Comments about ‘LDS Church repeats call for 'civil discourse' on immigration’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, July 17 2010 8:00 p.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended

There can never be a "successful resolution" until the laws are enforced.

Through their actions, they shall be known. I have learned more by example than by words in my life. As far as the immigration mess goes, I see the greed of men supersede that of God time and again.

"Careful reflection and civil discourse" are catch words that mean very little, and will be interpreted by all different groups as supporting their cause. Neither will budge, as it is an argument for massive amnesty that will break our country on one side, and enforcement of our laws that we have not seen for 25 years on the other.

To either side, there is no middle ground. As amnesty has been tried before and created the mess we have now. It's now time to try the other, which will surely lead to calls of profiling, racist, compassion, etc.

We've had words for 25 years, now we need action. It's important to this young generation that they learn by example that laws are to be followed, and crimes do not pay.


@ eagle

"... however, the long-term vibrancy and growth of the church is certainly tied with Latin America."

No. The long-term vibrancy and growth of the Church is tied to its doctrinal truth. No unhallowed hand can stop the Work from progressing. Additionally, what does securing our borders with Mexico have to do with the growth of the Church in Latin America? Make the link - don't just assume that it is just a PR issue.

All those who simplify the immigration issue (i.e. "What about honoring and sustaining the laws, etc.?") should consider which laws and rulers they would obey. Would you honor and obey Hitler, Jim Crow laws, or Stalin's orders to summarily execute kulaks if you were put in those situations?

Remember that the Church resisted anti-poligamy laws passed by Congress for years until at least 1890. Remember also that when the Saints left Winter Quarters, crossed the plains, they settled in what was then Mexico (now Salt Lake City, Utah).


When my house is broken,I fix it, not move into the neighbors house. Take care of the real problem. Revolution?


Would LDS faithful that are Latino living in the confines of Utah or Arizona feel that they are indeed welcomed? I think it is fair to say that an uneasiness exists. These families have relatives throughout Mexico and other countries in Latin America. They talk to these people. That would be one possible connection.

While I don't know how many posters on the DN blogosphere are LDS, it is fair to assume that many are. And those who brought forth the list have been called heroes, their actions called heroic, etc. Many might agree that it took courage for them to do this etc. Many others feel that they have broke the law period. Many others feel that they may have broke the law but for the better good etc. Go research the blogs since the list came out and you will find comments of this theme. Unless all of these are written by non-LDS, which I doubt, then there are many out there amount the Utah Anglo LDS faithful that feel what these people did in exposing the list was the right thing to do.


Bill in Nebraska

Please, I'm as conservative as one can get but I can also see the problem of trying to expel 12 million people. That to me makes absolutely no sense at all. I believe that the Lord would rather for us to work out a means that for those who REALLY want to be here and work for a living should be given the opportunity to do just that and to apply for permanent residence in this country. It will be a near impossibility and a load of cash to deport 12 million illegal immigrants from this country. We have been the melting pot for the world since our inception in 1776 and our constitution is devinely inspired. It is time to be civil and to come up with a series of law that will accomodate all. I agree in principle with Arizonia but I disagree with the anti-amnesty people. Ask your self deep down if Christ would deport them or would he work to make it feasible for them to meet the requirements to stay here. I appauld the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve in this statement. So we must be civil also.


I would be shocked, unless there is a revelation or something, that President Monson or anybody in the church leadership will:

A) call all illegal aliens of LDS faith to return home to the countries of origin and do so post-haste for the good of our country or to follow the 12th Article of Faith.

B) will come out with any political position calling for increased border security, comprehensive immigration reform etc.

I would suspect that a call for understanding and brotherhood would be in order. However, all I did suggest that recent events and emphasis on illegal immigration can increase tensions between the Anglo-LDS community and the Latino LDS community.

As far as the growth of the church, perhaps its growth will take place based on doctrinal truth as stated above. The church is growing rapidly certainly. But as I understand church doctrine, there is a battle with the Adversary for every soul and I feel this is a divisive issue in which the Adversary would indeed find useful to His cause.

Perhaps compassion and attempts at understanding rather than strident positions and actions fit better within the doctrine of the church...


Economic differences aside, we as a country must enforce our immigration policies and stop believing that as a nation can take in all of the rest of the world's problem people who seek better lives here.

Our citizens are having problems just trying to survive. We have a large unemployment problem, two wars, huge financial debt, burgeoning health-care crisis in this country. Now we want invite every illegal to come here to take advantage of 'Uncle Sugars' generosity. You now increase the rate of crime, homelessness, alcohol and drug abuse, you breed inner city gangs with dis-contempt for law and order when these people realize the 'American Dream' is nothing but a dream. A huge underclass of poor people who aren't even willing to pay for the basic necessities (i.e. electricity, gas, etc.) and sponge off the generosity from our 'free' social services at taxpayers expense. What's wrong with this picture? Send them home and have them make it in their own countries of origin. Their problems shouldn't be added to our's.


Please allow me to pull back the Zion curtain for you...

At 3.79 million square miles and with over 309 million people, the United States is the third or fourth largest country by total area, and the third largest both by land area and population.

It is one of the world's most ethnically diverse and multicultural nations, the product of large-scale immigration from many countries.

The U.S. economy is the world's largest national economy, with an estimated 2009 GDP of $14.3 trillion.

So, no, John Adams, someone 'breaking' into my 2800 sq. ft. house tonight, and 'wanting to stay' isn't comparable to desperate people pouring through our porous southern border, seeking opportunity and a better life.

Can you understand this?


