blaming you for anything. You are reading too much into my words.

If the Mormon God was just He'd have a system in place that didn't require such a travesty. It is hurtful to many people.

You disagree?

That's fine with me. No problem.

I will continue to let people know that the mormon church (and you) don't respect those who don't want their names and reputations used in these ways.

People can use my ancestors' names however they want, because they are dead, and don't care either.

I can rephrase:

You are upset or miffed at mostly misinformation, at things that are not true. The key word is misinformation, and that is fact, not mindreading.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/24/2011 08:35AM by atheist&happy:-).

I don't like my name being misused. Many people agree with me and many don't. That's their right.

I plan to continue to spread this information to the public because many of them, like the Jewish community, agree with me. And I think that continued public outcries will eventually modify these church procedures if not in time for me possibly for others.

atheist&happy:-) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> People can use my ancestors' names however they
> want, because they are dead, and don't care
> either.


I agree. I'm not offended or angry. I don't care, and neither do the dead. It's symbolic, not literal anyhow.

People have been doing rituals for the dead for thousands and thousands of years. These rituals are very mild compared to those that dig up bones and dress up the deceased and other rituals for the dead.

Personally, I think some people make to much of other people's religious rituals. All religions have them. But that's just me.

SweetZ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> n/t
+1

+1

Hey, if dead people can vote in places like Chicago, I don't see why mormons can't pretend to baptise them. Sounds fair to me. lol

Many don't see it as a problem because ancestors are dead already. Atheists make a good logical argument.

But what about people whose traditions and beliefs involve what is called "ancestral worship"?

In the United States there are many non-Christian traditions. Some involve a year-long period of mourning at the end of which a ceremony is performed to "release the soul".

Temple proxy baptism overlaps with this due to the year long period after death before the ordinance can be performed.

Non-LDS families should not have to have their own ceremonies compete with mormon temple rituals.

A handful of LDS family members should have no right to highjack the dead loved one and submit them in for proxy work, timing it in conflict with traditional ceremonies.

Unlike the atheist, many traditional people see all religions of others as valid but do not want beliefs forced on them. They only want to be left alone to practice their own ways. Even the recently deceased are "stolen" from them sometimes by their own family members.

The dead of different centuries are also honored and even prayed to for guidance. The COJCOLDS has no concern for this. They argue that no one owns their ancestors. But to the traditional people, their sacred ones are being desecrated, maybe even disoriented in their post life.

Just another way to look at this.

anon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But what about people whose traditions and beliefs
> involve what is called "ancestral worship"?
>
> In the United States there are many non-Christian
> traditions. Some involve a year-long period of
> mourning at the end of which a ceremony is
> performed to "release the soul".
>
> Temple proxy baptism overlaps with this due to the
> year long period after death before the ordinance
> can be performed.

It is an interesting conflict of religious belief if it happened. Whose religious freedom wins?

It is not common for work to be done exactly one year to the day from a death. That could be difficult, because temples are not open all days of the week, especially in remote locations. One year is a minimum requirement. I don’t see competition for several reasons:

1. If they need to ask permission, the traditional family members can deny it or allow it at another time - no need for conflict.
2. If they do not need to ask permission, then they have every right to practice their religion, as insensitive as it may be.
3. The traditional family members would not be at the temple when it was done. Where is the conflict there other than conflicts of opinion?

> Non-LDS families should not have to have their own
> ceremonies compete with mormon temple rituals.

If the family belonged to two religions, why is your prejudice towards LD$ only?

> A handful of LDS family members should have no
> right to highjack the dead loved one and submit
> them in for proxy work, timing it in conflict with
> traditional ceremonies.

Why are the LD$ family members hijacking, and not the other way around? That is insensitivity of family members if they purposely schedule a conflict. Even so, why would the traditional members want to stand outside a temple? That is not participation. How can it conflict if the traditional family cannot participate? This is a family dispute, not an argument against why LD$ should not be allowed to do their ordinance work.

> Unlike the atheist, many traditional people see
> all religions of others as valid but do not want
> beliefs forced on them. They only want to be left
> alone to practice their own ways. Even the
> recently deceased are "stolen" from them sometimes
> by their own family members.

There is no forcing of beliefs or stealing people, because even LD$ theology says the deceased choose to accept or reject TSCC in the spirit world. That would be a religious misunderstanding, and a family conflict. Both have their religious freedom.

