Reader comments
Debate resumes over illegal immigrants' status in LDS Church
165 comments | Read story
Steve | 11:27 a.m. Feb. 15, 2008
Bishops work through the spirit also, but some may not be as in tune as others.
I'm not a bishop, but if I lied to the bishop about being worthy to enter
the temple and the bishop doesn't pick up on it, it's not the fault of
the bishop. The liar will be the one who will pay the ultimate penalty. If a
bishop knows first hand that the member is illegal in this country and has a
fake pass to be here, it shouldn't bar the member from membership, but
should bar him from the temple. In this circumstance, I believe the bishop
should pay the price also. All are invited to the temple, but there needs to be
a very strong commitment and the correct standard of living. If the honesty
question is being overlooked by a known illegal, the the question then needs to
be disregarded, because it is a waste of time. For this reason, I'm glad
I'm not a bishop yet. But despite it all, i love the church.
COME TO UTAH!! | 11:22 a.m. Feb. 15, 2008
THE WELCOME WAGON IS OPEN!!
Comments continue below
How funny critics are... | 11:22 a.m. Feb. 15, 2008
It's very funny to me when the LDS church makes a decision like this and
all the cynics and critics of the church officially take it upon themselves to
put in their own opinion. The church is led by incredibly intelligent and
inspired men who unlike politicians don't lie or put out false statements
so they can get elected into office. They usually have far more education and
experience in dozens of matters than does anybody that tries to profess what the
church does wrong.
Stewart | 11:28 a.m. Feb. 15, 2008
A lot of weird logic in this article. "While reiterating the LDS Church is
politically neutral, Elder Jensen noted that immigration is not only a political
issue but a moral and ethical one." First of all the Church is not being
politically neutral and has taken the same political stand as in previous years.
This not a moral or ethical issue, it is a taxpayer, cheap labor, and a law and
order issue. The Utah Legislature has every right to protect its citizens and
taxpayers from the harm caused by illegal immigration.
I suppose that that having a fraudulent ID in your pocket and saying that you are honest with your fellowman makes sense?
Finally, it is a sovereignty issue. Does the Church interfere with other nations' sovereignty issues? Do they go to other states and attempt to interfere with legislatures trying to protect their citizens and taxpayers? No! only in Utah would they attempt such behavior. Compassion is fine, but compassion isn't going to stop the problem. We can have compassion for criminals of all types, but that doesn't mean that we should look the other way and allow the behavior to continue.
I suppose that that having a fraudulent ID in your pocket and saying that you are honest with your fellowman makes sense?
Finally, it is a sovereignty issue. Does the Church interfere with other nations' sovereignty issues? Do they go to other states and attempt to interfere with legislatures trying to protect their citizens and taxpayers? No! only in Utah would they attempt such behavior. Compassion is fine, but compassion isn't going to stop the problem. We can have compassion for criminals of all types, but that doesn't mean that we should look the other way and allow the behavior to continue.
John | 11:30 a.m. Feb. 15, 2008
As a member of the Church I see now that I may disobey laws. Them leadership is
supporting lawlessness.
John Lambert | 11:29 a.m. Feb. 15, 2008
So Ann Chovie is advocating for the seperation of families. Maybe that is the
best way to do it now, but there is nothing wrong with favoring a change in the
laws. I think we should restructure the laws to allow families to be together.
Spanky | 11:32 a.m. Feb. 15, 2008
I can't go to Mexico take a job from a Mexican national, get free health
care, protest, stay forever, or even own land there. But illegal Mexicans can
come into my country and do all of those things with no consequences. There
seems to be something basically wrong with that. Because someone works in the
service industry, or construction trades, does not mean that they don't
have a right to a living wage. Illegal immigrants are keeping wages artificially
low in those sectors, and it's big business, and politicians who are in the
pocket of big business, who allow it.
Bill | 11:37 a.m. Feb. 15, 2008
I agree with Elder Jensen's temperate remarks, despite the fact that I was
in an automobile accident caused by an uninsured, unlicensed, illegal alien
young woman. Just as we cannot lump all illegals into the status of being
gangland murderers or drunk drivers, we cannot lump all of them into the status
of being good, hard-working people simply trying to provide for their
families.