When the law is changed, to allow easier and more immigration, I will remind all of you (illegal you say) immigrant haters that you staked your opinions and actions on the need to follow the law, so follow the new one. And help shape the new law. The present law needs change, but nobody is really debating the details. To some it means clamping down more. To some it means open borders. This is the debate we must engage in, and soon. Our neighbors to the south used to live in the US southwest, they are not an army coming to overrun this country, they are not terrorists, so chill, you immigrant haters. Make immigration legal and easy. Get the police going after real criminals, and stop wasting their time and our newsprint with your (illegal you say) immigrant bashing. It's a non sequiter. look it up frogger I mean flogger.


I'm surprised that people are comparing this to gay marriage. One involves social acceptance, the other involves a severe risk to human life. The church has been active is passing legisltion for civil rights for glbt individuals.

Most Americans have never been in a position where they had to choose between keeping the law and keeping their families alive. It is a rare blessing that we enjoy as a testament to our wonderful country. It is a blessing that many in Latin America no longer enjoy. While not all come with benign intentions (drug running is still far too prevalent), the vast majority of illegals only commit the crime of coming to the country without papers (because papers cost too much...our immigration system is biased towards the rich and educated). They come here to work, not freeload.

As usual, the LDS leaders are displaying wisdom beyond the average church member. That's part of why they are church leaders.
I don't hear them condoning illegal immigration; I hear them saying God's children are more important than political statutes, and we need to make sure our actions don't needlessly cost human lives.

Dave from Taylorsville

DocSarvis | 5:42 p.m. July 17, 2010-

Folks, It's people who talk like this that foster lynch mobs and fan the flames of Nazi like regimes.

Be very carful when you read and you will see Satan poking up is head here and there.

Dave from Taylorsville

lkball00 | 6:50 p.m. July 17, 2010
"God would not have his people cross a boarder, steal people's identity, smuggle drugs into the country, and not pay taxes, but collect the benefits. Use your brain people. Think for yourself, quit letting the church speak for you!"

The LDS Church does not condone "steal people's identity, smuggle drugs into the country, and not pay taxes, but collect the benefits." Asking for civility in dealing with it is a Christ like quality.

Now as for "God would not have his people cross a boarder. . ." Well now, how many time can we go into the Old Testament and find that very case?

And the LDS people don't have the leaders of the Church speaking for them. . . the leaders speak on GODs behalf.


Whether or not the LDS church leaders are inspired, their logic makes sense.

Uncivil rhetoric leads to hasty, irrational actions. And irrational actions are just that--irrational. Civil discourse provides room for logic to flourish.

However, if you're so sick of talk that you just want anything to be done, I suppose there is no sense in logical discourse. Just make sure you don't complain if you don't like the way things turn out down the road.


If the important issue is to "keep families intact" (see jfarker 3:13pm), the same "compassion" should be applied to all criminals. Sending a criminal to jail or prison breaks up families. Obviously, that's not the issue.

It seems each big player (political parties, businesses, churches) has something to gain by encouraging disobedience to existing law. The majority of the little folk, like me, see something wrong with their stance and we find the call for compassion to be disingenuous. There's more to this than meets the eye.

Even this recent call for civil discourse is one-sided. You have Rep. Sandstrom on one side and 29 people on the other. Stacking the so-called "roundtable" doesn't fly. In fact, it is offensive because those who organized this stunt obviously thought we'd be duped by whatever recommendation they come up with.

I have become firm on my position partially due to the fact that those who encourage lawlessness will not honestly explain their reasoning. Rather, they hide behind phoney emotional pleas. However you slice it, these are lies. And the little folk know it.

Personally, I'm disappointed with how the Church is handling this.


Meanwhile, hundreds of meters away, the Energy Solutions Arena crowd most emphatically cheers Napolitanos statement that the second amendment gives people the right to have guns to protect themselves from tyrants. Now uh... exactly how many Utahns think that the Obama Administration is a tyrannical one?


re from SoUtBoy: "Ask yourself this question: if you lived in Mexico under the conditions 99% of the people live in with no hope to better yourself or your situation would you come to America too?"

That is Mexico's problem! They need to take care of their own civil problems. The answer is not infiltrating America with all of their illegals and all of their babies. Get a grip on trying to justify this situation. You can't. It is illegal pure and simple. Do you know what that means?


The church is right to call for civility on this issue. Like any other institution they must take the high road. But, if you poll Utah and U. S. citizens, the vast majority of them want to see the border closed and our laws enforced. Instead, the laws (immigration laws) have been bent by public officials in order to pander to those who break them. The church should take a stand on this issue and simply state that all members are expected to obey the laws of the land. That should include immigration laws. U. S. citizens are expected to obey ALL laws so why not illegal immigrants? Our elected officials have failed us. I hope the church leadership doesn't.

John Adams

@ Galileo | 9:40 p.m.

How is it different? The person that breaks into your home comes uninvited. He's out of work. He sees that you have "plenty" so he helps himself to better his situation and that of his family. He's broken the law by entering illegally and what isn't his to take. How is it different?

Truth and Light

Before Orange County was built, "illegal" members there could only go to Los Angeles because if they went to San Diego, they were at risk of being identified at random road blocks. I cannot understand why such activity is tolerated.

We believe in sustaining the law, so let's do what we say.


If I were to hazard one guess about the "civility" of the immigration issue, I would look at the comments posted on this and other boards.

Sometimes there isn't much civility.

A year or two ago, a meat packing plant in Postville, Iowa was subject of a federal raid looking for undocumented aliens. Dozens were taken into custody. Children were separated from parents for significant lengths of time.

One can suggest that the raid was "uncivil" since federal agents did not take into consideration family needs or situations of those detained.

I have soul-searched this issue at length. I find myself agreeing, and disagreeing, on nearly every point made. I am conflicted.

I firmly believe, though, that for the health of the country, we must come to some resolution, be it amnesty or deportation, or some combination of the two.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments