The Mormons have the right and should have the right to baptize (for the dead) anybody that they want (so long as they are dead.) It is part and parcel to their religious beliefs and quite frankly I don't think anyone has a right to tell them to stop it. I would say that they are not being true to their religious convictions if they stop doing this or if they become selective on who they can and cannot baptize for the dead.
A good question to ask Mitt during the primary campaign is whether he intends to honor this vow OVER his oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States.
I don't believe they are mutually exclusive. Indeed, I don't think you will find a more loyal group of Americans than American Mormons. They really take seriously their Boy Scout oaths to "do my duty to God and my country". Since the Boy Scout oath puts God above country, should we then question the loyalty of every former Boy Scout who chooses to run for President?
Now, let the indignant mormon apologists begin throwing their spears at me...I have my flame-proof armor handy.
Your post seems to be intended to invoke flames and not to engender meaningful discussions. If you get flamed for it, then it is something that you brought on yourself... deliberately and with malice aforethought. So, when you reap the whirlwind, don't go patting yourself on the back thinking you are being persecuted for Jesus' sake, or anything like that.
I don't think you will find better neighbors than LDS members. And as a property owner in Utah, I can attest that I don't think you can find better renters. :-)
The Mormons have the right and should have the right to baptize (for the dead) anybody that they want (so long as they are dead.) It is part and parcel to their religious beliefs and quite frankly I don't think anyone has a right to tell them to stop it. I would say that they are not being true to their religious convictions if they stop doing this or if they become selective on who they can and cannot baptize for the dead.
I've never understood how anybody can get worked up over our baptisms for the dead.
If they think we are full of beans, and that we are only deluding ourselves as to the effectiveness of such baptisms, why would they care if we do it? It is such an irrational issue.
Read my post again. I cited specifics that will most likely be used against Romney, with sources.
The following comment by you is mind-boggling: The Mormons have the right and should have the right to baptize (for the dead) anybody that they want (so long as they are dead.) It is part and parcel to their religious beliefs and quite frankly I don't think anyone has a right to tell them to stop it.
If THAT is the mormon attitude, it certainly seems to be extremely arrogant, and would play into the hands of the anti-Romney forces.
Re: the temple oath, your comment, I don't believe they are mutually exclusive. My point is not what YOU believe, but what opponents will make of the fact.
Mormons have long prided themselves on being a "peculiar" people, and Romney's candidacy will provide the forum for them to explain and defend their doctrines. They should begin to prepare themselves for this, and be aware that there are sites on the web that provide all kinds of info, including the temple ceremonies, the masonic comparisons, baptism for the dead (against the will of survivors), and Joseph Smith's declaration that no one will be allowed into the mormon version of heaven unless allowed by Smith.
Over and over again, the arrogance in Smith's declaration and belief by mormons that they have THE only true church is going to be examined and challenged by leaned scholars and opponents. What you are seeing in this discussion here is only the beginning. Evangelicals will be provided with this information, and have a decision to made at the polls.
One last reply, I grew up in a mormon environment, and know first hand that mormons have as many faults and failings as any other group.