> The dead of different centuries are also honored
> and even prayed to for guidance. The COJCOLDS has
> no concern for this. They argue that no one owns
> their ancestors. But to the traditional people,
> their sacred ones are being desecrated, maybe even
> disoriented in their post life.
>
> Just another way to look at this.

They need to find a way coexist. Your example sounds like two generations warring. Religions offend each other. Welcome to history.

TSCC does not justify work by telling people they do not own their ancestors, even though we do not own them. They encourage members to seek out their ancestors, and we all share ancestors at some point. Like I said, according to LD$ theology you cannot “disorient” them against their will, and if they could change like that on the other side, how would the living know the people they were praying to did not become Catholic or abandon belief altogether? Maybe they could pray to all of them, and take a poll, because they would be more likely to get an answer from the imagined bias of their traditional religion. I don't mean this as disrespect towards a traditional religion, just to show the absurdity of making assumptions about what people would be like if they lived after death. People change in life, and if they lived after death they could change then also. Since you say they believe in such change after death, they have no guarantees of what their ancestors represent regardless of LD$ ordinance work. I don't see a point there other than bias.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/24/2011 10:22AM by atheist&happy:-).

Ancestral names are sacred to many traditional indigenous people in the Americas. The LDS harvest these names from documents. They use the extraction program as well as converted tribal people. In the United States the census records are government documents. Even nineteenth century church records from Indian agencies were government sponsored. Churches on agencies were government programs.

Since 1990 the NAGPRA has become law. Government owned property falls within that law. Census records and agency church records for name extraction has not been addressed yet in the courts. The records are open for public access but maybe the time is becoming ripe to seek legal limitations on what the LDS can do with those records. Nobody has pushed this issue with documents and the LDS yet, but taking of names from government sources and performing religious ceremonies with those sacred ancestors could end up in the U.S. supreme court. It hasn't been filed in courts yet.

anon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ancestral names are sacred to many traditional
> indigenous people in the Americas.

> The LDS harvest
> these names from documents. They use the
> extraction program as well as converted tribal
> people.

Most extraction is done in areas with higher LD$ ancestry like England or the U.S. Converts can practice their religion.

> In the United States the census records
> are government documents. Even nineteenth century
> church records from Indian agencies were
> government sponsored. Churches on agencies were
> government programs.

What is the point here?

> Since 1990 the NAGPRA has become law. Government
> owned property falls within that law. Census
> records and agency church records for name
> extraction has not been addressed yet in the
> courts. The records are open for public access but
> maybe the time is becoming ripe to seek legal
> limitations on what the LDS can do with those
> records. Nobody has pushed this issue with
> documents and the LDS yet, but taking of names
> from government sources and performing religious
> ceremonies with those sacred ancestors could end
> up in the U.S. supreme court. It hasn't been filed
> in courts yet.

These are not artifacts, but names. How are you going to legislate spirits, even if they did live on? Seriously? What if your ancestor's spirit wanted ordinance work done? If converts are extracting records, then it is reasonable to assume their dead, if they lived on, would also convert. This is just bias. As much as we dislike TSCC, they have freedom of religion too.

Census records are public after 72 years. Are these LD$ church records or missions of other churches?

LD$ can go anywhere for extraction, and they like white people. It is an absurd stretch of reasoning to say they will have a great financial benefit from a few extracted public access records that happen to be Indian. Most temple work is done for Europeans, and Americans - the ancestors of LD$, and that would continue regardless. Like I said, if Indians believe their ancestors can change their minds, then they have no guarantees that they have not already changed their minds. They cannot claim LD$ relatives are disturbing ancestors like a static burial site if they have free will. Who would believe, that if we lived on after death, we would not have free will? Who would argue that one gawd can imprison or corrupt the ancestors who worship other gawds. You admit theirs is more powerful. Do you want to argue in court that xstian sky daddy is more powerful than your indigenous deities? Can courts set boundaries for all powerful imaginary beings or even hypothetically if they were real? Isn't the world lovely when imaginary beings have a tiff?

People love their ancestors, and will continue to do temple work until they realize it is based on a lie. One small hoped for victory in court like this would not make one bit of difference.