The Church's position isn't the problem. The problem is a FEDERAL (not state) government that won't step up and enforce the borders while increasing legal immigration and guest-worker arrangements.
The Church's position isn't the problem. The problem is a FEDERAL (not state) government that won't step up and enforce the borders while increasing legal immigration and guest-worker arrangements.
Clarity | 11:44 a.m. Feb. 15, 2008
Elder Jensen's comments were his own as he repeatedly said. He comes from
a good democrat background that cares about the average person and tries to
treat everyone with compassion regardless of circumstances. The church has no
policy on this issue and is not required to ask about immigration status for
baptism, however, that is a result of government legislation that is very
confusing and erratically enforced. Other countries have strict immigration
policies, like Italy and the LDS missionaries there are not able to baptize
illegals because that countries laws do not allow it. If you have a beef with
the church's position in the US, then you should push for stronger, clearer
laws regulating immigration. There is never a need to be insulting as to race
or country of origin to anyone however and that is what I took most from Elder
Jensen's comments.
Rule of Law | 11:57 a.m. Feb. 15, 2008
Illegal immigrants, as the name implies, are doing something "ILLEGAL"
- they are violating the laws of the nation. And just as with anyone who
violates the laws of the nation in which they live, they are NOT "being
honest in [their] dealings with their fellowman".
Moreover, they are "supporting, affiliating with, or agreeing with groups or individuals whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints," which officially teaches that we are to be "subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law" (Pearl of Great Price, Article of Faith 12).
Therefore, being an illegal immigrant disqualifies them from Temple worthiness, and any Church authority who knowingly grants temple recommends to illegal immigrants is violating Church doctrine as well as acting as an accessory to a criminal act.
These statements by these Church authorities are repugnant to anyone who believes in the rule of law and the Constitution of this great nation. They should be chastized and released from these official positions as representatives of the Church.
Moreover, they are "supporting, affiliating with, or agreeing with groups or individuals whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints," which officially teaches that we are to be "subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law" (Pearl of Great Price, Article of Faith 12).
Therefore, being an illegal immigrant disqualifies them from Temple worthiness, and any Church authority who knowingly grants temple recommends to illegal immigrants is violating Church doctrine as well as acting as an accessory to a criminal act.
These statements by these Church authorities are repugnant to anyone who believes in the rule of law and the Constitution of this great nation. They should be chastized and released from these official positions as representatives of the Church.
ChickasawMan | 12:10 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
I agree with JMHO. We love our Brothers & Sisters but if the borders are
not secure & the magnet that draws illegals here not removed, we will have
Mexico in America, not my choice for a free land.
daddygeee | 12:10 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
I find this to be one of the most perplexing problems facing the Church and its
members, legal & illegal. While serving as a missionary in L.A. 37 years
ago we were allowed to teach and baptize worthy individuals though they were in
the US illegally. Then, in 1973 about January, we were counseled to stop
baptizing those who did not have their papers but we could continue to teach
them and we encouraged them to be involved in the L.A. Spanish Branch. We
taught a delightful fellow from Nicaragua named Carlos who, at our invitation
continued to read the Book of Mormon in spite of deep resistance from his
immediate family who were very devout Adventists. We left Carlos with the Book
of Mormon and challenged him to read it. That Sunday as I was gathering people
from the foyer to begin our Sunday School meeting (long before the block) Carlos
entered the doors of the Wilshire Building and shook my right hand; his left
hand was shaking the Book of Mormon at me and with tears in his eyes he said
"Este libro es verdadero"! "Puedan bautizarme?" I had to
tell him that I could not.
hypocrite | 12:09 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
Have you ever sped? Have you ever changed lanes without signaling? Did you
forget that you are supposed to pay "use taxes" on untaxed stuff you
ordered over the Internet or bought in another state? Ever "California
stop" at a stop sign? Then YOU are a dishonest lawbreaker, too. Maybe you
should remove the mote from your own eye by turning in your recommend before
calling for immigrants to be denied baptism or temple privileges. That
isn't your call to make.
