Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mormon Dude

Were the Mormon Pioneers illegal immigrants?

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Danzo said:

And sometimes they break the law today.

100% obedience to laws(God's or man's) can be difficult. When there is conflict between several laws, it Becomes impossible 

“I very much regret that the laws of my country should come in conflict with the laws of God, but whenever they do I shall invariably choose the latter.”  

Apostle Rudger Clawson 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

That was not presentism. Adverse possession has been around since long before the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.

Which is exactly why the concept of "illegal immigration," at least as it is understood in the 21st century, is practically irrelevant, if it is not completely irrelevant, to a discussion of the propriety of exiled Latter-day Saints settling in what was then Mexico.

Share this post


Link to post
41 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Which is exactly why the concept of "illegal immigration," at least as it is understood in the 21st century, is practically irrelevant, if it is not completely irrelevant, to a discussion of the propriety of exiled Latter-day Saints settling in what was then Mexico.

Nope.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
46 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Which is exactly why the concept of "illegal immigration," at least as it is understood in the 21st century, is practically irrelevant, if it is not completely irrelevant, to a discussion of the propriety of exiled Latter-day Saints settling in what was then Mexico.

Brigham Young would have ignored today's immigration laws had they existed then just as they ignored anti-polygamy laws.

Gathering to Utah was seen as God's law.  The perpetual immigration fund was set up for expressly that purpose.

Modern Church members occasional vitriol against illegal immigration is as misplaced as their occasional rants against polygamy.

Edited by JLHPROF

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Brigham Young would have ignored today's immigration laws had they existed then just as they ignored anti-polygamy laws.

Gathering to Utah was seen as God's law.  The perpetual immigration fund was set up for expressly that purpose.

Modern Church members occasional vitriol against illegal immigration is as misplaced as their occasional rants against polygamy.

I have engaged in neither, Sir, so your accusation(s) is/are misplaced.

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Nope.

Actually, it is irrelevant, but if you don't think so, I'll leave you be.

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Actually, it is irrelevant, but if you don't think so, I'll leave you be.

Still hope.the examples of the past have value even when legalities change. In the same way the Torah commands kindness to the stranger in your land the exodus of our faith teaches a similar lesson.

Share this post


Link to post
42 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Modern Church members occasional vitriol against illegal immigration is as misplaced as their occasional rants against polygamy.

Of course, back then, there was no welfare state. Either one made it or they didn't. And there was plenty of land to settle. And opportunity. The mormons who settled in Utah depended on the church and on each other to survive. Not to mention surviving a possible war with the federal government at that time. Times have changed now. The US has most likely millions who wish to come to the US legally. It is possible. But why bother if one can do it illegally? Times have changed.

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/26/2019 at 4:26 AM, Tacenda said:

 I'm so tired of the white man taking lands from everyone, when in reality we immigrated here and took their lands. I know I'll hear back that it was all on the up & up, but me thinks not!

Research just how Islam was spread across the globe. And it wasn't done by 'white men'. Not to mention what was going on in central america in the past between groupings of peoples And the native americans who did come from someplace else, lets say for academic purposes, siberia and asia. I wonder when new groups of people would come if the people already there gave them a hero's welcome and assigned them a tribe.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, why me said:

Research just how Islam was spread across the globe. And it wasn't done by 'white men'. Not to mention what was going on in central america in the past between groupings of peoples And the native americans who did come from someplace else, lets say for academic purposes, siberia and asia. I wonder when new groups of people would come if the people already there gave them a hero's welcome and assigned them a tribe.

Ask the Hopis what they think about that time they welcomed and helped the straggling strangers from the Northwest, and then were swept away and onto marginal lands by maurading, headbashing barbarians.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said:

I have engaged in neither, Sir, so your accusation(s) is/are misplaced.

No accusations meant.  Sorry that's how it read.  I was addressing your point, not accusing you personally.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
On 7/26/2019 at 8:11 AM, Storm Rider said:

We may be talking about two different things. I am talking about the Native American peoples being conquered by invading Europeans. I am not talking about Mormons and Indians per se. 

The discovery of America was inevitable. Conquest was inevitable. Given the times, which country that had the will, the technology, and the means would have been more considerate of the Native Americans? The French got along ok, but would that have lasted?

As believers of their Book, we know that what happened to them was predicted and that their story is not yet completed.

Edited by Bernard Gui
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
On 7/25/2019 at 6:26 PM, Tacenda said:

Why only them? I ask because I've a personal situation with a son in law from Mexico, who came across illegally with his family. I'm so tired of the white man taking lands from everyone, when in reality we immigrated here and took their lands. I know I'll hear back that it was all on the up & up, but me thinks not!

Since discovery of America by foreign powers was inevitable at the time it happened, which contemporary groups or countries of people of color do you think would have simply moved in, said “howdy,” and lived peacefully with the Native Americans? Serious question.

