1. The 4 immigration bills dubbed the Utah solution are constitutional. The US
has power over naturalization/citizenship, not immigration. Prior to case law
beginning in 1893, Immigration was and is a State Power. The constitution wasn'
changed.2. The Utah Compact states "Immigration is a federal
policy issue between the U.S. government and other countries not Utah and other
countries." So the 4 bills violate The Utah Compact, not the
constitution.3. There are 4 bills. One that provides enforcement HB
479, one that provides for migrant workers HB 466, one that provides sponsoring
HB 469, and one that provides a guest worker permit HB 116. HB 116 was modified
to become a combination of others and could be deleted and the 3 bills remaining
can function and many believe would work better.4. With HB 469, you
don't need HB 116. Someone here illegally could find a sponsor, go home and come
back with permission.5. If we are going to have a line for people to
come to this country, you can't reward those that bypass the line. HB 116
violates that. HB 469 doesn't.
There is probably very little that is similar when comparing the immigration of
the Germans, Poles, and Italians to the immigration of those from south of the
border. For one thing, the Germans, Poles, and Italians probably did not march
on the steps of the capital making demands as the immigrants (legal and illegal)
in Arizona do.
I believe a balanced and thoughtful approach to immigration is exactly what is
needed. I've seen people who made it their life's goal to see that there is no
immigration, period. I believe a charitable, yet orderly, approach is what the
Lord would want us to do. The USA was quite willing to let in other groups of
immigrants (German, Poles, Italians, etc.) in the past. If there were an
orderly, consistent approach or policy for immigration, I believe those who do
and would immigrate could really contribute to our society.Call me
unrealistic, but I still see it that way.
i see why church leaders warned months ago to be compassionate. And the church
is simply supporting new state law. I don't get it. Would angry posters like the
churchto disagree with the State? Or do angry posters on this board think
the church should do whatpay to deport! Illegal immigrants? The church is
not the entity who let the immigrants stay. The State of Utah let them stay. Hey
uncivil posters! Now the State of Utah, seeing no. good way out of this mess,
may see a need to change a law or two. And the church is doing its. civic duty
by supporting the law andlawmakers of the land.Someone tell me what
theChurch of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints should do? Isee that
the leaders are doing just about what theyneed to do. Not that they need
my endorsement. Or any of yours, either. All the criticizing will hurt only the critics. WE need the Church but it does not need our
endorsement to remain true. "My ways are not your ways."That's
my opinion. Now someone explain, please, why your Creator should do it your way.
Members of the LDS church would do well to review President Bensen's landmark
address, Fourteen Fundamentals of a Prophet. Highlights include:1.
The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything.2.
The living prophet is more vital to us than the Standard Works.3.
The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet.4.
The prophet will never lead the Church astray.7. The prophet tells
us what we need to know, not always what we want to know.8. The
Prophet is not limited by mens reasoning.10. The prophet may well
advise on civic matters.11. The two groups who have the greatest
difficulty in following the prophet are the proud who are learned and the proud
who are rich.12. The prophet will not necessarily be popular with
the world or the worldly.14. The prophet and the presidencythe
living prophet and the First Presidencyfollow them and be blessedreject them and
suffer.Please spare me the line that the Prophet hasn't spoken on
this issue. He directs the church's affairs. President Bensen would stand with
the Prophet on this and every issue!
With this endorsement, the church has lost all credibility. When Brandon Davies
got kicked off the BYU basketball team for honor code violations (violation was
not illegal, just against church policy), many in the USA, although disagreeing
with the action, still lauded the church for standing up for its honor code and
having the integrity to dismiss a player even though they had a chance of being
in the final 4. Now the church is agreeing that it is OK to lie, steal and break
the law (identity/social security/job theft and fraud), just pay a fine and all
is well. How hypocritical is that?? I am truly disappointed in the church for
Since this is not a doctrinal or moral issue (ignore that it's immoral to
flagrantly break the law and steal benefits) why is the church taking a stand on
this? This is a political issue!As for the 12th Article of Faith;
there doesn't seem to be much room for interpreting "obeying, honoring and
sustaining the law." Perhaps people need to reacquaint themselves with the
definition of those words.Concerning the point of loving our
neighbor; if my neighbor breaks into my house and steals things, I'm certainly
not going to go have a key made for him.As for tearing families
apart, we didn't create the situation. Illegal aliens knew what could happen to
their family. They just figure we won't do anything about it.Remember, this is a political issue! This is not on par with Divine
Revelation.If the prophet makes an official declaration then I'll
feel obligated to listen. But, I don't expect that he will. He has more
important matters to deal with!
Apparently when someone uses SCRIPTURE to show up the Mormon Church they take it
personal. My original post biblically condemned the stance the Mormon Church is
taking towards Illegal Immigration. I as a NON-Mormon would have thought
otherwise but the Illegal Immigration problem in this country obviously has many
Mormon hands in the cookie jar. Joe
I can't understand the laws and church position in light of a Hispanic branch
president in SL County who is being deported Friday, April 22.
@BobP I doubt the local native americans considered this area part of mexico.
The Church supports a secure border as well as some reasonable accommodation for
those who are already here and who are trying to make a decent life. It is a
rational position.If we think that deportation is the answer because
these folks are serious lawbreakers, we need to remember that US policy
(stretching back to pre-Reagan days) has been a wink and a nod at the border.For at least two generations, our message to them has been "Dont
cross the border, but if you do, there is a job waiting for you".Now, many have been here for a decade or two. They have children who are
either citizens or who have lived here so long that they have no effective
recollection of their birthplace.Should they have a quick and easy
path to citizenship? No. Should they pay fines and back taxes? Sure. The
adults who have been here long-term should then have a path leading eventually
to legal residency. Their kids should have a path to eventual citizenship.
Perhaps disallow them access to any type of financial support for a period of
years as well.We can make this work.
Hubbardesquire,Great comment, you are right on. I can tell you this
the third time I have tried to comment on the story, the censors are out in
force, they don't want to hear how the majority of Utahns and church members
feel about this issue. You cannot reconcile this position with the 12th article
of faith nor can you justify the church throwing its own law abiding citizens
under the bus in favor of illegals. This is just plain wrong on so many levels
and will hurt the church a lot in my opinion. They will lose membership over it
they just don't seem to care.
As an attorney and member of the Church, the position of the Church on illegal
immigration as stated in the news release, appears to be very contradictory,
impossible to implement and enforce, illegal, unconstitutional, and unchristian.
The church has spoken. The thinking has been done.
A few random thoughts--and speaking in generalities--Could it be said that
Arizona and Utah BOTH have taken positions on immigration which apparently are
in violation of some federal laws on some level? And, the United
Order had to cause doubt and controversy in its day, just as polygamy and the
blacks receiving the priesthood did. Were these "tests?"Is
the church's position on immigration a test? Or, like the church's position on
gay marriage, is this position on immigration a journey into the political
arena?Obviously, I have no answers, only questions. One
thing I am pretty certain about, there a quite a few LDS who are politically
involved in Arizona, and they don't support illegal immigration. Awkward---
The Articles of Faith were not cannonized scripture until fairly recently. Sec
138 of the D and C has been around a lot longer as cannonized scripture. It
covers some of the same territory but does not invariably state that all laws
must be blindly followed.
When Brigham Young and we Mormons hit Utah in 1847 it was still part of Mexico.
@ Hugo Stiglitz | 3:07 p.m. April 21, 2011 Hugo, may I suggest you
go back and reread some history, especially that of Mexico and the southwestern
United States.I wonder, where did all these Mexican learn to speak
There is revelation, and there are decisions made every day in running the
church, that are made by men. I believe if this was Revelation, it would of been
announced in conference? It was Gods Church when I was younger, and
it's still Gods church, but man has tampered with the interpretation of the
doctrine. Preaching one thing, while doing another is not going to teach or help
adherence to the Gospel in my opinion. Our legislature and governor
broke federal immigration law by inviting people to come here illegally. (May 11
deadline for new arrivals). If the Church influenced the writing of the law,
then they encouraged lawbreaking also. Gods law is always Gods law,
and you can't change it on specific issues to suit your needs, even if you are
the church leadership.
Mexican illegal immigrants are only taking back the land that was stolen from
them by the Pioneers who were breaking the law as squatters. Yep, there is a
bucket of cold hard truth for you.