Many immigrants are more righteous than you or me when it comes to the "weightier matters" of the law.
And the Church never said it's OK to break the law. They simply said let's make sure we are being compassionate in the way we deal with the issue and in the laws we make, and that the Church isn't the enforcer of immigration policies.
There is nothing inherently wrong with coming to the US without permission. It is only wrong because the lawmakers made a law saying it is illegal. There's nothing wrong with asking the lawmakers to be compassionate in the laws they decide to make that make things "wrong" that would otherwise not be.
Many immigrants are more righteous than you or me when it comes to the "weightier matters" of the law.
And the Church never said it's OK to break the law. They simply said let's make sure we are being compassionate in the way we deal with the issue and in the laws we make, and that the Church isn't the enforcer of immigration policies.
There is nothing inherently wrong with coming to the US without permission. It is only wrong because the lawmakers made a law saying it is illegal. There's nothing wrong with asking the lawmakers to be compassionate in the laws they decide to make that make things "wrong" that would otherwise not be.
Two sense worth | 12:13 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
I suppose LDS businessmen who hire illegal aliens can now justify doing so with
impunity, even though they are breaking the law. Are these lawbreakers to be
treated with compassion?
Right or Wrong. | 12:15 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
Baptism brings the contrite "in the fold" and "on the path."
However, temple privileges are for those who have demonstrated desire,
committment, and sacrifice for the gospel. Under those definitions, it is
conceivable that illegals who so desire and demostrate should get both.
However, honesty is one specifically asked requirement for temple privileges.
Moderating one requirement would seem logically to moderate all requirements.
So it would seem that the Brethern would need to explain clearly what constitues
honesty, moral cleanliness, a full tithe, etc...
But then again, should 1930 and 1940 German LDS members have participated in Jewish persecution? (rhetorical) It was the law for them.
One 'illegal' youth lived with 3 families in our ward. We all liked him very much. When it came time to serve a mission. He knew that he had to go back with little to no chance to return to the USA. He did. Personally I was very impressed.
But then again, should 1930 and 1940 German LDS members have participated in Jewish persecution? (rhetorical) It was the law for them.
One 'illegal' youth lived with 3 families in our ward. We all liked him very much. When it came time to serve a mission. He knew that he had to go back with little to no chance to return to the USA. He did. Personally I was very impressed.
Captain Obvious | 12:17 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
Its about QUANTITY not QUALITY people!
slightly miffed | 12:24 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
Well, I can see their point to some extent. However, I really have a hard time
with .... if you live in zion you do it this way, if you live in the mission
field you do it this way......
I'm not sure I've met a latter day saint who is always honest in his dealings with his fellow man. Heber C. Kimball is the one who initiated the temple recommend, not any other source. It has been passed on by tradition ever since.
In other words, its a "policy of the church" but certainly not Doctrine in any manner whatsoever.
What the church has for policy and for doctrine are quite often Two different animals.
I'm not sure I've met a latter day saint who is always honest in his dealings with his fellow man. Heber C. Kimball is the one who initiated the temple recommend, not any other source. It has been passed on by tradition ever since.
In other words, its a "policy of the church" but certainly not Doctrine in any manner whatsoever.
What the church has for policy and for doctrine are quite often Two different animals.
To Spanky | 12:25 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
You can't go to Mexico and basically take the country for all it's
worth?
Just what the heck do you think Americans have been doing in Mexico, Central America and South America for centuries? Think, United Fruit Company. Or Panama -- a country carved out of Columbia when Columbia wouldn't give us the land necessary to build a canal.
Or, in the alternative, if we don't want to do it in Mexico -- we just turn that part of Mexico into the US (i.e., Texas and California)!
Irony again reigns over reason in the immigration debate!!
Just what the heck do you think Americans have been doing in Mexico, Central America and South America for centuries? Think, United Fruit Company. Or Panama -- a country carved out of Columbia when Columbia wouldn't give us the land necessary to build a canal.