Edited by Bernard Gui
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Adverse possession is probably not allowed by illegal immigrants under any law structure.

I am unaware of any laws where immigration status would restrict an adverse possession claim.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/25/2019 at 7:55 PM, RevTestament said:

Incidently, it has been widely believed that the Neanderthals were pressured into extinction by the more capable Homo Sapien sapiens, but there is good evidence that a giant eruption about 60K years ago simply made their lands signifcantly colder, and the Neanderthals as well as all Homo Sapiens were pressed near extinction as a result with what was left of the Neanderthals being bred into the modern humans which survived better in Africa.

More like 40K years ago:  the Campi Flegrei caldera near Naples.  And according to 23andMe, I have the Neanderthals to thank for a relatively high percent of my genome; emphasis on 'relatively'; with apologies to Adam who I think was a real person.

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Since discovery of America by foreign powers was inevitable at the time it happened, which contemporary groups or countries of people of color do you think would have simply moved in, said “howdy,” and lived peacefully with the Native Americans? Serious question.

Well, the COJCOLDS, for one.

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/25/2019 at 7:26 PM, Tacenda said:

Why only them? I ask because I've a personal situation with a son in law from Mexico, who came across illegally with his family. I'm so tired of the white man taking lands from everyone, when in reality we immigrated here and took their lands. I know I'll hear back that it was all on the up & up, but me thinks not!

I work w/an archaeologist who asked a Ute Elder what happened to the 'Fremont Indians' (now regarded as an Anasazi outlier).  He was asked to describe them, afterwhich the Ute Elder said something like:  "Ah, yes.  When we moved into this area, we killed them off".

Then you have the various Indian tribes that would go on slaving expeditions agains Mexican/Mestizo communities in New Mexico and Mexico proper, etc.  How do you feel about them?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Still hope. ... [sic]

Good.  I'm glad.  If very nearly less than nothing came out of this exchange, there is that. :rolleyes: 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Brigham Young would have ignored today's immigration laws had they existed then just as they ignored anti-polygamy laws.

Gathering to Utah was seen as God's law.  The perpetual immigration fund was set up for expressly that purpose.

Modern Church members occasional vitriol against illegal immigration is as misplaced as their occasional rants against polygamy.

Except for the fact that the LDS pioneers were going to an almost vacant land that was virgin in nature. And that fact that there was no government in the area. And that there were no "jobs" - no industry, no settlements, nothing. Other than those really minor points, your comment would have value and apply. 

Edited by Storm Rider
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, blarsen said:

I work w/an archaeologist who asked a Ute Elder what happened to the 'Fremont Indians' (now regarded as an Anasazi outlier).  He was asked to describe them, afterwhich the Ute Elder said something like:  "Ah, yes.  When we moved into this area, we killed them off".

Then you have the various Indian tribes that would go on slaving expeditions agains Mexican/Mestizo communities in New Mexico and Mexico proper, etc.  How do you feel about them?

Geez, I guess they had to do what they could to survive, which I'm taking this to mean the pioneers who crossed so many miles did as well. Just think "God's church", would have figured out a better way. Not happy with any of it, the US is a big country, I wonder if the church could have gone into Idaho, Colorado or Montana areas and have done less damage? And yes, I do understand that they were not considered American soil at that time. I'll have to research to find my answers I guess. Or non answers.

 

Edited by Tacenda

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/26/2019 at 9:28 AM, The Nehor said:

If you look at some US plans to deal with immigration I think some have decided that invasion and illegal immigration are synonymous and should be treated the same way complete with POW camps and psychological warfare.

It was illegal immigration to move in. We did not get permission from the US government to set up shop there either. We did what we had to do to find a place where we would be safe and able to prosper like most immigrants (legal or illegal). Demonizing those today who do the same seems to me to violate the commands in the Torah and the implied lessons of the Book of Mormon.

Sorry, but much more complicated than you're implying.  You also need to ask:  when does illegal immigration start amounting to invasion?  Especially when the 'immigration' is largely funded and encouraged by interests who want to see the US w/open borders?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/26/2019 at 9:13 AM, The Nehor said:

There were some good relationships but most were mixed. The battles with and mass conversion of the Shoshone come to mind.

Mass conversion of Shoshone?  You mean forced, or what?  I'm not familiar with that.

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/26/2019 at 11:44 AM, USU78 said:

Just like JFK in the 1960 election:  He stole it, fair and square.

No, Nixon gave him the election via his (Nixon's) 5-O'Clock shadow.

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, blarsen said:

Mass conversion of Shoshone?  You mean forced, or what?  I'm not familiar with that.

In the aftermath of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bear_River_Massacre,

That really happened. See also Washakie's Vision.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I wonder if the church could have gone into Idaho, Colorado or Montana areas and have done less damage

Why do you think less damage would have been done there?

http://www.native-languages.org/montana.htm

http://www.native-languages.org/idaho.htm

http://www.native-languages.org/colorado.htm

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...