To "Timj | 10:18 a.m. April 21, 2011" - maybe you should read Section
134, specifically verses 5 and 8 (excerpted below). And, keep in mind that some
of the most common words out of the Savior's mouth were "it is
written..." referring personally to the scriptures on multiple occasions
when clarification or guidance was desired.If I follow my Saviors
example, then I would refer to the Doctrine & Covenants (canonized LDS
scripture) and to the Articles of Faith (again, canonized LDS scripture) for
guidance, both of which clearly, without ambiguities, state that all men are
bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside (vs
5) and the commission of crime should be punished according to the nature of the
offenseby the laws of that government in which the offense is committed; and for
the public peace and tranquility all men should step forward and use their
ability in bringing offenders against good laws to punishment. (vs 8)THAT is scripture, and nowhere does it discount the two great commandments -
in fact, allowing someone to suffer their own consequences is an act of the
utmost love; any parent will so testify.
I believe in the official doctrine of the Church, not the individual opinions of
Church leaders.D&C 134 is canonized scripture: "It is NOT
JUST for religions to mingle religious influence with civil
government..."I disagree with the stance on illegal immigration
being taken by the Public Relations department of the Church organization. I
believe their position is in error and contradicts the collective will of the
people of Utah, and the best interests of this State.I do not
"sustain" this position by the Public Relations department of the
Church. It was never presented for a sustaining vote. It was never presented as
a doctrinal or canonized position.I have no problem at all opposing
HB116 and all that it represents. It needs to be repealed, and we need to take a
serious look at how our public servants and elected representatives are being
manipulated by people in high places, but who should not be mingling religious
influence with civil government.
you could not be more wrong .. this is not the church of Pres. Monson
Re:RichardB"It violates the 12th article of faith by rewarding
and encouraging illegal immigration. (The law has a May 11th deadline, which
encourages people to come here illegally)It's against it's own teachings in the
Bishops handbook."The living prophet being called of God has
the right to determine the official position of the Church and to have all of
those who are called to exercise any portion of his authority do so in his
behalf. It is doctrine that the public relations department of the Church is
acting under the direct authority of the President of the Church and those
called or hired to fill those positions are exercising his authority. Every
calling or position in the church falls under the President. It's him and his
direct leader, Jesus Christ, who have made this decision and have allowed this
statement to be released. If you do not agree with it then you do not agree with
Jesus Christ or His Father."This is not the Church I knew as a
child."Of course it is not the church you knew as a Child
because its is God's Church and not RichardB's.
how strange to think that " the constitution will hang by a thread" is
because the church ( in this one case) is part of the problem
Seems odd to me that if a member drinks one cup of coffee, or a can of beer,
they are not in good standing with the church. Yet another can break
immigration laws, steal someone's social security number (fraud), and work
illegally all for financial gain, yet they are considered a member in good
standing (and can attend the temple, be in a bishopric or serve a mission). How
do I explain this irony to my neigbhors who aren't Mormon?
So much ignorance is been portrayed on this board. And the pharisees have come
out full force too!! That is the reason why I find that those that bind
themselves with political ideologies, loose the meaning and understanding, the
light of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I see this ever more constantly with the
Right now-a-days, but I'd say it happens with the left too. Elder Oaks said that
there are truths in both conservatism and liberalism.. but some are been blinded
and fooled by opinionated TV characters. Some are easy and fast to jump and
judge the brethren of the church, and the church. It is an official statement
from the church, and I believe that the Prophet has a wider, and more spiritual
vision on all things, compared to the narrow mind of some. I have a testimony of
the Gospel and of this church, and I support wholeheartedly the brethren and
their official statements. For those of you who are questioning, I'm no one to
judge you or your testimony of the church, for all that I can do is invite you
to pray about it and for it. Seek Wisdom, no men
I love that people cite "The laws of the land must be obeyed" as if it
were the One Commandment to Rule Them All. Study your New Testament, folks:Matthew 22:36-40 (King James Version) 36 Master, which is the great
commandment in the law? 37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord
thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like unto
it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandments
hang all the law and the prophets.Laws are man-made and are
changeable. Yes, the church instructs us to obey, honor, and sustain the laws
of the land. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to make changes to the laws to
improve them. The current immigration system is broken and needs to be fixed.
One could argue that a guest worker program is necessary; however, it is still
unconstitutional for a state to issue visas to citizens of other nations.Some thoughts to consider:1. Would other states have to
honor Utah's state visas?2. Who could apply for them - citizen's in other
countries? Illegals already here?3. What if it runs in conflict with
immigration laws set in other states? 4. If it conflicts with other
states laws, how will this variance in states laws be resolved?5. What if
other states create laws that Utah visas are invalid in their states and that
these individuals are therefore restricted to movement in Utah?6. Who
would be responsible for issuing, managing and tracking these visas?There are valid reasons why immigration (who can and who cannot enter the
United States) is an ennumerated power in the constitution and should remain in
authority by the federal government. Passage of this law would create far more
problems than it would resolve.
i'm confused. it has been 48 hours and the church has not issued a statement
that they were in error. what will i now say in my temple interview. that i
support part of what the Brethryn say and do . Very confusing. And by the way,
please don't preach to me, I do everything that all of you "worthy"
members do and then some.
I believe that the churches should stay out of the state's business, because it
appears that the church believes in breaking the laws are just as guilty as the
illegals that come to this country. I've worked hard all my life and I have to
follow the laws of this land, why shouldn't churches be held just as accountable
as I am? I further believe that there is a way to handle this problems of the
illegals and it's not rewarding them for breaking the law, send them back to
were they came from and make them come to this country the right way.
BYU Alum | 12:24 p.m. April 20, 2011 Cedar Hills, UT I refuse to
believe that my Church would side with law breakers. Mercy CANNOT rob justice. I
want to throw up. ==================== 2 words then
Brother -- Bye Bye.Oh, and please turn in your Temple Recommend on
the way out.
The LDS Church has an obligation to remain out of politics. It is a church not
a PAC. If the Church chooses to become political (ex. Prop 8 in California and
now the support of legislation) it should lose it's designation as a religious
organization. To reiterate other's comments, the Articles of Faith state
clearly that the laws of the land are to be obeyed.
I find it interesting that the church has to repeat itself so many times here.
Why are people so reluctant to take what the church says at face value? This
isn't some general authority giving his opinion on Coke or bananas. This is the
church itself making and repeating a statement regarding how we should treat
immigrants.Also, for those enamored with the 12th Article of Faith,
I encourage you to dig a little deeper. D&C 134 is a good place to start.
Also, remember the two greatest commandments...
@GWBc'mon. Not everything the brethern says or does is inspired or needs
to be substained. They are just men. Sometimes they speak for themselves, and
not for God. Tough to handle, but it is true. The prophet could say bannanas are
the best fruit in the whole world, but that doesn't make the opinion church
doctrine of mean that it came directly from revelation by God.
@Mormon88There's been a lot of responses to the article since you replied
to me, but I will respond. No, the church doesn't need to take a political stand
on everything, or really anything. People who know the church at all know our
moral stances. If there is a bill in direct opposition with the standards,
individual members should take a stand and vote occordingly to those standards.
The church leaders don't need to get involved. It is not only hypocritical for
the leaders of the church to claim to be neutral on issues, but then take
stances and support or oppose legislation, but it creates political hatred that
the church that we don't need.
I choose to follow the counsel of wise church leaders as opposed to listening to
the vitriol and hate spewinhg from talk radio. I can't stand Rush Limbaugh and
all Sean Hannity is nothing but a professsional critic. To Kathy many illegal
immigrants are also victims. About 75 were murdered in cold blood before they
could even try to come here. Mexico is a broken country. Most posters on here
only care about the United States. The fact that violence, poverty, and
corruption exist in Mexico seems pointless to many. We are all brothers and
sisters in the gospel, regardless of country of origin and nationality.
Punishing people for being poor is not a solution. I choose to support the
church and the right to speak out on political issues.
Call me crazy but there is something I just don't understand here. As LDS, we
are always instructed to "obey the laws of the land"- but, that only
applies if we are legalized citizens? Illegals can crash our borders; feed off
our social services; break our laws and the Church approves of this using the
theory that we should "love our brothers"? hmmmm. I seem to have a
disconnect somewhere as I thought we, in the Church, all lived the same laws.
Maybe not? Illegal is illegal and as such the Church should probably not
encourage any other way of thinking or it seems to be back pedaling on what we
have been taught all our lives. Just my opinion. A legal citizen.
@ Viva la migra @ 11:26 you are right on I couldn't have said it better and I'm
so glad someone has common sense.
Chances are close to zero that this ever becomes law. It appears this is nothing
but a public relations ploy. Whether it leaves a good or bad image remains to be
I believe in the Gospel, right now I don't believe much in the actions of some
men. If they want to show compassion, then do so with the tithing
money, not with American jobs.