Its hard to discuss this with you. You bring in things as if I said them that I did not. For example, you assumed the ceremony dates being one year to the date exactly of death. I never said that. I never said that America's indigenous people believe their ancestors can change their minds. Again you assumed that. There are many different traditional beliefs among the various people. Some have traditions of detractors on the spirit trail. If the spirit is led to confusion it wanders.

I am white. You don't have an understanding of these things either. We could debate it between ourselves but what would it prove? That two atheists who know nothing could decide what is best for a people that we are not part of? Hell, I've spent more than 27 years living in my wife's world and my own and each day I realize how little I understand.

You say names are not artifacts. American Indian law is the least understood by most Americans. I know of a case where a name was protected under the NAGPRA.

My point is that the LDS are taking names from government records. The Christian churches that were established on 19th century agencies were government sponsored. Their records could be included as government records.

There is merit to a legal precedent here. The Jewish Holocaust victims and survivors do not have these laws, but in the United States the American Indians do, since 1990.

I would like to see the LDS have to deal with this.

anon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Its hard to discuss this with you.

I like to understand, but I do not like bigotry. I hate TSCC, and what they did to me. I tell members what I think of TSCC, but it is not my place to try to deny them their rights.

> You bring in
> things as if I said them that I did not. For
> example, you assumed the ceremony dates being one
> year to the date exactly of death. I never said
> that.

You said:

> In the United States there are many non-Christian traditions. Some involve a year-long period of mourning at the end of which a ceremony is performed to "release the soul".
> Temple proxy baptism overlaps with this due to the year long period after death before the ordinance can be performed.
> Non-LDS families should not have to have their own ceremonies compete with mormon temple rituals.
> A handful of LDS family members should have no right to highjack the dead loved one and submit them in for proxy work, timing it in conflict with traditional ceremonies.”

The words compete, and conflict implied simultaneous times to me. I do not see a need for conflict, because LD$ are flexible with scheduling. You have been fairly cryptic about this entire discussion so if you think I have misunderstood, I say you have not been clear.

> I never said that America's indigenous
> people believe their ancestors can change their
> minds. Again you assumed that.

You used the words “stolen”, and “disoriented” So are you saying indigenous ancestors do not have free will? They are zombies to be possessed by whatever or only to be acted upon?

> There are many
> different traditional beliefs among the various
> people. Some have traditions of detractors on the
> spirit trail. If the spirit is led to confusion it
> wanders.

It would have to make the decision to become confused, unless you are saying the priesthood, and xstian gawd are powerful enough to control it.

> You say names are not artifacts. American Indian
> law is the least understood by most Americans. I
> know of a case where a name was protected under
> the NAGPRA.

Was the name carved somewhere?

> My point is that the LDS are taking names from
> government records. The Christian churches that
> were established on 19th century agencies were
> government sponsored. Their records could be
> included as government records.

I suppose a court would decide where the records belong. Churches in the U.S. keep their own archives, because there is separation of church, and state.

> There is merit to a legal precedent here. The
> Jewish Holocaust victims and survivors do not have
> these laws, but in the United States the American
> Indians do, since 1990.

You have not cited anything, nor given a reasoned explanation. Saying there is merit is your opinion, because you have not produced any evidence.

> I would like to see the LDS have to deal with
> this.

I don’t see how. Personally, I do not like to see graves desecrated, and that is more tangible than alleged desecration of spirits that do not exist, and even if you did believe in their existence none of it makes sense. You have not cited any sources or examples or defined anything.

It's the same as not honoring a dead person's instructions for his/her funeral and burial. Live people leave wills and instructions and while they're alive they anticipate if these will be honored or not. Knowing that mormons systematically disrespect the wishes of the dead is not acceptable for many. That's how I and many others see it and we have that right.

Agreed 1000%, Cheryl.

There doesn't need to be a law for someone to expect being treated with common decency. Mormons have no boundaries in any aspects of their lives.

Maybe some people don't care if their ancestor's names are "used" as dead dunking material, but A LOT of people do care.

My boyfriend's great-grandfather was a danite and he left the church and Utah and went back to Pennsylvania in the late 1800s. All that side of the family is ANTI-MORMON. My boyfriend's father being the one who hates mormons the most. He is 86. When he dies, he is CERTAIN that his mormon relatives will dead dunk him and he is NOT HAPPY about it. Whether dead or alive, in the end, the FAMILY has a right to say yes or no to dead dunking.

