Re: Vatican trying to avoid baptism by proxy

Bruce Remick wrote:
> "Tony H." <punkyNOSP*M@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
> news:8Oidnbblw9L-_b_VnZ2dnUVZ_hqdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> D. Stussy wrote:
>>> I find it offensive and improper for a member of any religion to
attempt 
>>> to
>>> impose his views on a person not of that same religion (or open to
it).
>>> Where the dead are concerned, they already have been or will never be 
>>> part
>>> of that religion, so it is offensive to attempt to retroactively
impose 
>>> the
>>> view.  It's not meaningless.
>>>
>>> In the U.S., one's right to practice a religion stops where it is in
>>> conflict with someone else's right to do the same.  Proxy baptisms 
>>> overstep
>>> that right.  LDS members can baptize their own as LDS all they want,
but
>>> they have no right to do that to non-church members - because that
>>> interferes with the non-members' right to practice and enjoy their own
>>> religion.
>>>
>>> In parallel, should we allow the radical muslim to practice what his
>>> religion dictates - kill infidels and get 72 virgins in heaven?  Hell
no!
>>> LDS members may not be killing people, but it is imposition just the 
>>> same.
> 
> Where's the imposition?  You likely didn't even know what they were
doing 
> until you read about it.

Salt Lake City is in a desert ! Baptizing little pieces of paper is a 
waste of water and time they could be scanning do***ents and census 
pages...etc... *smile* Now I'm curious if the proxy baptisms are a paid
job, salary, or charity volunteer work someone does ?

I love threads like this.

Jonathan M.