This country gives out over 1 million green cards a year. More than any other
country. We give out 160,000 just to Mexico last year. Combine that with the
H-2b non agriculture visas that are limited to 66,000 each year to protect
American jobs, and no limit H-2a agriculture Visas, and we give out more than we
should. We can't let everyone in when they want to come. No country can. Saying one thing, and doing another is going to create questions. I find
myself lost here, because I was taught right from wrong, and this does not seem
right. The guest worker bill hurts the illegal immigrants and the citizens, it
only benefits business. And it is amnesty to let people stay here
that are illegal immigrants. Residency of any kind is amnesty.
I'll attempt to follow the reasoning of those who criticize the Church's policy
of compassion.1. They refuse to look beyond the word illegal.2. The only acceptable punishment for undocumented presence is
deportation.3. They refuse to consider any change in policy until
our borders are secure (and in their view they'll never be completely secure, so
the only acceptable change is to make the laws even more harsh).4.
They will not consider the needs of the poor because there are too many.5. They ignore any evidence that having more legal aliens among us could
actually be good because _________________________(fill in the blank).
Yay! I'm with the church's stance, and have been arguing vigorously for quite
some time now that we show compassion to all men, keep families together and
that we're responsible about how law-enforcement is handled. The law
can and should be maintained through principles of righteousness. Let's do our best to get to know all our neighbors and treat them the same way
we'd want to be treated. I'm a better person because my neighbors are
immigrants. No one in this country is "entitled" to a job,
regardless of your birthplace--it's about one's ability and willingness to work
hard, learn more, and respect one another. There should be no
American Aristocracy. Our country should be one that loves the
downtrodden, cares for the huddled masses, makes means for the handicapped and
underprivileged, and still reaches out around the world to care for the
afflicted and oppressed. That's the work and will of God and we are an honored
and blessed nation to be able to do that sort of work. Until the
whole world hears and is liberated and free.
When our compassion leads us to finally allow enough more new visas, more guest
workers and immigrants will finally be legal. Meanwhile those who
hide their prejudices behind "the law" will be scurrying for a new
excuse.Does this issue remind anyone else of the occasional
resurgence of tax protesters among some LDS members? They advocate breaking tax
laws, justifying their actions despite clear reminders from Church leaders to
obey tax laws. I propose that both groups are cut from the same cloth--a
willingness to rationalize their personal selfishness despite clear Church
To me most of the previous posts disagreeing with the Church are good for
nothing but to be cast away. Only the drywaller, the lady who had premature
labor and one or two others had valid concerns worth reading. Anyone would think
the Church got us into this mess.One poster is Back East, I think. I
shudder to think what his impression is.I'm glad I'm not to be sentenced
by some of the previous posters. I'm sure my sentence would be execution.And I'm against illegal immigration!
Based on the comments here, it sounds like a lot of LDS members who sustained
their leaders a couple of weeks ago in conference have sincerely prayed about
this issue and received confirmation that those leaders... are wrong?
The Lord already had an immigration policy which he set forth in Alma 27. The
Book of Mormon was written specifically for the latter day saints so that we
would have a blue print to follow in dealing with today's problems and so that
we would know how to handle this issue and others.
I suggest that the church find families to sponsor those coming into this
country. Take them off the welfare rolls and take care of them. It is not fair
to take our taxes to support something that not all agree on. The best way is
for the church to do it the way it was done in the past. Sponsorship without
hardship to the rest of the citizens of the country or this state. Check for
disease, criminal activity and identification. That would solve all the problems
we are facing now.
It is hard for me to see this being about anything other than economics. If
member illegals in Utah don't have work then the wards and stakes end up
supporting them. That is an enormous drag on the funds of the church.And with others I wish there were a statement from the First Presidency, or a
statement from the Quorum of the Twelve. Having something come out from the
public affairs office is less than faith promoting. And I appreciate the
Presiding Bishop stepping out to take any bullets, but it has been years (since
LeGrand RIchards) that the statements of the Presiding Bishopric have carried
doctrinal weight. If "The Brethren" really feel this way, then let's
have "The Brethren" speak up. Every other issue - even the biannual
statement on members voting - are signed by the First Presidency. Certainly
this issue is as important. Or, perhaps the Brethren are unable to get
unanimity.This is the fist conference in my life when I didn't raise
my hand for EVERY sustaining vote.
"I like the people who are referring to President Benson as their reason
for not following the church's stance on this issue. They should read President
Benson's "Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet," a talk
given in 1980. It was quoted by TWO different speakers in the October 2010
General Conference. Here are a couple of those fundamentals: "The living
prophet is more vital to us than the standard works and The living prophet is
more important to us than a dead prophet. Ezra Taft Benson was a great man and
prophet, but the prophet TODAY is Thomas S. Monson. The church doesn't put out
statements that President Monson isn't 100% behind. Do you really need President
Monson to express directly over the pulpit every stance of the church before you
follow? And to those who get up in arms over illegal immigrants breaking
the law, there was another man who would break the law to help others and make
their lives better. Jesus was often condemned and criticized for healing on the
Sabbath or breaking other stupid rules the leaders had made up. What would He do
with illegal immigrants? Send 'em back? Really?" ~kepurz
The real message today is this: The end justifies the means.It is OK to
take a job from a citizen, using fake ID...as long as you attend church and pay
your tithing.It is OK to be a financial clerk in your local unit...even
though you are paid under the table and are thus violating the tax code.It
is OK to serve a mission as an illegal alien...even though we make special
arrangements so you don't fly or drive a car. (Thanks, Bob Bennett, for the
indemnification.)It is good for illegal aliens to live here...because our
branches are filled with them and they wouldn't have joined otherwise.Did
the Brethren really want to send that message?
No matter what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints supported or
opposed there would be a riff among citizens of Utah and elsewhere. For those
members who have a problem with their support of this issue I would suggest you
pray about it. I've given this a lot of thought and have concerns just because
the current trend of illegals has brought burden on the economy of each state,
vandalism and crime has increased yet we can't blame them for wanting something
better for their families. I believe they should do it legally but that's just
my opinion. I've tried to put myself in their shoes - it's a sad place to be and
it's not my place to judge. So I stand in support of President Monson and the
Brethren for I know there are good reasons for their support of the Bill and as
an active member of the Church it's not my place to question our Prophet..but to
support his decision.
I guess this just goes to show the church is full of contradictions....Early Church History teaches us that the message of the early Church was to
collect in Zion or Utah following baptism......As a Missionary in Australia
during the 70's, one of my converts approached an Apostle for guidance on
immigrating to Utah, along with his wife and three beautiful daughters.....he
was advised to stay in Aussie and grow the Church in his homeland........today
the Church has reversed their position once again inviting illegals to break the
laws of the USA, come to Utah, and steal SS# from law-biding Citizens?How can you view this any other way? I am questioning the wisdom of the
Church and President Monson....I am missing Pres Hinckley alot right now!
It amazes me how many people on here I assume consider themselves good members
of the Church but will pick and choose what they will agree with. When I
opposed the position of the Church on gay marriage, everybody told me I was
directly opposing the prophet, and I reconsidered. But now I'm sure many of
those same exact people are the ones saying they don't need to take advice on
politics from the Church. A bit hypocritical but I guess understandable.
The federal Government already has a guest worker program but employers are
breaking the law along with the employees. The State has no interest
enforcing laws with illegal immigration or they would have stopped all the big
Home Builders from using subs that use illegals. You can't win a drywall bid on
a home built by any of those taking up freeway space on billboards along the
freeway without using illegals and paying under the table. But they do pay for
campaign funds.The new E-Verify law in the State should be for all
companies not for those with 14 or more employees.The foreclosures
or on the brink of foreclosures I know about are directly related to illegal
immigration. I try to keep a good feeling towards others who may or
may not be illegal immigrants. It doesn't make the person. Doesn't make them a
"criminal" per say. But they do have a direct effect on people's lives
and those using them are usually the only ones benefiting in this economy. Like I said if they don't enforce it on these big builders now when
Where is charity and compassion for those out of work and their families? I
guess giving them back their jobs is not a good public relations ploy? I don't
see this ending here. To many questions left unanswered. It was
strange how we went from an enforcement legislature to a guest worker in one
night. People are starting to talk and point fingers.
