Can An Illegal Alien In Utah Get A Temple Recommend?

[ed2276]

That's a very simplistic view, that denies a lot of the underlying causes of poverty in Latin America. Just look at Mexico and you see the roots reaching into America. Just imagine for a second, had the US not launched an unprovoked war of conquest against Mexico (not to mention the illegal annexation of Texas before that), all that Gold people were rushing for in California would've been funding decades of industrialization in Mexico, not the US. History would be a lot different.

But my point isn't to blame everything on the USA. The point is that the fact that you think that us Hispanics coming to America bring poverty and nothing else, basically equating us to a plague that will destroy the country is rather offensive. Did the Puritans, Irish, Italians, who populated the North East, all coming here impovershed, doom this country to perpetual poverty? Did it happen with the Chinese immigrants who built railroads out West? Why do you think so bad of us then?

Beyond that, they don't all actually want to live here. Many people come here to work hard and support families in their countries and after a good number of years go back, not stay and depend on social security or any other government programs. Let this go on for a little while and the situation will improve enough over there that very few will have the motivation to come work in the US.

No Touch , how do you see the economic situation improving enough in Mexico that Mexican citizens will not feel a need to come across the border into the U.S. for jobs , education and healthcare?

[The Nehor]

People with real suggestions for how to deal with immigration problem: http://www.theonion.com/content/video/in_t...ow_the_u_s_moat

[Confidential Informant]

As it stands , the Mexican government , rather than reform to address the economic injustice it does to its own citizens encourages the malcontents to cross the border , thus palming their problem children off onto the United States. In so doing , the government of Mexico not only avoids having to change its economic corrupt practices it also is rewarded for them with the dollars the exiles send back across the border into Mexico.

And the U.S. has no culpability. Pish posh. In fact, the U.S. Government, while not the single most important problem, plays a MAJOR role in the problem. We have been implicitly inviting these people to come across the border for almost three decades now.

Yes, the Mexican gov't should be ashamed, but so should the U.S. The Democrats love them because they view them as an emerging new constituency. The Republicans publicly claim to decry them, but are beholden to the business interests who have grown fat by exploiting the illegal labor pool And you, my friend, are just as guilty when you buy the cheap products, the prices of which are artifically deflated by the low cost labor.

So, you'll excuse me if I land on the side of the folks being used instead of the folks doing the using.

Oh, and BTW, I'm a conservative republican kind of guy.

C.I.

[No Touch]

No Touch , how do you see the economic situation improving enough in Mexico that Mexican citizens will not feel a need to come across the border into the U.S. for jobs , education and healthcare?

They don't come here for education (unless you're talking about universities) or overpriced healthcare. They come here for jobs. And when the poverty is brought down enough, to where people can actually make a livable wage in Mexico, there will hardly be a reason to come to America.

[ed2276]

And the U.S. has no culpability. Pish posh. In fact, the U.S. Government, while not the single most important problem, plays a MAJOR role in the problem. We have been implicitly inviting these people to come across the border for almost three decades now.

I agree that the governments on both sides of the border are exploiting these poor people. But , I think that the U.S. is giving them the better end of the deal than they would have if they stayed in Mexico. Obviously , the Mexican citizens who come across the border see a comparative advantage for themselves on the U.S. side of the border.

Yes, the Mexican gov't should be ashamed, but so should the U.S. The Democrats love them because they view them as an emerging new constituency. The Republicans publicly claim to decry them, but are beholden to the business interests who have grown fat by exploiting the illegal labor pool And you, my friend, are just as guilty when you buy the cheap products, the prices of which are artifically deflated by the low cost labor.

I agree with you about the shame to go around to the Mexican government and the political parties in the U.S.

So , to expiate my sins I should only buy the most expensive items available on the market? My buying habits are generally not to shop for the least expensive item I can get in any case ; I mostly shop based on brand loyalty and taste.

So, you'll excuse me if I land on the side of the folks being used instead of the folks doing the using.

Excuse you? No. Admire you? Yes.

Oh, and BTW, I'm a conservative republican kind of guy.

C.I.

I'm not.