Or, in the alternative, if we don't want to do it in Mexico -- we just turn that part of Mexico into the US (i.e., Texas and California)!
Irony again reigns over reason in the immigration debate!!
Texas Resident | 12:30 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
The government either needs to enforce its laws or change them to something that
they will enforce. Why should a church try to hold its members to a standard
that the government ignores? I feel strongly that citizens of a county should
not be left to decide which laws need to be followed and which laws can be
ignored.
I have empathy for all of the people that want to come here to improve their lives. Many of them are good and hard working people. But our society maintains order through its laws.
When I moved to Texas from a very expensive city, my auto insurance doubled. Why? Because the uninsured motorist line item went up so much. It is sad to know that everyone around me EXPECTS to get hit by an illegal at some point.
Government enforcement is a key. Welcome people from other countries, but allow for immigration in the law, enforce what is on the books, and do not encourage people to break the law by rewarding them for coming here the wrong way.
I have empathy for all of the people that want to come here to improve their lives. Many of them are good and hard working people. But our society maintains order through its laws.
When I moved to Texas from a very expensive city, my auto insurance doubled. Why? Because the uninsured motorist line item went up so much. It is sad to know that everyone around me EXPECTS to get hit by an illegal at some point.
Government enforcement is a key. Welcome people from other countries, but allow for immigration in the law, enforce what is on the books, and do not encourage people to break the law by rewarding them for coming here the wrong way.
Clarification needed | 12:36 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
"Remember Elder Uchtdorf's family fled East Germany illegally."
However, he entered West Germany legally!!! That is the important point. The Mexicans who violate our borders are here illegally, and that is what is important.
"Why is it ok for us to live in a rich and prosperous nation and deney (sic) our borhters (sic)and sisters these blessings."
So based on your criteria should we allow the population of the whole third world to enter the United States??? Should US citizens be allowed to vote on such a proposal, or should we dispense with our representative political system and adopt your proposed theocracy???
However, he entered West Germany legally!!! That is the important point. The Mexicans who violate our borders are here illegally, and that is what is important.
"Why is it ok for us to live in a rich and prosperous nation and deney (sic) our borhters (sic)and sisters these blessings."
So based on your criteria should we allow the population of the whole third world to enter the United States??? Should US citizens be allowed to vote on such a proposal, or should we dispense with our representative political system and adopt your proposed theocracy???
Gavroche | 12:48 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
I was intrigued by the following statement by one of the posters above: "I
hate to think about sending people back into a situation where the big worry in
a person's life is how to get enough money to feed my family. But does that
justify breaking the law?"
I wondered why it sounded familiar, and then I remembered: This was Jean Valjean's dilemma in Les Miserables. Stealing bread to feed his sister's children was illegal - but letting them starve was morally wrong. So, he stole. Inspector Javert could only see the first part - breaking the law. I think that Javert would find many kindred spirits in the discussion on illegal immigration. Truly, our illegal immigration problem is one of "Les Miserables".
I wondered why it sounded familiar, and then I remembered: This was Jean Valjean's dilemma in Les Miserables. Stealing bread to feed his sister's children was illegal - but letting them starve was morally wrong. So, he stole. Inspector Javert could only see the first part - breaking the law. I think that Javert would find many kindred spirits in the discussion on illegal immigration. Truly, our illegal immigration problem is one of "Les Miserables".
bob | 12:56 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
I know a man who was excommunicated from the church for not paying taxes.
That's a federal law that seems unfair. So it is with illegal immigration.
The Church should not look the other way on this. Pingree's attitude that
people should stay in their own country but since they're here we should
embrace them is assnine. Uchtdorfs fleeing East Germany is not the same as
mexicans coming to the US illegally.
Extending the analogy | 12:50 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
Since Elder Jensen equates illegal immigration to civil trespass, let's
take the analogy a little further. Suppose while the Jensen family were away on
a church assignment, some homeless people took up residence in Elder
Jensen's back yard--built a little shack there, moved in their family and
friends, ran an electric line from his house (not to mention cable and maybe
telephone) and maybe "borrowed" some of his food storage items.