Those who are stridently, passionately, recalcitrant on the issue of illegal
immigration absolutely refuse to understand that legal immigration from Mexico
is virtually impossible under today's law's and policies. They also absolutely
refuse to understand that a guest-worker program is not amnesty (amnesty grants
a green card, not a work permit). They also absolutely refuse to believe that
we need cheap migrant labor. I suspect that such people have never exchanged
testimonies or broken bread with undocumented immigrants. I have lived in
economically depressed areas where jobs existed that only undocumented
immigrants would take. I have known a number of unemployed, white, legal young
people to turn down jobs they felt were beneath them, and I have known
immigrants -- legal and not -- who would take any work they could. When I was a
child, a railroad track ran in front of our house. It was a conduit for migrant
workers. Many times, they would stop and ask my mother for food. She would fix
them a meal fit for a VIP while they pulled weeds for her. What a kind,
compassionate woman she was! Some of us cannot close our minds and harden our
One thing is clear to me. Members of the church do think for themselves and
don't blindly follow church leaders as many people here have commented in the
past.Maybe the defeat of Prop. 8 had more to do with personal
opinion rather than church leadership. And it looks like most Mormons will
decide for themselves where they stand on immigration issues.That
may be a hard one to swallow for some people, but it does seem that Mormons do
follow the dictates of their own conscience.
It looks like the Church has chosen a compassion public relations move, over the
families of 105,000 Utahns out of work.
Passage of the guest worker program (HB116) was a mistake. Churches, lawmakers,
the attorney general, businesses and others who continue to support it's passage
continue in their mistake. The citizens of Utah will continue to pay for this
mistake as the federal government takes Utah to court. This HB116 should be
quickly repealed. Simply admit the mistake and move on.
This is an interesting situation.Many of those who opposed the
church's involvement in proposition 8 are now saying it is a good thing the
church is getting involved in this political issue. Many of those
who supported proposition 8 based mostly on the church's statements on that
issue are now claiming it is ok to oppose the church on political issues where
it has taken a stance.Smells like a lot of hypocrisy.
Look out Biships, Branch Presidents and relief society presidents - you will be
seeing a very large growth within your wards of those who will be needing help
with paying bills, putting food on the table because of joblessness. Eventually, you will see members moving in or out of your wards. The reason
for many is that they have had to move in with a family member to make ends
meet. I have a friend who is doing that this weekend. Finding a job
is really tough right now for anyone and worse for anyone who is only english
speaking so I hope that the church is willing to give me a job as I have been
looking for over 3 years and haven't been hired. I actually had one company tell
me they wouldn't hire me because I don't speak spanish. And no - it wasn't
HB 116 Why do we need guest workers? We need jobs
The church supports the federal government securing the borders. Well if the
gov did, the other points the church supports would not be necessary.
@patriot"I can certainly disagree with this church statement on
illegal immigration while still supporting and obeying the brethern. In matters
like abortion, homosexuality, etc... there is no debate because these are moral
matters tied to the commandments."Heh, no you can't do that...
that's a double standard. You see... wait first off the church supports abortion
in the cases of rape, incest, or the life of the mother is in jeopardy. So
actually the church isn't completely anti-abortion. Anyway secondly... there's a
difference between supporting gay marriage, and then wanting the LDS church to
marry same-sex couples. Those who advocate the first aren't in disagreement with
commandments because it does not affect the church. Besides... LDS members, if I
remember right, are supposed to uphold the Constitution, and the only way to
uphold the Constitution is to allow gay marriage or to just get marriage out of
the gov't and give gay and straight couples civil unions. I'm fine with my
position of going against the church on some opinions but I'm not just going to
let you weasel out of this double standard you've set.
Guess you could compare this to Adam and Eve. They were told not to partake of
the fruit and yet they were told to have children. So they ate the fruit, which
was the lesser law, in order to fill the greater law. I have really
had a hard time about this, because we are told to obey the laws of the land.
But there is a much greater law and that is the family unit. So I
still do not condone people coming here illegally, but the value and strength of
their family, like Adam and Eve creating a family is more important then their
being illegal, like eating the forbidden fruit. So, I will still
want people to come here legally, but I will soften my heart for those good
families that are here, but didn't go through the proper steps.
Whatever happened to "When the Prophet has spoken, the discussion is
over"? I hate to break it to you, but Glenn Beck isn't a
General Authority. If you're going to attack those of us who have disagreed
with the Church in the past (i.e. Prop. 8), at least be willing to take a look
When I read most of those who have posted on this issue I am ashamed to
associated with them. Such petty mean spirited, selfish comments are hard to
take.If I have a choice to hire a whining self righteous citizen for
a job, or a man of questionable standing as to his immigration status; who will
give me a day's work for a day's pay, I will take the latter 100 times out of a
hundred.In case you wonder, I am a very hard right conservative. I
love proposition 8 and I try to follow the prophet but not blindly. The person
who cited Moroni 7 (or 1 Cor. 13) has it dead right. Some of you sicken me.
Why should illegal aliens receive special treatment? We already have rules to
immigrate into the US. Some people keep saying these rules, or laws, are unfair.
Of course they are unfair, but only for those that do not qualify for
immigration. Should I be allowed to take a job even if I do not qualify for the
position? Legal immigrants like myself obeyed the laws, why should illegal
aliens be treated differently? I oppose HB116 as I don't agree with rewarding
people who break our immigration laws. It sends the wrong message to us legal
immigrants and to the rest of the world.
As a nation, we have to become informed regarding policies that relate to our
survival. Wholesale invasion of this country (which is still going on) is a
serious threat to our survival. Anyone who thinks that state government is
capable of measuring, monitoring, and controlling the flow of invaders is
woefully naive. They may be well-meaning, but they are naive nevertheless. Any
policy that supports the invasion of this country is directly contrary to the
welfare of those who are working citizens, those who pay taxes, and those who
might welcome the opportunity to come here, but do it legally and follow all the
guidelines. Churches would be better served by sticking to the spread of the
Gospel of Salvation, rather than trying to take sides in all kinds of political
issues. Invasion of this nation is not an ecclesiastical issue--but you better
bet it's a matter of national security and national economic survival. Before
you ever get all wrapped up in someone's advice or opinions, it pays to ask
"Who's paying?" We have a surplus of advisors and payees, but a
severe shortage of advisees and payors. Let's listen to the payors.
We were each given the intelligence and a sense of reason to exercise our own
agency. At this point everyone is free to do just that. Most or our Utah State
legislators apparently chose to follow blindly with little concideration for the
opinion of their constituents.
Also for all those who warn all lds people not to express an opinion contrary to
the offical church position I would remind you that the church is not a
dictatorship and allows members the right to be democrat, republican, or
independent and have their own opinion on matters that don't pertain to the
commandments. I can certainly disagree with this church statement on illegal
immigration while still supporting and obeying the brethern. In matters like
abortion, homosexuality, etc... there is no debate because these are moral
matters tied to the commandments.
@EgbertThrockmorton: "It would be NICE, if the illegals here now, would at
least try to take advantage of the free ESL classes our taxpayer dollars
support, which are available at every single school district in this
country."If you truly were compassionate you would learn the
foreigner's language so that you can communicate. It would make them feel more
loved and accepted. "So, if these people choose willingly to
self-estrange themselves (that means segregate), from society, they are
willingly depriving me of the opportunity to show compassion for their
plight."They self-estrange even if they speak English. I see
it every day... Hispanics associating with only Hispanics. Blacks associating
only with Blacks. And Whites associating only with Whites.
"The churches position use to always be that that we should educate our
selveson the issues, vote and support good causes and that it, the church
wasresponsible spiritual issues. I chose to follow that stance. I am not
blindlyfollowing political advice! If the prophet says, thus saith the
Lord, then Iwill follow, but political opinions. even from the brethren is
not mandatoryfor any member."
I think the Church is trying to be careful here and not offend Hispanic's simply
because of the impact on missionary and temple work in Mexico. It would have
probably been better for the Church NOT to comment at all on this political
issue and simply state that it hoped illegal immigration could be stopped while
treating those already here illegally in a humane manner. As Latter Day Saints,
we can't have it both ways - honor, obey and sustain the law of the land while
turning our heads to the law breaking thousands who come here illegally. There
is no doubt that illegal immigration costs the state of Utah millions in violent
crime as well as robbing legal citizens of jobs. There is also no doubt that
there are many who come here illegally who are peaceful, hard working and decent
human beings. The ONLY answer is for the Federal Govt to solve the problem and
not leave to states the impossible task of figuring this thing out.
@Did I Say That?: "My church may accept it, but I don't... "It is indeed troubling that a church, any church, will condone and justify
lawbreaking... for any reason.
