This thread discusses the Content article: Vatican keeps parish records from LDS church

Curious...just where does the LDS assume they have the right to infringe on another religion?

iceman wrote:
This thread discusses the Content article: Vatican keeps parish records from LDS church

Curious...just where does the LDS assume they have the right to infringe on another religion?
Ice, where are the LDS infringing upon another religion? I am asking so I can understand what it is that you are understanding..

I agree with iceman. People have the right to be (or not) any religion. When any other group takes an action that effectively makes the deceased a part of their religion, it's disrespecting the deceased's profession (or lack thereof) of faith.

I have great respect for the LDS pursuit for and collection of genealogical records. I think they must be number one in quantity and quality. I admire that those records are made available to the public for free. I would feel even better if they would honor the requests to refrain from auto-baptizing those of different faiths. Personally, I don't find it problematic, but obviously some do.

If there's a request by certain groups, respect their wishes. Wouldn't the LDS folks like it that way if the tables were turned?

onyerpockets wrote:
I agree with iceman. People have the right to be (or not) any religion. When any other group takes an action that effectively makes the deceased a part of their religion, it's disrespecting the deceased's profession (or lack thereof) of faith.

I have great respect for the LDS pursuit for and collection of genealogical records. I think they must be number one in quantity and quality. I admire that those records are made available to the public for free. I would feel even better if they would honor the requests to refrain from auto-baptizing those of different faiths. Personally, I don't find it problematic, but obviously some do.

If there's a request by certain groups, respect their wishes. Wouldn't the LDS folks like it that way if the tables were turned?

Again, baptisms for the deceased do not make the deceased a Mormon anymore than Jesus atoning for all mankind makes all mankind Christian.

JLD wrote:
onyerpockets wrote:
I agree with iceman. People have the right to be (or not) any religion. When any other group takes an action that effectively makes the deceased a part of their religion, it's disrespecting the deceased's profession (or lack thereof) of faith.

I have great respect for the LDS pursuit for and collection of genealogical records. I think they must be number one in quantity and quality. I admire that those records are made available to the public for free. I would feel even better if they would honor the requests to refrain from auto-baptizing those of different faiths. Personally, I don't find it problematic, but obviously some do.

If there's a request by certain groups, respect their wishes. Wouldn't the LDS folks like it that way if the tables were turned?

Again, baptisms for the deceased do not make the deceased a Mormon anymore than Jesus atoning for all mankind makes all mankind Christian.

The Mormons have their own beliefs, and understanding regarding the ordinance of baptism for the dead...but other Christians have difficulty understanding why the Mormons feel the necessity to baptize people who had already baptized...at least in the case of deceased Christians.

And non Christians are within their rights to be outraged at the Mormons for presuming to baptize the ancestors of anyone they are not directly related to.

Okay. It appears that I am misinformed. Please explain the meaning, purpose, and effect.