When Elder Jensen returned, would he compassionately allow them to remain there, using his resources? Maybe, but out of respect for the safety and comfort, and financial security, of his family, it's likely that he would work with appropriate police authorities, homeless advocates, and other resources to compassionately remove them from his property and help them get a start elsewhere.
Maybe the compassionate part that we should be considering is how to help illegal immigrants to get on their feet--once they're BACK IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY. And it seems that the Church has quite a few resources to do that, and is doing that now.
But I am puzzled why the Church appears to be encouraging the homeless to take up residence in our backyard.
When Elder Jensen returned, would he compassionately allow them to remain there, using his resources? Maybe, but out of respect for the safety and comfort, and financial security, of his family, it's likely that he would work with appropriate police authorities, homeless advocates, and other resources to compassionately remove them from his property and help them get a start elsewhere.
Maybe the compassionate part that we should be considering is how to help illegal immigrants to get on their feet--once they're BACK IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY. And it seems that the Church has quite a few resources to do that, and is doing that now.
But I am puzzled why the Church appears to be encouraging the homeless to take up residence in our backyard.
hman | 12:59 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
How many of us forget that our ancestors broke laws to practice polygamy?
Church leaders chose to follow the tenets of their faith instead of the
princicples of the 12th A of Faith. This is not a black and white issue. The
vast majority of illegals come here with good intentions- to work hard and
provide a better life for their children, the same reason our ancestors came to
this country and this valley. If you were in their situation would you come
here for a better life, or continue dwelling in the cycle of poverty, and no
opportunity? Would you want a better life for your children, and do anything
moral to obtain? Is it better to commit a civil trespass, and provide for your
progeny or let your kids suffer and go hungry? What would our ancestors do?
What did they do? They broke the law. Was Brigham Young not a great prophet
who also broke the law?
We secure the borders, deport all the illegal criminals we can, and help in the graceful and compassionate assimulation of those who are already here.
What would Jesus do?
We secure the borders, deport all the illegal criminals we can, and help in the graceful and compassionate assimulation of those who are already here.
What would Jesus do?
The beginning of the end | 1:04 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
It doesn't seem like allowing baptims should be a problem since this is
supposely only a first step on the road to "exaltation." These would
be the kind of acts that a good Samaritan would provide. On the other hand,
I've always thought that those people that hold temple recommends are those
that are only willing to live by the very highest of spiritual principles. I
don't even hold one myself since I'm not currently a full tithe payer.
What becomes interesting is that if we start making exceptions for breaking one
law, such illegal trespassing, why wouldn't we make exceptions for others.
It would allow us to open us the temples to everyone.
bob2 | 1:21 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
No matter how "global" the Mormon Church is the United States of
America is still a soverign nation!
Kate | 1:21 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
I am LDS and I see nothing wrong in baptizing an illegal immigrant, although I
do not condone their illegal status. However, entering the temple is another
matter entirely. The interview for a temple recommend asks if the person is
honest in all their dealings. Obviously an illegal immigrant could not
truthfully answer yes to that question, and they should not qualify for a temple
recommend. This is something that needs to be taken seriously by the church,
otherwise they need to be equally lax on the other criteria, such as being a
full tithe payer, or keeping the Word of Wisdom, which would make a mockery of
temple attendance. Anyone hiring illegal immigrants also comes under the
umbrella of not being honest and they too should not qualify for a temple
recommend.
Remember | 1:22 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
Jensen seems to be one who just runs off at the mouth. I doubt that he speaks
for the church in most respects. I'm not sure that's his calling.
However, if it is, maybe a better setting apart blessing is in order, and maybe
a little more authority to speak on what the Lord thinks, and not on what the
church thinks.
Basically this:
IF the First Presidency can't say it for themselves, why are we Supposing that Jensen Has some Kind of Authority Here.
I don't see him set apart or called as a member of the twelve or the first presidency.
Basically this:
IF the First Presidency can't say it for themselves, why are we Supposing that Jensen Has some Kind of Authority Here.
I don't see him set apart or called as a member of the twelve or the first presidency.