I wonder if all citizens feel as betrayed as I. First our federal government
refuses to stand up for the citizens by enforcing its own laws. Then our federal
government sues one of our states that is trying to protect its citizens. It
then allows the president of another country to join in supporting the suit.
Then our state leaders pass a bill that rewards those who have come to this
country illegally, and now my church condones it.Is the value and
integrity of citizenship really fading or am I imagining it?
So let me understand this... if a family from Mexico breaks US Federal Law and
comes to Utah illegally then ... that's ok ... because we need to love our
Mexican neighbors and keep families together. The articles of faith of the LDS
church state "we believe in honoring , obeying and sustaining the law of
the land". Anyone see a conflict here? So as legal US citizens we should
not attempt to prosecute law breakers because that means we don't love our
neighbor? It seems to me that "honoring , obeying and sustaining the
law" means supporting and obeying existing US law on illegal immigration
which means prosecting those that break the law and come here illegally... and
sending them back to Mexico. Sending illegals back to Mexico and encouraging
them to obey existing US law and make the effort to get their green card and
come here legally is the RIGHT thing to do. Encouraging law breaking is the
WRONG thing to do.
I simply disagree with the church's support of HB116.The LDS Church
has not released their statement as a point of doctrine.When the
church adds to the temple recommend questions "Do you support HB116?"
and requires an affirmative answer to retain my recommend, I will rethink my
Reciting the 12th AOF like a broken record won't change the fact that charity,
not justice, is the essence of the gospel. Mormon says if we don't have charity
we are nothing (Moroni 7:46). Nothing! All the callings we hold, temple visits
we make, or church ball tournaments we win wont matter if we arent charitable.
The Gospel of Jesus Christ doesnt work that way. All things must fail, Mormon
says, but charity never faileth. Do you think all things includes man-made
borders, laws, and statutes? Where is charity on Gods list of important
commandments? See if this rings a bell: And the second is like unto it, Thou
shalt love thy neighbor as thyself (Matt 22:39). Its not my own opinion or
ideology, and its not the first time its been said. This scripture sums it all
up: Wherefore, the Lord God hath given a commandment that all men should have
charity, which charity is love. And except they should have charity they were
nothing. Wherefore, if they should have charity they would not suffer the
laborer in Zion to perish" (2 Ne 26:30).
"I didn't understand the Church's position on the ERA, but I wasn't (am
not) a prophet, seer, or revelator. Now I see the reasons for that position. I
was puzzled when the Proclamation on the Family came out (seemed pretty
obvious), but now I see why it was important. I was concerned about the church's
involvement in passing Prop 8, but President Monson didn't ask my opinion on
that, so I didn't voice any dissent. I applaud the Church's stance on
immigration, but even if I didn't, I'd support it. I believe that we have a
living prophet, and I sustain him. "And this is why a Mormon
will have a hard time becoming president.
This seems to be a changing stand by the Church. Going back and reading old
articles and posts on the official Church blog, show they said they never
supported any particular bills. Now they say they did?
Editor: Seriously? You can't accept a comment that is based on one of the
Articles of Faith of the Church? Look at some of the comments you've accepted
and please reconsider. That's a double standard if there ever was one.
People make bad choices all the time, and families are broken up when laws are
enforced and people are sent to jail. Does the LDS church plan to stop all laws
from being enforced?Families are deported, I think we all know that.
I am not going to throw my fellow citizens under the bus so people
who broke the law coming here can take their jobs. You are not teaching
responsibility, honesty, and doing things the right way by rewarding illegal
I didn't understand the Church's position on the ERA, but I wasn't (am not) a
prophet, seer, or revelator. Now I see the reasons for that position. I was
puzzled when the Proclamation on the Family came out (seemed pretty obvious),
but now I see why it was important. I was concerned about the church's
involvement in passing Prop 8, but President Monson didn't ask my opinion on
that, so I didn't voice any dissent. I applaud the Church's stance on
immigration, but even if I didn't, I'd support it. I believe that we have a
living prophet, and I sustain him. Over the years, people have left the church
over blacks not having the priesthood, over blacks receiving the priesthood,
over the ERA, over Prop 8, and now (I'm guessing) over the Utah Compact. It's a
trial of our faith to sustain our leaders when we see things differently than
they do, but "We see through a glass darkly." When the Savior
returns, we will live in a theocracy, where all people are equal and have all
things in common. That's how it is.
@GWB"If you disagree WITH them on this issue, you are morally
obligated to tell your Stake President that you can't sustain the AUTHORITY of
the Prophet."Is this in the same spirit that an illegal alien
is morally obligated to tell the Stake President that he is not being honest in
his dealing with others if they are committing identity fraud and I-9 perjury or
openly defying a court order to leave the country?And come to think
of it, unless I slept through a recent conference talk, I have yet to hear a
Prophet or General Authority officially proclaim that members of the church are
now obligated to overlook immigration laws and disregard long-taught doctrines
to be honest and obey the laws of the land. The few statements I've seen quoted
from certain leaders have been made in a political setting, not in General
Conference or a letter from the leaders read at the pulpit.I think
it's safe to root against the Prophets' favorite sports team or disagree with a
General Authority's political opinion outside of a church setting.
Paying a fine and staying out of jail is not amnesty for citizens. Amnesty would
be not having to pay the fine and stay out of jail. Rewarding
lawbreakers that come here illegally for jobs is amnesty if you allow them to
stay and work. You teach nothing by rewarding illegal behavior. I think this
sets the wrong example, and teaches a generation that breaking laws is OK. It's hypocritical to stop enforcement of immigration laws, while
allowing other laws to be enforced that break up families. Lots of mixed signals
here that send the wrong message. HB116 has no quotas for need. If a
person is here illegally, they get a free ride. The permits are good for two
years, but can renewed indefinitely. There is no funding for a police force,
administration, or workers for the new immigration department. The state does
not believe this will ever be law. The legislatures own lawyers told them it was
unconstitutional. It will only help the business leaders retain workers and
maybe add a few new ones with the May deadline. And the Church supports this?
We have our agency to agree or disagree politically with our religious leaders.
That's a far cry from not "supporting" them ecclesiastically.To
suggest, infer, insinuate, otherwise, is truly reprehensible even here in Utah.
It's typical cultural behavior from people who do not have a strong testimony of
the Restored Gospel. Mexico is a corrupt failed country. It would be NICE, if
the illegals here now, would at least try to take advantage of the free ESL
classes our taxpayer dollars support, which are available at every single school
district in this country. So, if these people choose willingly to self-estrange
themselves (that means segregate), from society, they are willingly depriving me
of the opportunity to show compassion for their plight. I can't force myself
upon them, that's taking away their agency, but don't expect me to lay out more
tax dollars to support people who are unwilling to be a part of this country,
when most of those opportunities to better themselves are indeed FREE, by
Federal Law. The "Statement" is nothing more than political
expediency, to stave off Mexican government intervention down there. The truth
never needs a defense.
What happened to the common consent doctrine? (D&C 26:2) I don't recall
voting on this.
@GWB:Your assumption and false piety about temple recommend interviews is
sadly erroneous. I vehemently disagree with the "Statement" based on
political principle, you "choose" to assume that means myself and
others like me, don't support the General Authorities of the Church. You are so
wrong, it's part of the mythology that so infects "Utah Mormons" who
wear their (false) "testimonies" on their sleeves to get their Church
career tickets punched. Most unfortunate indeed. You could have shown more
compassion for those who disagree, but you made false assumptions and now bear
false witness by your actions. Try not to judge others so harshly friend, I/we
might have to interview YOU for a temple recommend some day, you might not like
the results either.Mexico is a corrupt and failed state. Yes, we desperately
need immigration reform, but we need the illegals here NOW, to assimilate into
our culture, to take advantage of the FREE ESL classes at every school district
in the country. Most do not, and will not, that's who I have a problem with.
Your assumptions are way off base and smack of the very thing the Statement is
Sorry Casca. Real Mormons don't drink tea.
@MormonDem: "I'm glad that so many members of the Church who find
themselves at odds with the Church on this issue are so generously offering to
counsel the Brethren as to the proper interpretation of the 12th Article of
Faith..."The 12th article of Faith is not that complex and
difficult to fathom. If a person crosses the US border without authorization,
government immigration laws have been broken. And the law breaker must correct
the situation before getting back in the good graces of the Church. That means
leaving... or if necessary, being tossed out. Staying does not correct the
situation. How can that be so difficult?
