LDSToronto Posted March 8, 2012 Author Posted March 8, 2012 If you'd cared to explain why you quoted only what you did, I'd be interested.I quoted a church spokesperson and a Jewish genealogist's response because I thought they were two interesting viewpoints, one after the other.H.
KevinG Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 What about celebrities?I'm pretty sure they can join the LDS Church and get baptized on their own.
KevinG Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 I quoted a church spokesperson and a Jewish genealogist's response because I thought they were two interesting viewpoints, one after the other.H.What a curious use of the word interesting.
LDSToronto Posted March 8, 2012 Author Posted March 8, 2012 Anti Mormons are small that way. They complain that what they wanted isn't what they wanted. Too bad, no soup for you!I hate when ant-Mormons do that.H.
divinenature Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 (edited) Members are not supposed to submit the names of Jews, celebrities or people from unauthorized lists. (that are not direct ancestors, in the case of Jews or related, in the case of celebs OR have permission from the family)How does this course of action keep that from happening? It does not. All it does is try to hide it from public view. Edited March 8, 2012 by divinenature
Stargazer Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 I hate when ant-Mormons do that.H.Well, in order to get those we'd have to baptize them in a VERY small font. The problem with surface tension alone would be quite an issue!
Stargazer Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Members are not supposed to submit the names of Jews, celebrities or people from unauthorized lists. (that are not direct ancestors, in the case of Jews or related, in the case of celebs OR have permission from the family)How does this course of action keep that from happening? It does not. All it does is try to hide it from public view.I'm not sure you read the article thoroughly enough, or perhaps you didn't take what was said to its logical conclusion.. It seems to me that if they suspend someone's access for submitting unauthorized names that this would prevent it quite neatly. Likewise, it would be difficult to understand how catching the submission would not naturally also divert the attempted submission into a suspense file of some sort. I mean, I can chew gum and walk at the same time, so why can't suspending access occur at the same time as suspending a submission?
KevinG Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Members are not supposed to submit the names of Jews, celebrities or people from unauthorized lists. (that are not direct ancestors, in the case of Jews or related, in the case of celebs OR have permission from the family)How does this course of action keep that from happening? It does not. All it does is try to hide it from public view.Unless a bunch of Mormons decide to lose their temple work priveldges in order to do a one off false submission and the church decides to leave the improper submissions in the database then do the temple work, this isn't a problem.
LDSToronto Posted March 8, 2012 Author Posted March 8, 2012 KevinG, those youtube clips are great! How do you find such relevant clips so quickly?
Stargazer Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 KevinG, those youtube clips are great! How do you find such relevant clips so quickly?Yeah, I loved that "cat" if that is what it was. Looked more like a cross between a cat, a snake and a sloth, to me.
LDSToronto Posted March 8, 2012 Author Posted March 8, 2012 Yeah, I loved that "cat" if that is what it was. Looked more like a cross between a cat, a snake and a sloth, to me.It was adorable! My daughter has a cat doll made of yarn, similar to the one in the clip. I didn't realize KevinG was avant-garde film buff.
mfbukowski Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 What about celebrities?My question on that one is how do you define it? The local TV weather guy?
LDSToronto Posted March 8, 2012 Author Posted March 8, 2012 My question on that one is how do you define it? The local TV weather guy?Or well-known internet forum posters?
KevinG Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 KevinG, those youtube clips are great! How do you find such relevant clips so quickly?I keep a list of links on a word document every time I find a good one... I waited weeks for a word of wisdom thread to use the muppet beaker "too much caffiene" video.A twisted sense of humor and ability to recall useless cartoon moments also helps. 1
mfbukowski Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Well, in order to get those we'd have to baptize them in a VERY small font. The problem with surface tension alone would be quite an issue!Especially when you consider that they all float down there.
KevinG Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Yeah, I loved that "cat" if that is what it was. Looked more like a cross between a cat, a snake and a sloth, to me.I was looking for Alice saying "curiouser and curiouser" but found a clip by that title. If you watch it to the end it has a moral.
LDSToronto Posted March 8, 2012 Author Posted March 8, 2012 I keep a list of links on a word document every time I find a good one... I waited weeks for a word of wisdom thread to use the muppet beaker "too much caffiene" video.A twisted sense of humor and ability to recall useless cartoon moments also helps.Cool! I really thought that cat video was an excellent metaphor for the 'cage' that the church has built around the those it wants to protect in the familysearch system.Kudos! Very relevant!H.
Jeff K. Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Anti Mormons like Toronto whine way too much. Since integrity isn't a safeguard in their book, I am more than fine with locking them and their ilk out. At least the chance of the system being abused by them is reduced, and isn't that what the little ant Mormon wanted? Small minded people always get upset when they are treated like small minded people.
divinenature Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Unless a bunch of Mormons decide to lose their temple work priveldges in order to do a one off false submission and the church decides to leave the improper submissions in the database then do the temple work, this isn't a problem. Has anyone lost their temple recommend for submitting unauthorized names? I have never heard of that happening before. Is there an actual documented example?My question on that one is how do you define it? The local TV weather guy? If he is of no relation to you then you are unauthorized to submit his name for temple ordinances. If he is not Jewish you can probably submit him once his birth is over 110 years and all his family is dead. If he is Jewish you may not ever submit him.
mfbukowski Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Or well-known internet forum posters?I know. But I think you already did your own work- so your kids don't have to worry about it.
KevinG Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Or well-known internet forum posters?I wonder how many times Dan Peterson of Provo, UT has been baptized in proxy?
LDSToronto Posted March 8, 2012 Author Posted March 8, 2012 (edited) Anti Mormons like Toronto whine way too much. Since integrity isn't a safeguard in their book, I am more than fine with locking them and their ilk out. At least the chance of the system being abused by them is reduced, and isn't that what the little ant Mormon wanted? Small minded people always get upset when they are treated like small minded people.We'll see, Jeff. I haven't been locked out yet. Bummer.H. Edited March 8, 2012 by LDSToronto
Jeff K. Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Has anyone lost their temple recommend for submitting unauthorized names? I have never heard of that happening before. Is there an actual documented example?If he is of no relation to you then you are unauthorized to submit his name for temple ordinances. If he is not Jewish you can probably submit him once his birth is over 110 years and all his family is dead. If he is Jewish you may not ever submit him.Since such actions are private affairs not given to publicity, it would not be surprising if it isn't known to have occurred. Which doesn't mean it hasn't.
KevinG Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Especially when you consider that they all float down there.That is exactly why we don't baptize fire ants in the Atlanta Temple. I did fish a black widow out of the chapel font before my sons baptism.
Recommended Posts