GI Jack | 1:29 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
My question is this.....why are illegal immigrants given resident tuition, but I
as a military member cannot have it? I am stationed here, as a resident of
another state and I have to pay out of state tuition for my kids. I have an
issue with the double-standard.
To: The beginning of the end | 1:25 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
"What becomes interesting is that if we start making exceptions for
breaking one law, such illegal trespassing, why wouldn't we make exceptions
for others. It would allow us to open us the temples to everyone."
Opening up the temples to everyone?
WOW -- What a concept?!?!?!
Opening up the temples to everyone?
WOW -- What a concept?!?!?!
BornAmerican | 1:45 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
REMEMBER:
I can only hope you're right,in which case, a clarification of position should be forthcoming very shortly,and a muzzle (figuratively) placed on Jensens snout at once. What isn't clear in the article,to me anyway, is whether Jensens pronouncements are his own or if he felt confidant in speaking for the GA's. Your point is noted and well taken.
I can only hope you're right,in which case, a clarification of position should be forthcoming very shortly,and a muzzle (figuratively) placed on Jensens snout at once. What isn't clear in the article,to me anyway, is whether Jensens pronouncements are his own or if he felt confidant in speaking for the GA's. Your point is noted and well taken.
Just a thought | 1:55 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
How many of you people who say you believe in obeying, honoring and sustaining
the law who are using this as a reson to take a stand against undocumented or
illegal aliens having full privileges in the church are truly always honest in
your obedience to the law? Do you ever speed or break other driving rules? Do
you ever park illegally? Do you ever litter? Have you ever taken anything from
a hotel room?
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
GI Jack | 2:38 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
File a lawsuit against Utah for violation of your equal rights.
Dave | 3:27 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
Would you deny baptism to a person for speeding? At this point, being illegally
here is a misdemeanor and not a felony. If the laws change and government
requirements change, the LDS Church will comply with what is asked. Right now,
the problem is being debated. The acceptance or rejection of illegals has yet
to be determined. Up until the recent light shed upon the problem, it was
winked at. Don't be so hasty to jump on any church or organization that
did not create the situation, but is merely trying to help people in the best
way possible.
Anonymous | 4:17 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
LET THE CHRUCH SUPPORT THEM ALL FROM CRADLE TO GRAVE IF THEY WANT THEM SO BAD!!
re: Just a thought/Dave | 4:38 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
If we have not done any of these things you listed to break the law, does our
opinion that immigration laws need to be enforced have any more value or weight?
Probably not to you so your comment is pointless.
Give me a break! What a cop out of a statement.
Give me a break! What a cop out of a statement.
Hey Dave | 4:36 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
Immigration laws is very complicated and it takes a specially trained person to
enforce it properly. One thing that is clear: Illegal immigration is not a mere
misdemeanor. Even a first time offender can be placed in jail for up to 6
months before being deported. Someone who re-enters the country illegally after
being previously deported has committed a FELONY.
An illegal immigrant who lies about their status when they fill out the I-9 employment paperwork commits perjury when they swear they are eligible to work in this country. If they use a stolen identity at the same time, it's a felony.
If the entire basis of ones life is based on deception and trying to evade law enforcement, how can someone truly live the gospel and uphold the basic tenets and articles of faith? I suppose people could hold out hope that another amnesty might be forthcoming, but does that solve the fundamental personal honesty problem with these individuals?
It's my understanding that the church excommunicates members convicted for felonies. If that sentence is later pardoned by a governor/president, does the church automatically re-instate membership, or would they prefer a complete repentance process?
An illegal immigrant who lies about their status when they fill out the I-9 employment paperwork commits perjury when they swear they are eligible to work in this country. If they use a stolen identity at the same time, it's a felony.
If the entire basis of ones life is based on deception and trying to evade law enforcement, how can someone truly live the gospel and uphold the basic tenets and articles of faith? I suppose people could hold out hope that another amnesty might be forthcoming, but does that solve the fundamental personal honesty problem with these individuals?