If you want an upper hand to stop these innocuous Political Correctness of our
immigration laws, forced on us by the Lib-Democrats and their (seeking more
votes) or Elite Republicans (cheap labor) our only real alternative is the TEA
PARTY. Its overall platform is less government interference, fair taxes, and
national security. Their leaders will halt the unresponsiveness of both parties
to our 14 Trillion deficits and not allow the credit ceiling to rise without
assurances that government expenditure will be cut, including fraud and waste in
entitlements. That a double layer fence will separate America from drug cartels
and the far reaching economic immigrants pouring into America. There will be no
Immigration reforms, which include amnesties of any kind; currently that means
the Dream Act, Sanctuary States, chain migration, that are stealth amnesties. We
need to look after our own people, living in poverty, not the rest of the world.
Speak-up, join the TEA PARTY and make this a central issue in coming elections.
"The commandment to 'love thy neighbor.'"We love them...
and we love them even more if they obey our laws and stay in their own country
until invited to come in."The importance of keeping families
intact."Families can be kept intact if illegals with kids will
take them with them when they are asked to leave, and stay out until they are
invited back."The federal government's obligation to secure its
borders."Calls for securing the border is a red herring. The
borders will never be secured. Foreigners can always find a way to break in.
For example, fully forty percent of illegal immigrants here today come on visas
but overstay. They forget to to home. A fence a mill high cannot stop that
method of illegal entry.
As a progressive, it amuses me that the staunch conservatives who are most
likely to rail against progressives in the faith for things like opposing to
prop 8, are now the ones who find themselves disagreeing with a church position.
Welcome to cafeteria-land, it's nice to have you here.
I don't understand you all that disagree with the church's stance. This is
coming directly from the Prophet and the Quorem. You should not disagree - you
should obey.Once you start disagreeing with the leadership and
prophesy, it is a slippery slope. Don't let satan side-track you - to disagree
is to follow the wrong path.Trust the church - it will not steer you
wrong. When you let personal feelings interfere, you lose sight of the goal.
Wow, I can't wait to hear the results of the next Temple Recommend appointments
for those on this board who post that they oppose this move by the Church.You either sustain and uphold the Prophet and the General Authorities or
you don't. If you disagree wtih them on this issue, you are morally
obligated to tell your Stake President that you can't sustain the authroity of
the Prophet.Anything less would be hypocrisy, and God will be able
to look into your heart and know that you are being deceitful.So, do
you support your church leaders or don't you?
Don't we as American receive "amnesty" when we elect to pay a fine to
stay out of jail for breaking the law? Shouldn't we accept our punishment and
go to jail for speeding, jaywalking, etc. When I receive a ticket, I pay a fine
to the city (to stay out of jail) AND pay more money to take a class to keep
points off my driving record. If I'm honest in obeying, honoring and sustaining
the law, I should not pay the fine, go to jail for a few days to think about my
actions and allow points to be added to my driving record.As an
American citizen and Utah native, I support the church position & I support
Kateybug:I'm sorry to hear about the trouble you went through. But
the fact is, immigration reform such as that supported by the Church would help
in situations like yours, because more immigrants would have a legitimate way to
work, drive, and have insurance. There's simply no way to deport all the
undocumented workers that we've been welcoming into our country on the down-low
in order to keep our cheap produce, etc. Sensible immigration reform like that
which the Church has supported will make horror stories like yours less common,
not more common.
I agree with the three points made by the LDS Church. Unlike many on
this thread, I choose not to extrapolate the meanings of those three points in
order to find details with which I disagree.
Mexico is a rich nation when it comes to natural resources.They have a
wealth of minerals.They export more oil than they use.They have
fertile farmland and can grow many crops.Their people are poorly
educated and their government is corrupt.Illegal immigration is their
welfare program.Mexico could and should be one of the richest
nations on earth. Educate their people, clean up their government, destroy the
drug cartels and you will have a paradise.Mexico will never solve
their own problems if the US keeps current immigration policies. These policies
act as a pressure relief valve.
I have mixed feelings on this issue. I was broadsided by an illegal immigrant at
8 1/2 mos. pregnant. The accident caused premature labor. I had to go to the
hospital for several hours until the doctors were able to get the contractions
stopped. The immigrant fled the state before his court date (probably back to
Mexico) so we had to pay for everything that our insurance didn't. My brother
and a close friend were also hit by illegal immigrants and the same things
(minus pregnancy/labor) happened to them. With all that said, I will
support the leaders of the church in this issue. D&C 1:28 "What I the
Lord have spoken, I have spoken and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens
and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be
fulfilled, WHETHER BY MY OWN VOICE OR BY THE VOICE OF MY SERVANTS, IT IS THE
SAME." Obviously I added the CAPS, but pray all you want. If you get an
answer contrary to what church leaders say, it's not coming from God but rather
Satan to pull you away from the church.
Cowboy Joe: That's exactly what I was thinking. I think that many of the same
people on here who are upset at the Church were probably critical of the
liberals who couldn't understand the Church's stand on Proposition 8. I think in
both cases, people need to look into the reasons why their church spoke out.
They don't speak out on political issues often, but when they do, it is
It is amusing to see the extreme right wing Utah legislators who are members of
the LDS Church and thump their chest in pride of that fact with their shorts in
a bind having just discovered the Leaders of the LDS Church suggest the idea of
compassion toward the Hispanic population of the state of Utah who are in the
country illegally.Did not the Savior show compassion toward all in
the World with his act of Atonement toward all who have or will live upon the
earth - including those who have crossed the US border without the proper
Mormon church reiterates support for Utah immigration bills, including HB116 Keep in mindAiding and abetting is an additional
provision in United States criminal law, for situations where it cannot be shown
the party personally carried out the criminal offense, but where another person
may have carried out the illegal act(s) as an agent of the charged, working
together with or under the direction of the charged party, who is an accessory
to the crime. Internationally, it is comparable to other laws governing the
actions of accessories, including the similar provision in England and Wales
under the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861.It is derived from the
United States Code (U.S.C.), section two of title 18:(a) Whoever
commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands,
induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal.(b)
Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed by him or
another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as a
HB116 forces illegal immigrants to pay a fine, get a legal federal visa, submit
to a background check (no serious felonies allowed), have health insurance, and
follow all federal and state statutes. They will no longer be able to accept pay
below minimum wage, and would be fighting for jobs without all the advantages
that they had before the law was passed.HB116 puts in place harsher
penalties for employers, requires them to prove the worker has proper visas and
work permits.HB116 allows quotas to be set so to control the number
of workers based on need. It also creates a fund out of the fees and fines from
migrant workers to be used to pay the damages of those injured by identity
fraud.HB116 doesn't grant citizenship, and fines those that were
here illegally. The work permits are temporary, and last up to 2 years.Why is everyone up in arms about these provisions. I don't see the amnesty
here. I think everyone should take some time to look at the bill. Maybe the
criticism would go down a notch or two.
Let the hate begin!"More than 2,400 people have signed an
online petition supporting a repeal of HB116" I think Utah is more than
2,400, don't we?I will follow my leaders, period
@Mormon88Among the immigration bills the church has come out against
in the past include a bill to repeal the opportunity for illegal aliens to
obtain a valid Utah Drivers licenses. Is it church doctrine that illegal aliens
must be provided with a valid identity card that allowed some to vote illegally
in elections?Another bill the church routinely opposes is a repeal
of in-state tuition for adult illegal aliens who attended High School in Utah.
Keep in mind that this same law forces LEGAL immigrations who attended high
school in Utah, as well as U.S. citizens who graduated here and move away
temporarily (military service) to pay the higher out-of-state rates. Are you
saying that it's church doctrine that illegal aliens are given a cheaper
educational opportunity perpetually?I wonder how a Bishop or Stake
President would handle a situation where an illegal alien member victimizes
another member by stealing their identity? Would the don't ask/don't tell
policy still apply, allowing both members into the temple? I'm pretty sure the
guy who stole the purse from the wardhouse will not be going to the temple
Well done to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for taking a
righteous stand on this important issues.Members of the Church need
to remember that we are no longer part of an American church. We live in an
international world, and we need to consider things more holistically.
So how is this stance being "politically neutral"?
What I find upsetting is that somehow you don't feel it necessary to show
compassion for those immigrants who are out of work. Are they not children of
God as much as Americans are? When did Jesus or the Church say that we are
exempt from showing non-Americans love and compassion?
President Monson, in the closing moments of the closing session of the last
General Conference (upper caps mine): "May we be GOOD CITIZENS
of the nations in which we live and GOOD NEIGHBORS in our communities... May we
be examples of HONESTY AND INTEGRITY wherever we GO and in whatever we do."
