walkingdork said:

darth_ender said:

To do such work for Holocaust victims was purely well-intentioned. Since they do not believe it a valid ordinance, no one thought it would be offensive, but it is of great significance to us. Even the Founding Fathers of the United States have had this same work done for them. But out of respect for the offended Jews, and as pointed out in your more balanced article, the names have since been removed from the list, which essentially undoes the work for the dead.

This statement could not be more arrogant and is exactly why nonreligious people can't stand some religious people. So people have to except Christ to go to heaven, but if you don't it will just be forced on your name when you die.

May your corpse be raped and dismembered, sir!

Um...we're not touching any corpses. Baptism for the dead involves nothing but the name of the person we are being baptized on behalf of. Nothing beyond that. Their bodies remain in their graves. If Catholic relatives began praying for me, believing I'm in purgatory, because they wanted me to get to heaven, I'd have no problem with that. I see nothing disrespectful about that. Beyond that, and assuming Mormonism is 100% correct (which the Jews do not, obviously) nothing is forced on anyone, which I have said before. They can choose if they wish to accept it or reject it. It's merely an opportunity.

It's a good thing you never, ever come off as arrogant. It's only those obnoxious, over-the-top atheists that cause religious folks to be apprehensive towards the rest.

You, sir, are a disrespectful, self-righteous, high-horsed jerk. I can hardly imagine why a 29 or 30 year-old like you might be divorced and why there was some sort of alienation between OT.com and myspleen. Feel free to take this argument to a different thread, possibly here, or even more appropriately here. Or at least before you reveal yourself as an idiot, use that superior intellect and intelligently read and comprehend my posts.