It's my understanding that the church excommunicates members convicted for felonies. If that sentence is later pardoned by a governor/president, does the church automatically re-instate membership, or would they prefer a complete repentance process?
OH Yeah! | 4:45 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
Now I can play the game and stay for ever !
Lancer | 4:56 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
Sounds to me like many are ready to leave the Church over a pint of cream.
Kevin | 5:00 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
To Kate,
Why isn't the Baptismal interview (and worthiness) just as important and significant as the Temple recommend? Your double standard is baseless. Worthiness to be baptized is the same as worthiness to enter the Temple. Look into it and you will see that I am right.
Why isn't the Baptismal interview (and worthiness) just as important and significant as the Temple recommend? Your double standard is baseless. Worthiness to be baptized is the same as worthiness to enter the Temple. Look into it and you will see that I am right.
Anonymous | 5:16 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
Looks like illegals have taken over this site. Have fun talking about nothing!
Unalienable rights | 5:26 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that
they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among
these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Isn't that what the Illegal Immigrants are seeking?
We can enforce immigration laws or make laws that give order to the chaos and allow persons to pursue their unalienable rights.
Isn't that what the Illegal Immigrants are seeking?
We can enforce immigration laws or make laws that give order to the chaos and allow persons to pursue their unalienable rights.
Homeless status | 5:30 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
If I civil trespass in front of a LDS temple, will the church use their own
security guards to remove me or call just call the cops!!!!
Elder Jensen | 5:32 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
Elder Jensen was not speaking on his own errand. He was speaking at the call of
President Monson.
"Jensen, speaking at a forum at Westminster College, emphasized that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints hasn't taken a position on any particular legislation. He did say, however, that he was speaking on behalf of the LDS Church's governing First Presidency."
Nice attempt at disavowing someone on the Lord's errand
"Jensen, speaking at a forum at Westminster College, emphasized that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints hasn't taken a position on any particular legislation. He did say, however, that he was speaking on behalf of the LDS Church's governing First Presidency."
Nice attempt at disavowing someone on the Lord's errand
DP | 5:38 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
Is a law really a law if it's not enforced? Jay walking, going 9 mph
faster than the speed limit, swearing in public etc. How can you blame Mexicans
for coming to our country? Look at our actions - we give them driver's
licenses, free health care, we provide government documents in Spanish, we
educate their kids for free, we allow them to sue legal citizens in our courts -
just to name a few. Sure they came "illegally," but we knew what was
happening. We could have stopped them if we felt it was a real need.
Post 9/11 is makes more sense than ever to secure the border and prevent future boarder crossings - but trying to send people back to Mexico is ridiculous. Our laws say crossing the boarder is illegal, but our actions encourage it. Out of one side of our mouth we say "it's illegal" but out of the other side our actions say come and we'll take care of you. How can you punish Mexican's for their actions - our actions have condoned their behavior all along.
Good for you PJ.
Post 9/11 is makes more sense than ever to secure the border and prevent future boarder crossings - but trying to send people back to Mexico is ridiculous. Our laws say crossing the boarder is illegal, but our actions encourage it. Out of one side of our mouth we say "it's illegal" but out of the other side our actions say come and we'll take care of you. How can you punish Mexican's for their actions - our actions have condoned their behavior all along.
Good for you PJ.
Ken | 5:46 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
If the temple recommend questions are answered truthfully, an illegal would not
qualify for a recommend. Also, it would be in violation of the Articles of
Faith.
Andrew | 5:53 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
Here's the thing: immigration isn't going to go away. It's not
going to get easier to enforce. We can sit here and complain about it, or we can
try to deal with it as peaceably as possible. As an LDS church member, I figure
if the church is making a mistake, they are erring on the side of mercy
("For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged"). The temple
recommend worthiness is self-reported - God will be the final judge, and
it's not for us to say what He will say. Yes, being here is illegal and
those who do live in a constant state of breaking the law. Do we not all live in
a constant state of breaking some law - either of man or of God? If you say no,
then congratulations, you're perfect. The Church teaches its members to
keep the law - in whatever country they are in. The Church does not enforce the
law. Does an LDS border patrol agent now have a moral dichotomy? No, he does his
job.