Somehow, this doesn't seem to comport with the Church's support of
the Utah Compact and HB116 -- both of which, arguably, encourage illegal
immigration, arguably for the benefit of greedy businessmen who want cheap labor
and in the hope of assuaging the fears of a church apparently fearful for its
survival despite scriptural assurances to the contrary.What is the
function of the Church Public Affairs Department? Was this statement crafted
with the intimate involvement of the First Presidency? What is the
Church's point regarding Principle #1? Is it to suggest that "Love your
neighbor" also happens to apply to the people of Mexico -- that they ought
to show a little love for their neighbors by respecting America's borders, laws,
and sovereignty? Or, is the Church hinting that Americans should
look the other way at flagrant illegality and the harm this causes the country?
Many people on this comment board on contradicting their beliefs. They are
supportive when the church gets involved politically when it benefits their
beliefs (Proposition 8), but when the church makes a politcal statment contrary
to their beliefs they say "the church should be politicaly neutral"
This is the very reason why it is not healthy to follow a strict
politcal ideology regardless of the political party. Politics are the ideas of
man, but religion are the ideas of a greater being.
There is nothing wrong or prejudicial about defining a legal immigration policy
that allows a limited number of potential immigrants to come and contribute to
our country. Pretty much every country in the world, including ours has basic
requirements that potential immigrants are free from diseases, don't have
criminal records, have a basic understanding of the language/culture, etc...
Illegals bypass this system completely.If anything the current
practice of allowing our borders to remain wide-open and selectively choosing to
not enforce deportation laws against most illegals combined with the chain
migration and granting citizenship to children of illegals is creating a policy
that disproportionally favors Mexico and other nearby nations. I'm sure there
are thousands in the Ivory Coast who would like the escape the mayhem taking
place there.there are also thousands of victims of crimes committed
by illegals ranging from identity theft, job losses, and car accidents involving
drivers without a license or insurance. There seems to be a trend in our
justice system to be more lenient towards illegals when they commit crimes. It
seems that this is no spilling over into churches, by easing up traditional
standards/values for illegals.
Last time I checked, 1) Ezra Taft Benson was dead, and has issued no comment on
this current bill, and 2)Thomas S. Monson is President of the Church. I can't
fathom that even Ezra Taft Benson would not recognize that.Of course
mercy cannot rob justice, that's why the Church supports changing the laws of
the land. Justice cannot rob mercy either.
@SLars have you taken a look at the Church welfare program lately? Also it is
not a lack of compassion for one group to show compassion for another. Jesus
taught to love all men
Love thy neighbor goes both ways. It seems the Church and legislature has a lack
of love and compassion for those Utahns out of work. I find that very upsetting.
@gem2477 if legislation comes out in direct opposition to the teachings of
the Church the Church Of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints must take a stand!
This also refers to the upholding of church tenets which were stated in the
response if the church believes a bill is needed to uphold these tenets there is
no problem with the church taking a stance
Are those of you who are hung up on the 12th Article of Faith and the obligation
of immigrants to honor the law unaware of the processes by which unjust laws can
be changed? It's true: Bad laws do exist, and a self-governing people do have
the power to change them without running afoul of God's laws, which is precisely
what the LDS Church is supporting. It seems the story of the woman taken in
adultery was completely lost on some, and they seem far too eager to cast
stones. The Pharisees would be proud.
As I recall the Nephites had a problem securing their southern border.Them
dang Lamonites kept sneaking in and wrecking havoc.Timeless idn't
The church needs to stay out of politics, no matter what their
"position" is. Especially when the claim to be neutral. The church has
become more political since Monson has become the president.
@patrick campbell, Handbook 2 is on the Churches web site, you can look it up.
Let's not forget that 95% of the Native Americans have their roots
in Siberia, not the house of Israel. And of the remaining 5% they have varied
roots. It sounds like they are trying to protect our governor and
the rest of the legislature that voted for HB 116. I really wish we would start
seeing compassion for all people in the immigration debate, and stop making it
sound like our laws are breaking up families. It's the actions of the
individuals that cause that. I was taught we are responsible for our own actions
in Sunday School.
I like the people who are referring to President Benson as their reason for not
following the church's stance on this issue. They should read President Benson's
"Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet," a talk given in
1980. It was quoted by TWO different speakers in the October 2010 General
Conference. Here are a couple of those fundamentals: "The living prophet is
more vital to us than the standard works and The living prophet is more
important to us than a dead prophet. Ezra Taft Benson was a great man and
prophet, but the prophet TODAY is Thomas S. Monson. The church doesn't put out
statements that President Monson isn't 100% behind. Do you really need President
Monson to express directly over the pulpit every stance of the church before you
follow? And to those who get up in arms over illegal immigrants breaking
the law, there was another man who would break the law to help others and make
their lives better. Jesus was often condemned and criticized for healing on the
Sabbath or breaking other stupid rules the leaders had made up. What would He do
with illegal immigrants? Send 'em back? Really?
BYU Alum refuses to believe that his church would side with
"law-breakers" (as he puts it) in this situation probably because he
spends way too time listening to talk-radio, Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, Coulter,
Fox News ...
I am grateful that the LDS Church issued this statement reaffirming its
position. I would venture it was done because of those who have recently
misrepresented and mischaracterized the position of the LDS including the
American Leadership Fund (and its leadership) via its printed piece distributed
to the delegates at the Salt Lake County Republican Convention last Saturday.
Hopefully the delegates and the rest of Utah will study the issues and the
voices being raised and join those that are reflective of the principals of the
Utah Compact (which incredibly the enforcement only crowd had rejected in the
Convention with 17% of the available votes).
I stand behind the church's three point stance"The commandment to
'love thy neighbor.'"The importance of keeping families
intact."The federal government's obligation to secure its
borders.I personally do not see anything wrong or illegal about standing
for somethingI stand against illegal immigration and i stand for the US
Constitution someone please tell me where i am mistaken?
I refuse to believe that my Church would side with law breakers. Mercy CANNOT
rob justice. I want to throw up.
patrick campbell, I have no idea what Book One says any longer. But Book
Two has a section om Emigration 21.1.16 and another on Tax evasion 21.1.21.This official statement winks a both.
A person here illegally that applies will probably lose their current job.
Immigration and labor laws say that a visa worker cannot take a job an American
is available to do. And if they do they have to be paid a fair wage (current
visa law). Most employers will prefer to pay a person here illegally a sub par
wage. That's going to leave very few jobs for all those who apply,
most will be out of work in six months with Americans filling their jobs, and
illegal immigrants being hired over them to save money. Without a job and lots
of competition, they will be forced to go home, or become illegal once more in
another state. This really looks like a scam. How is this compassionate? Telling themselves it's not amnesty is not going to work, because it is.
With less than 1% chance the House and Senate even meet to talk about this, is
it worth the hit on the reputation? Teach one thing, support another?
The Church has said the Utah compact is a responsible approach, not a perfect
approach. The basis of this is the commandment to love thy neighbor, keeping
families intact, and securing borders. As stated, Church leaders feel HB 116 is
a responsible attempt to address illegal immigration.Where the
national government has ignored immigration for over twenty years and turned a
blind eye to the flood of illegal immigration it is no longer possible to just
kick out all illegal aliens. Doing something that includes compassion such as
the Utah compact may not be perfect but it is a place to start
Uh...what are all the statements that are read in church during election time
saying the chuch is neutral pollitically and doesn't endorse candidates??
As one who is in possession of Handbook 1, would someone please give me the
reference to where the church is contradicting itself? Just curious...Oh, and to all of those who have pointed to the 12th AoF, might I remind you
of the 10th:"We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the
restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon
the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and,
that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory."
I see this statement made by the LDS Church not as a support of an individual
bill, but an endorsement of an overall philosophy. I would be
surprised if the LDS Church would use it's influence to keep this bill from
being overturned. In other words, I don't think HB116 is that important to the
church, only the fact that we show compassion to those around us. HB116 makes it
possible for those here to stop breaking the law. If HB116 had provisions that
the people had to leave the U.S. and come back legally with proper visas, I
think the church would still support it.My point is if there is a
better way to address the issue, while keeping families together and still shows
compassion the LDS Church would support that option also.If you
don't like HB116, get your representative to replace it with something better.
