To be fair, gobear, the big difference between the claims about the curse genie mentions and the flood apologetics, is that the book in question (the Book of Mormon) actually refers to the curse and the specifics therein. Note here, here and here.
Hmmmm…I could be very wrong, but I’m pretty certain the catholic church accept a lot of baptisms as valid (Orthodox and protestant baptism).
I visited an Episcopalian (I think) church when i was looking for one many months ago.
I’d told them I was baptized in a Foursquare church.
They said, any baptism is okay as long as it was a christian church.
I don’t know if they’d have considered a LDS baptism valid.
No matter, God considered my pentecostal baptism totally valid.
clairobscur** is correct here. The rule of thumb is that any baptism is valid in which [ul][]the Trinitarian formula is used, and[]water flows on the head of the person in question.[/ul]So the vast majority of Christian baptisms are accepted by the Catholic church.
Yep, I was wrong. Probably because my detailed knowledge of Catholic/Protestant relations stops somewhere in the 17th century. When did this change happen–anyone know? And how 'bout the Orthodox?
BTW, gobear, did you have any responses to the non-miraculous majority of my points, like the DNA stuff, or are you just bored of the whole thing?
Genie, I had a rather long post above regarding the RCC’s stance on baptism, which I think you may have missed. As to when the RCC recognized Orthodox baptisms, the answer is always. Baptisms which satisfy the requirements for form, matter, and intent have been considered valid since the question was first hashed out in the 3rd century.
John, I did see your post, thanks. I worded that question wrong. It was not “Do Catholics accept Orthodox baptisms?”, but “Do Orthodox accept other baptisms?”
Genie, sorry, I misunderstood your question. In looking for the answer, it turns out that the RCC’s current position regarding Orthodox baptisms is only about 500 years old, and that after the Great Schism there was a period when Rome did not recognize Orthodox baptisms.
However, regarding Orthodox recognition of baptisms in other traditions, there has been a good deal of controversy for the last couple of centuries, but the majority of Orthodox today do recognize Catholic baptisms. (For way more detail, see this statement from The North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation.) Many (most?) Orthodox also recognize Protestant baptisms as well. The difficulty in giving a clear yes/no answer on this is due not only to changes from various ecumenical dialogues, but also the autonomy of the various Orthodox churches.
Someone mentioned earlier that they turned away from Mormonism because of the many changes in doctrine, policy, or convention. Compared with what I’ve just heard about Catholic and Orthodox acceptance of foreign baptisms, the Church of Jesus Christ of LDS seems quite stable.
Call me crazy.
MrMcPlad, while we believers, regardless of tradition, can of course give you many reasons for the appearance of change, while the core remains unchanged, you have to also consider that at least as regards the Orthodox/Catholic split, we’ve had a thousand years to fight over things, while the LDS is working on their second century!
The length of time is irrelevant. Just afford the Mormons the same reasoning you allow for changes in policy in other churches.
Why can’t we agree that the core of the LDS church remains unchanged as well?
Honestly? Buncha wack-os. But then, I think that about most religions, including my own.
Esprix
Well, Esprix, everyone needs a little bit of wackiness in their lives, don’tcha think? 
MrMcPlad, I never said that I don’t “afford the Mormons the same reasoning you allow for changes in policy in other churches”. Given the LDS precept of continuing revelation, the fact that certain policies of their church have changed is reasonable.