In closing, I can't help but think and wonder about the verse "and the Lamanites shall blossom as the rose..."
In closing, I can't help but think and wonder about the verse "and the Lamanites shall blossom as the rose..."
Tellin the truth | 5:50 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
If I steal a nickel or $1,000,000 bucks, which is worse? They are BOTH stealing.
Stealing is a moral crime in the God's eyes. Only the law sees them as
misdemenor and felony.
It's the same principle here. Illegal means illegal.
You people who use moral relativity are missing something very critical and important.
Marlin, you can have their pesos, cuz I'm done giving you my tithing dollars. Enjoy your compassion and your new amigos when our country is over run with illegals. Adios estupdido.
My church left me. I didn't leave it. It used to be black and white, now it's gray all over.
It's the same principle here. Illegal means illegal.
You people who use moral relativity are missing something very critical and important.
Marlin, you can have their pesos, cuz I'm done giving you my tithing dollars. Enjoy your compassion and your new amigos when our country is over run with illegals. Adios estupdido.
My church left me. I didn't leave it. It used to be black and white, now it's gray all over.
Helen | 5:53 p.m. Feb. 15, 2008
I talk to several today who are questioning the law of the land issue. They are
as well contemplating leaving the church. I'm undecided.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
- Obama, Soviet's Afghan endgame 1:04 a.m.
- Victims of Bhopal demand cleanup 12:55 a.m.
- Pakistanis kill 15 militants 12:47 a.m.
- SLCC campus briefs 12:24 a.m.
- Westminster campus briefs 12:22 a.m.
- SUU campus briefs 12:20 a.m.
- Sports on the air 12:12 a.m.
- Editorial: Buy local this Christmas 12:11 a.m.
- Conflicting advice for wise shopping 12:11 a.m.
- Half-baked nonstrategy will not work 12:11 a.m.
- Why is Y. ignoring spew of hatred?
- Unbeaten BYU takes trip to Logan
- Mitchell said to share LeBaron traits
- BCS just keeps dirty laundry on spin
- Teen girl killed in Kaysville crash
- Utahns growing tired of Bennett
- 2 citations issued at Y.-U. game
- Orem pair getting a rep for crime
- MWC awaits bowl destinations
- Simple candies for the holidays
- Hall mouths off about hate of Utah
914 - Cougars beat Utes in overtime483
- Hall reprimanded by MWC405
- Max Hall issues apology392
- Hall's pain reflects self-betrayal358
- Utes won't respond to Hall278
- BYU says Hall incident resolved244
- Why is Y. ignoring spew of hatred?237
- 2 citations issued at Y.-U. game184
- Religion in politics is tiresome154
If you want to learn what it's like to be an astronaut on the...
First, a big thank you to all who posted questions here for me to ask...
As the TV cameras Tuesday night scanned the West Point audience during...
Latest comments
What a fun game to watch!! I love seeing the Aggs step up huge on defense. I...
Take of your Rose-colored glasses and watch the game again. Y'all got beat...
Hey guys... what does BYU and Swag have in common??......... They both get...
Way to go AGGIES!! Can't wait till UNLV comes into Provo and punks them again.
From an example of a law abiding citizen, Rodney King ..."U of U and BYU...
First, you must bleed that parched, ugly, awful royal blue, because that's...
I did not know anyone in the accident, I am not from this area; but the...
Yum...I want some now.
don't get me wrong, i have tons of respect for coach sloan and what he's done...
If we could only figure out a use ( like the presto-logs from sawdust ) for...
Advertisements
What is their crime? Trying to feed their families. If I were injured and my 13 year old son decided the best way to get help for me was to put me in a car and drive me to the hospital, should he be excommunicated for breaking the law? No? Okay, maybe disfellowshipped then?
It is easy to judge when you haven't had to make the tough decision. Remember we are all sinners. There are only a few sins that immediately disqualify you for baptism or a temple recommend.
Note Church policy, however on missionaries. An illegal alien cannot be recommended as a missionary. Interesting.