After being beaten about the head for months no about comments from Ezra Taft
Benson about his political views, it will be interesting to see how the
"conservatives" react to this. How will they balance their black and
white view of the world with a religion that teaches compassion above all? The funny thing is, nations and boarders are creations of man. Gods
work respects no boarders. It is the same with or without some arbitrary line
drawn on the globe. People living south of the boarder are no less your
brothers or sisters than than family that looks just like yours sitting on the
next pew.Why people confuse religion and politics is beyond me. One
is driven my the desires of people, the other by the teachings of a higher call.
This is not a civil rights issue! Wrong is wrong and no legislation will make it
Illegal is illegal, end of story!
It's OK for the state to take jobs away from citizens and give them to foreign
citizens with 8% unemployment? This is messed up. I think the Church
better rethink it's position. There is no way they can rationalize this
rewarding of amnesty for illegal behavior (a person that steals a job receives
amnesty when they are allowed to keep it). This goes against their teachings.
Member retention is going to drop with this confusion they are creating. The Church has no right to support one group over another for work.
We have evolved into a better country because unjust, prejudiced laws eventually
change. One example from our fairly recent past is civil rights. Would we
defend those laws today? Blacks must sit in the back of the bus. Seriously?
Would we call foul and cite the 12th Article of Faith and demand they sit in the
back? No. We realize some laws are unjust. We are an evolving nation. Thank
heavens! Obviously, those who harbor feelings of deep prejudice will struggle
with this evolution.
Let's see ... what's the usual snide remark from the angst-ridden Right-wing?Oh, yeah. I remember now. "If you don't like the way things are
here - Move!(or write Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, Coulter and Fox News and
see what they can do about this terrible un-American thing.)
The churches position use to always be that that we should educate our selves on
the issues vote and support good causes and that it, the church was responsible
spiritual issues. I chose to follow that stance. I am not blindly following
political advice! If the prophet says, thus saith the Lord, then I will follow,
but political opinions, even from the brethren is not mandatory for any member.
So you print this statment, but not my statement regarding Paul Mero and his sad
commentary about the good people of this state who may not agree with him re
illegal immigrations,and the effect of illegals on my home town. To close to the
truth perhaps? It does not matter,thinking people read other forms of
I applaud Bishop Wester for taking the time to see what problems HB 116 will
cause in the future, and not endorsing the bill. It's bad for those
here illegally, and it's bad for the citizens of the state. When the
First presidency addresses this directly, then I will listen, but might not
agree. They have been wrong on issues before. In this case I will follow the
Bishops handbook, articles of faith, and scriptures.
My church may accept it, but I don't...
Choose ye this day...
stevep38now:In other words, you long for the days when
"following the prophet" meant only following counsel that already
coincided with your personal opinions anyway?Church aint an echo
Can someone please cite the recent conference talk that announced this apparent
major change in church doctrine? I wasn't aware that parts of the D&C and
Articles of Faith were no longer doctrinal. Since arresting and
jailing any criminal separates families, does that mean the church is softening
its stance on other crimes as well? It seems that sending just one family
member to jail is worse than deporting one member of a country the their
homeland, as the rest of the family could choose to rejoin them there and be
I'm glad that so many members of the Church who find themselves at odds with the
Church on this issue are so generously offering to counsel the Brethren as to
the proper interpretation of the 12th Article of Faith and the General Handbook
The Church has spoken. Faithful members now need to think about their personal
views of others and accept the Church's position.There are many
scriptural accounts of clarification of social issues (King Benjamin, woman at
the well, Peter & Paul's disagreement about proselyting gentiles, etc).No, the Church isn't the same as it was 40 years ago. The Church must be
reflective of current challenges and issues.
I'm deeply saddened that the church has chosen to support illegal activity. I
long for the days when Bensen was President and was a staunch supporter of Law
Just who is "The Church" in this endorsment. Surly "The
Church" can not expect to be speaking for every member on this political
opinion. Is this a statement representing the First Presidency? If so then say
so - that is their opinion. The "LDS Church" I hope does not expect
every member to stand in lock step union with such a nebulous statement of LDS
Church Policy unless we have some authority for who made up this position and
exactly what they are driving at in their praise of the Utah legislatures recent
Yes, it is important to keep families together.But what about
"We believe in obeying honoring and sustaining the law"?It
is wrong to reward people for breaking our laws and our immigration laws are
just (except for the misinterpretation of the 14th amendment that grants
citizenship to children of illegal aliens born in the USA).Here is
what I propose:1. Offer a $10,000 reward to anyone, including
illegal aliens, for turning in employers who hire illegal aliens without making
an honest effort to screen them out. 2. Make it illegal to rent housing
to illegal aliens. The penalty is the landlord has to refund all the rent.The above provisions are self enforcing. Nobody will risk it.3. Offer a guest worker program where workers can come to the USA for a
limited period of time (3 to 5 years). A background check will be conducted and
they come here with the understanding that their children who are born here are
NOT citizens.4. Anyone who violates our immigration laws be deported
and will not be eligible for citizenship or the guest worker program. Same goes
for those who help them break our laws, including lawyers.
I don't think the Church knows what it's stand is. The law violates the Utah
compact, which they claim to support, by intruding on Federal law. It violates the 12th article of faith by rewarding and encouraging illegal
immigration. (The law has a May 11th deadline, which encourages people to come
here illegally)It's against it's own teachings in the Bishops handbook. And it hurts the families of Utah citizens that are out of work. Is this
really the message they want to send? This is not the Church I knew as a child.
Thank you to the leadership of the Mormon Church for bringing reason and
influence to this critical issue. Their thoughtful support should be
appreciated by Utah's citizens. In a politicized atmosphere, they have stated a
position which resonates with a balance of justice and mercy.
I would comment with respect and intelligence,and you would not post it. I did
that already today on another article and you refused to post. One can only
assume that you really do not want any other opinion than your own,and those who
appear racist so you may classify all of us the same. No logical thinkers with a
differing opinion will be tolerated.Silly,silly people. We allow my four year
old grandaughter to use this phrase,I apologize if it is to harsh for you. Seriously,do you think you are a legitimate newpaper?
I have a lot of empathy for those that have their social security number stolen
and their credit history and job history trashed.I also have lots of
empathy for those that struggle under the unbearable tax burden of those that
break the law and steal benefits.I have a huge amount of empathy for
families that are torn apart by drugs and violent criminal activity.I have immense empathy for those that have had their livelihood destroyed by
huge numbers of day laborers paid in cash. I am distressed that so
much money is spent in English as a second language programs. Money that could
be spent in other educational programs.I am troubled that so many
hospitals near the Arizona border had to quit delivering babies and closing
emergency rooms because of all those that don't pay their bills.I
would like to see the compassion extended to the victims.
I looked at the statement, and it can be misleading to assume that the church is
only in favor of HB-116. They are saying that it is only part of a solution.
They also say that enforcement of current emigration laws is necessary. If you
only look at part of the solution it doesn't look good, but taken as a whole it
seems reasonable.As part of the Mormon church's stance on this issue
is No citizenship is granted, we control the flow of emigrants, and border
control.There are still details that the federal government needs to
address. The biggest problem with this plan is the status of the children of
immigrant workers. If these children are granted citizenship, then we will still
have an issue of breaking up families when the jobs dry up and the parents are
forced to leave because of limited work. They also need to define how long some
one can stay and work. There are a lot of details that would need to be worked
out, but I think that it should be done at the federal level.
From the article:"...allow those who are now here illegally to work
legally, provide for their families and become better contributing members of
our communitybut without establishing a path to citizenship or granting
amnesty."If you allow illegal aliens to work and live here, aren't
you in fact granting the amnesty they seek?They don't want citizenship;
naturalization rates have been pathetically low since 1960.And the Church
had better get out the red pencil for the new Handbook 2.
'Mormon Church posts statement supporting controversial immigration reform bill'
- Title This is good. But will it HELP? We have other examples in
Utah's history where Utah's leadership does factually NOT listen to the will of
the Mormon church. *'Mormon church issues statement in support of
gay-rights ordinances' - By Carole Mikita- KSL - 11/10/09 'SALT LAKE CITY
-- At Tuesday night's Salt Lake City Council meeting, The Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-day Saints issued a statement showing its support of the city's
proposed non-discrimination regulations.' This was a
anti-discrimination bill in SLC to prevent discrimination due to orientation to
housing and employment. 12 cities have passed similar measures to date.
Why not the state? *'Senate blocks anti-discrimination bill from
public hearing' - By Dennis Romboy - DSNews - 02/28/11 'SALT LAKE CITY A
last-ditch plea Monday wasn't enough to move Utah legislators to consider a
proposed statewide housing and employment anti-discrimination law. 'The
Republican majority Senate voted 21-7 along party lines....'