I just resigned. I certainly don't want my family dead dunking me. Who cares about laws. It is about RESPECT, which mormons have NONE OF.

As you say it's a matters of boundaries.

It is about time Satanist start baptizing Mormons living and dead into their church.

They can list them as members on their roles.

It is only symbolic so Mormons should not care.

And many hated the idea of exmos having mock sacrament rituals and temple rites in hotel rooms at exmo conferences. I could understand this mormon attitude if the mormon church showed any sensitivity to the wishes of dead nevermos or exmos, but sadly they don't.

That's why it wouldn't bother me if there were funeral demonstrators and protestors at the burial services for GA. The demonstrators could wear temple clothes or red Bozo noses and big clown shoes and such to prove a point. LOL

my thought is that the LDS church does't seem all that concerned about the wishes of the dead, or accuracy of the work that is done.

According to the church, if somebody doesn't WANT the ordinance, they can reject it in the next life. In the LDS mind, no harm, no foul, just and extra ordinance. (Even if people really DO mind). But that's just a typical boundary violation for the LDS church: They want to discharge what they percieve as THEIR obligation, and can't imagine why that should bother anyone. Kind of like missionary work, VTing, or "fellowshipping".

And the idea that nobody is hurt is WRONG. People sacrifice a LOT to go to the temple, including time and money that could be spend on the living.

And as far as the accuracy, it's probably abyssmal. I remember going through the temple for women with only a first name and an approximate year of birth. REALLY? So I did the ordinance work for a Sally who might have been born in the 1700s? Did anyone know who she married, or who her parents were? Will God know WHICH Sally I did the work for? Couldn't Sally just take care of that in the next life? Or appear to somebody and give them the correct information so she doesn't end up getting sealed to the village idiot for all eternity?

To me, the whole thing is an exercise in futility. Why bother doing an ordinance of someone who you can't even uniquely identify?

So why are there no consequences for submitting incorrect information (like baptizing someone for the dead who isn't dead yet? Seems like I read about one like that recently). . . . Well, I think it's because the church knows it just really doesn't MATTER. It's the old "it'll get worked out in the next life" attitude.

Which is why temple work, done by the living, using incomplete information and without knowing the wishes of the dead, is a complete waste of time and resources. If mistakes can be nullified in the next life, then why can't the ordinances be ADDED then?

I have heard of several persons being dead dunked before they were dead.

And it makes me laugh knowing that mayan and aztec statues have been dead dunked.

I have a question about this. If you die and get baptized posthumously do they alert your living family members? Let's say I died tomorrow and someone did this to me, would my kids receive some kind of notice? What about my parents or siblings? Would it matter if they were LDS or not? (My dad is non-active, my mom and sis are Nevermos like me, and I have a sis and bro who are TBM)

I think what they are doing is impolite.

In the case of the FLDS deadies, it points to the fact that polygamy is still doctrinal and points up their duplicity on the issue.

In the end result, I don't think it hurts the deaders at all so why get upset about it. There are a lot of more serious issues to worry about.

For what it's worth, I have an opinion on this.

The Church has very little in the way of safety nets on the process of ordinances being done for the dead. If they did I'm sure that Adolf Hitler and Jesus Christ would not have slipped through the net and been posthumously baptised on numerous occasions (if you don't believe this you can check it on on the LDS genealogical site Family Search).
It's a mess. Anybody can submit anybody for this kind of ordinance. I have seen with my own eyes baptisms done for people who only have a first name like FRED. No date of birth, no relatives, no other information, just FRED. I've seen men listed on female cards, I've seen females listed on male cards.
It's a mess, and in the name of common decency should be stopped and the system re thought out.

In my humble opinion, if the Church members want to continue this practice of doing ordinances for the dead, then only names of people submitted by bona fide relatives with proper details should be processed.

I only know about the early versions, and they do try to prevent problems, and like to be efficient.

When you find work done for JC or Fred with no dates, it was probably done before the rules were in place. The new program will not print the card for you if it is lacking something. People cannot forge cards, because they are bar coded.

I would not assume anything about gender mix ups on cards. I am sure people make mistakes, but Rainer Maria Rilke is a man, and I had a female ancestor named Newton. Surnames were often used as given names in Eastern Shore Maryland, and one girl was even named Scarborough.