What I suggest, is, that Mormons willingly baptise dead fetuses. Jesus’ mission was to save souls for a eternal life – and not prevent folks from sinning. Christians have paid too much attention to politics, and have forgotten about the souls of the unborn. If they believe a fetus is a being with a soul, why then have they not set aside a cemetery on church property for victims of the abortion holocaust?
Christian Republicans want to do away with intrusive big government, but want to make many laws in many states that will make getting an abortion difficult. Jesus and Paul understood you can’t legislate moral laws. Paul bid his followers to ignore Old Testament Laws. If the Morons and Christians can set aside their religious differences, then the innocent aborted unborn can enjoy a blessed eternal life – tommorow! Why are Christians and Mormons denying these innocents eternal life? How selfish!
Jews are complaining about how their dead are being brought to a eternal life by a special Mormon baptism. Anne Frank – the most famous holocaust victim – has been baptized five times by Mormons! My gosh, there is an endless supply of dead persons waiting to enter the kingdom pf God at abortion clinics all over America – and the world!
Just to be clear on this, Christian churches have never recognized folks being folks while in their mother’s womb, because on tombstones inside church grounds, the day you are born, and the day you die is etched. This is your church recognized life, your stay on earth before you moved on to everlasting life!
I’m talking about Everlasting Life for the Unborn!
Here’s how it works. The city where the abortion took place becomes the last name of the fetus. A computer chooses boy or girl. Since sex does not matter to these unborn angels, it is a random choice;
Brody and Brook are now in the Bronx family tree! The only hitch to this solution, is, do you tell the mothers their aborted babies are being baptized and blessed – then sent to live with Jesus in heaven? This might make it more O.K. for these mothers to go ahead with an abortion. It might be best to let them believe their babies are going to to hell. So, I might keep this solution a Holy Secret.
Jon the Nazarite
After Anne Frank baptism, Mormons vow to discipline members
By Dan Gilgoff, CNN.com Religion Editor
(CNN) – Reacting to a report that well-known Holocaust victim Anne Frank had been baptized by proxy in a Mormon temple, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints says it is committed to disciplining members of its church who conducted such baptisms, which violate church policy.
Word of the Frank baptism came a week after the issue of Mormon posthumous proxy baptism of Jews attracted national attention. This controversy surfaced after it was reported that the dead parents of Jewish Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal had been baptized in a Mormon temple.
The church apologized for that baptism, blaming it on a technical glitch in its system for submitting names for posthumous proxy baptism.
“It takes a good deal of deception and manipulation to get an improper submission through the safeguards we have put in place,” LDS Church spokesman Michael Purdy said in a statement Tuesday, responding to the report about the Anne Frank baptism.
Explainer: How and why do Mormons baptize the dead?
Though the church regularly conducts proxy baptisms for dead, in what it calls an attempt to give everyone a chance to accept salvation through Jesus, it has a 1990s-era policy against conducting such baptisms for Holocaust victims.
The policy was adopted after complaints from Jewish groups, which said it was offensive to conduct Mormon baptisms for Holocaust victims who were killed because of their Jewish faith.
“The Church keeps its word and is absolutely firm in its commitment to not accept the names of Holocaust victims for proxy baptism,” said Purdy in his Tuesday statement.
The church said it is “committed to taking action against individual abusers by suspending the submitter’s access privileges,” the statement continued. “We will also consider whether other Church disciplinary action should be taken.”
According to Helen Radkey, a former Mormon who tracks Mormon posthumous proxy baptisms, the one for Anne Frank was conducted on Saturday in the Dominican Republic.
Last month, legislators in South Dakota introduced a bill that was worded in such a way that it could allow for the legalized murder of abortion providers. Under a firestorm of controversy, the bill was withdrawn, but similar bills have also been introduced in Nebraska and Iowa.
Legislators who introduce these bills invariably claim they aren’t encouraging terrorism or trying to infringe on the right to abortion, which is protected by the Supreme Court under Roe v. Wade. In fact, the argument for these kinds of laws is that they’re about protecting pregnant women from violent assault. The sponsor of the South Dakota bill, Phil Jensen, laughably announced that his bill was about giving pregnant women the right to fend off attackers, even though pregnant women–like all citizens of South Dakota–already enjoy a broad right to self-defense in that state. More likely, this proposed bill, along with a broader one in Nebraska and Iowa, would work both to subtly encourage terrorism and establish a potential defense for those who kill abortion doctors.
Even short of that, laws like these are about establishing the notion that a fetus, or even a fertilized egg, is a separate person from the woman in which it resides, and therefore has rights equal to, or in most cases, greater than her rights. This would seem most obviously an attack on women’s health, freedom and safety, but supporters always strike a pose of protection for pregnant women, claiming to have their interests at heart. But the real-world results of these laws demonstrate that, just as pro-choice activists claim, women–especially pregnant women–are being assaulted rather than protected by attempts to establish fetal rights.
Take the more direct “personhood” bills, which define fertilized eggs as “persons” under the law. One such law is winding its way through North Dakota’s legislature. Proponents of these laws admit they are laying groundwork for abortion bans, but still promote the laws as somehow being pro-woman, with Rep. Dan Ruby claiming that “women and children” will be protected by this law. Planned Parenthood disagrees, arguing that women who miscarry or suffer pregnancy complications will find themselves turned over to the police for criminal misconduct. Not very protective of pregnant women! At least four other states, including Florida, are looking at similar laws.
If you find yourself wanting to dismiss the possibility that these laws will be used to jail women who miscarry or suffer pregnancy complications, consider a recent event in Iowa where a pregnant woman was arrested for falling down a flight of stairs. You read that correctly. Christine Taylor fell down a flight of stairs after having a fight with her husband on the phone. When she went to the hospital–to makes sure the fetus was okay–she was arrested under one of the many state laws that grant fetuses rights separate from the mother. In this case, Iowa has a “feticide” law that pertains to the second trimester and beyond, and since Taylor confessed that she had contemplated abortion but had chosen to have the baby, the nurse and doctor at the hospital decided to phone the police and accuse her of trying to terminate her pregnancy illegally. She was eventually not charged, but in light of these events, any notion that a law such as this will be used for any other purpose but to harass and punish women should be disregarded.
In the practice of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (or “Mormons”), a living person, acting as proxy, is baptized by immersion on behalf of a deceased person. After giving a short prayer that includes the name of the deceased individual, the proxy is immersed briefly in the water, then brought up again. Baptism for the dead is a distinctive ordinance of the church and is based on the belief that baptism is a required ordinance for entry into the Kingdom of God.
This entire labor of love, as Mormons view it, rests on the premise that those who have passed on have the choice to accept or reject the gesture. I knew when I performed the proxy baptism for my father that he was a devout Christian, christened as a baby in the rites of the established Church of England. My gesture in his behalf took nothing away from him, the life he lived and who he was at his core. If there is an afterlife – a belief clearly shared by both of us – then I added opportunity to the goodness of a short but purpose-filled and worthy life. In the doctrines embraced by my particular faith, my offering opened up eternal possibilities, including the eternal “sealing” of his marriage to my mother.