All dead Mormons are now gay

In response to some Mormons’ posthumous baptisms of people who weren’t actually Mormons, such as Anne Frank, somebody’s decided to fight back with playground humour. Alldeadmormonsarenowgay.com enables you to look up the names of dead Mormons and posthumously convert them to homosexuality.

I’m quite sure that’s offensive on about seventeen different levels, but it did make me laugh.

12 thoughts on “All dead Mormons are now gay

  1. Squander Two says:

    I honestly don’t understand why that’s offensive. Christians, Mormons included, believe that being a member gets you into Heaven. Heaven is nice, apparently. Why is wishing (and wishing is all it is) that someone go somewhere nice forever offensive? Or do some Jews believe that the Mormons are actually highjacking Anne Frank’s soul and diverting it to the wrong heaven or something?

  2. Gary says:

    I don’t know much about it, but my understanding is that the baptisms are offensive to jewish people because in their religion it’s forbidden to attempt to contact the dead. There’s a longstanding agreement between Jewish and Mormon leaders about this, and it keeps being broken.

  3. Heather says:

    This, bizarrely, is why the Mormons hold the best repository of family history research in the world. They’ve literally hollowed out a mountain in Utah and buy up anything they can get their hands on – ships’ records, census data, and so forth. We were able to trace our ancestors in Eastern Europe back to 1847 because of the information they curate. No conversions implied or intended.

  4. Stephen says:

    I’d say the offence arises from the similarities between what the Mormons are doing, and the Christian history of forced conversions, and also things like “Jews for Jesus” (Christians specifically targeting Jews for conversion). Judaism is not a proselytising religion, and is quite happy to leave everyone who isn’t Jewish to continue being not Jewish, and just wants the other religions to afford them the same courtesy. It’s also pretty low to pick on someone who’s dead and therefore can’t have any say in the matter. There is a prohibition on necromancy and the like as well, but not sure if that’s a major reason.

    In any event, S2, as should be obvious, this has nothing to do with wanting good things for the person concerned, and everything to do with claiming the person for the Mormon team.

  5. Squander Two says:

    Seriously? So people will now think “Ah, so Anne Frank was a Mormon!” That will happen, will it?

    > It’s also pretty low to pick on someone who’s dead and therefore can’t have any say in the matter.

    This only makes sense if you believe the baptism actually works, in which case you would need to believe that Mormons really can somehow convert the souls of the long-dead, in which case you would be a Mormon — so why would a Jew get upset about it?

    > Judaism is not a proselytising religion, and is quite happy to leave everyone who isn’t Jewish to continue being not Jewish, and just wants the other religions to afford them the same courtesy.

    Yeah, I’ve heard this, but it’s not true. Judaism isn’t a proselytising religion, no, but Judaism doesn’t want anything nor is it happy to do anything: wanting and being happy are things that individual Jews do, and, of course, not all Jews agree with each other about this or, really, much else. Plenty of Jews have converted in a non-forced way over the centuries and they, being Christian, would tell you that they are glad they were converted and harbour no ill will towards those who helped convert them. And here’s my big problem with the whole debate: what you’re asking of Christians when you ask them not to convert Jews is that they run an exclusive club with loads of fantastic benefits, some very nasty penalties for not joining, and a big “No Jews” sign over the door. If you genuinely believe — as Christians do — that being Christian gives you a better life and gets you into Heaven, then there is no effective difference between “Don’t try to convert Jews” and “Fuck the Jews.”

    I’m not supporting the baptism of Anne Frank, by the way. I’m more addressing the general “It’s offensive to try to convert Jews” point which came up. I think the correct response to the Mormon’s posthumous baptisms of historical figures is to point out how utterly stupid it is, not to get offended as if they’re actually doing something real to souls.

    I speak as an atheist of Jewish ancestry, in case anyone had forgotten or cared.

  6. Gary says:

    > This only makes sense if you believe the baptism actually works

    Not necessarily. I’m not religious in the slightest, don’t believe in afterlifes or heaven or anything like that, but I’m appalled when people try to blacken the names of the dead (and of course I’m horrified by big stuff such as vandalising gravestones, even if everyone who knew the deceased is long dead too).

  7. Stephen says:

    >Seriously? So people will now think “Ah, so Anne Frank was a Mormon!” That will happen, will it?

    No, and I don’t think I said that. By Mormons claiming Anne Frank for their club, I meant that *Mormons* would think that in some way they had rewarded Anne Frank for her suffering, by nobly admitting her to the fantastic club of Mormonism. Which is pretty offensive.

    >you would need to believe that Mormons really can somehow convert the souls of the long-dead, in which case you would be a Mormon — so why would a Jew get upset about it?

    I don’t think that’s true. If, say, the Raelians started a campaign to put signs on gravestones to mark people who they thought the mothership should beam up for resurrection, you wouldn’t have to believe that would actually happen to find that offensive, both to the dead person, and to their family and anyone else who identified with them in some way.

    >If you genuinely believe — as Christians do — that being Christian gives you a better life and gets you into Heaven, then there is no effective difference between “Don’t try to convert Jews” and “Fuck the Jews.”

    There’s a massive difference between saying “you can join our club if you come to the door and ask to be admitted, but we won’t go out and chase you to join’, which is effectively Judaism’s current approach, and saying ‘you, as a Jew, are not allowed to join our club’.

    Christians are entitled to believe that their club gives them exclusive benefits, but not to use that belief to justify forcing their beliefs on others.

    >I think the correct response to the Mormon’s posthumous baptisms of historical figures is to point out how utterly stupid it is, not to get offended as if they’re actually doing something real to souls.

    I think that’s the correct response too, but I can understand why some Jews would be offended.

    >I speak as an atheist of Jewish ancestry, in case anyone had forgotten or cared.

    Of course we care! Anyway, it’s obvious, from the way that you argue about everything (2 Jews, 3 opinions, as the old saying goes) and also from your precise use of language and logic (Talmudic logic!) that you are a Jew! ;-)

    (Actually some Jewish thinkers believed you should be skeptical about everything, including the existence of God, and many doubted Maimonides’ claim that a belief in God is a requirement of being a good Jew. The whole idea of blind faith is alien to Judaism, you are supposed to use your logic to deduce God’s existence, as Abraham was reputed to have done.)

  8. Squander Two says:

    > If, say, the Raelians started a campaign to put signs on gravestones

    > I’m horrified by big stuff such as vandalising gravestones

    Yeah, but the difference here is between saying things about the dead amongst yourselves and shoving your opinions about them onto their gravestones or families or whatever. I’d be against the Mormons sticking signs up at Bergen Belsen; I couldn’t give less of a damn that they’ve created a record in their own database. Hey, if we’re going to find records in DBs offensive, where will we find the time for anything else?

    > Christians are entitled to believe that their club gives them exclusive benefits, but not to use that belief to justify forcing their beliefs on others.

    But I’m not talking about forcing.

    > There’s a massive difference between saying “you can join our club if you come to the door and ask to be admitted, but we won’t go out and chase you to join’, which is effectively Judaism’s current approach, and saying ‘you, as a Jew, are not allowed to join our club’.

    Yes, but Christians believe that proselytising confers benefits on the recipients, and they will keep proselytising to everyone else if you get your way and they stop trying to convert Jews, so what you are asking is for Christians to think “Fuck the Jews.”

  9. Squander Two says:

    > Anyway, it’s obvious, from the way that you argue about everything (2 Jews, 3 opinions, as the old saying goes) and also from your precise use of language and logic (Talmudic logic!) that you are a Jew!

    Funnily enough, I get the arguing from the non-Jewish side of the family.

Comments are closed.