[koakaipo]

I don't see a slippery slope because I believe the Church is led by inspired men. The Church could stand on a wet wall perpendicular to the ground and not slip. And I can't understand why someone wouldn't share that view.

A slippery slope not in regards to the leaders reasoning, but the reasoning in general when there are other criteria on the interviews that seem smaller an "offense" in contrast. I don't have a problem with it either, I'm just saying I understand why people have a problem with it in some ways.

[Confidential Informant]

I agree that the governments on both sides of the border are exploiting these poor people. But , I think that the U.S. is giving them the better end of the deal than they would have if they stayed in Mexico. Obviously , the Mexican citizens who come across the border see a comparative advantage for themselves on the U.S. side of the border.

And, IMO, the U.S. gov't ought to bear the burden of allowing those people to maintain the life they built here at the implicit behest of the U.S. gov't and it's people. Call it amnesty, call it path to citizenship, the fact is they came at our invititation and it's unreasonable and unworthy to just try and boot them out.

I agree with you about the shame to go around to the Mexican government and the political parties in the U.S.

So , to expiate my sins I should only buy the most expensive items available on the market?

Unless you want to be branded a hypocrite, yes. Because when you shop at Wal-mart, et, al., you are subsidizing the businesses that make their fortunes on the backs of these people.

C.I.

[karl61]

I read this in the Times today:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/na...2&cset=true

This crowd loves Tancredo. Largely Republican, the listeners have contempt for Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) but save special fury for President Bush â?? who, like Kennedy, wants to offer a path to legal status for people in the country illegally. "Amnesty," they disdainfully brand it. They draw a straight line between Bush and the only beneficiary they see: corporations that get cheap, replaceable labor.

"Carol ____, owner of an asphalt paving company in Ramona, Calif., said it was hard for her firm to compete against those who hire illegal immigrants. She visited lawmakers with Ray Boettinger of Escondido, who is angry about the border's effect on national security and "the fact that the federal government is not trying to do anything about it."

CI let me ask you something: if this is a civil matter why is immigration, customs and enforement (ICE) raiding factories.

How about a U.S. citizen and LDS member who hires illegal aliens for his factory; should he get a temple recommend; HE makes more money if he doesn't have to pay workers comp, taxes or comply with the minimum wage law. I would love to see the books of that company.

Suppose that lady mentioned above is a church member and needs to go to the bishop to help with paying her bills. Suppose a local LDS businessman operates and alphalt paving company with illegals, should he pay a fine and should he go to jail. The way I understand the issue is he can be arrested and fined. ICE is law enforcement agency .People say that the illegals take the jobs people don't want but here in southern california the people that hire illegals are the ones that run the current construction business. Black unemployment is on the rise and local leaders says it's not because of immigration but illegal immigration. If you don't get the dry wall job or brick work because someone will do the work for the eighty percent of the pay and not force the employer to comply with local safety and employment laws. They can harrass, kick, spit at, make the person work twelve hours for thiry five dollars and not worry about anything, no laws about breaks, safety regulations nothing.

can you also give me the case that the supreme court ruled on that said this a civil matter and what was the issue before the court.

[mbh26]

A slippery slope not in regards to the leaders reasoning, but the reasoning in general when there are other criteria on the interviews that seem smaller an "offense" in contrast. I don't have a problem with it either, I'm just saying I understand why people have a problem with it in some ways.

I think you're exactly right. As long as there is no specific question about illegal immigration, it's clearly left up to the individual being interviewed to define. Just as the bishop shouldn't ask for your W2 forms. It's interesting how many things people can get around. I've always been amazed at the number of temple worthy LDS who are some of the biggest business crooks I've ever met in my life. They don't commit adultery because the Church has decided to get specific in interviews and hence take a stand on that by excommunicating those who are guilty, but honesty? How many write off business expenses that aren't business, lie on insurance paperwork, or even lie for the Lord. Honesty seems so much more self defined.

The Church is clearly saying something by choosing not to get specific on the issue nor impose any penalties for disobedience as it does with other transgressions.

[mbh26]

That's a very simplistic view, that denies a lot of the underlying causes of poverty in Latin America. Just look at Mexico and you see the roots reaching into America. Just imagine for a second, had the US not launched an unprovoked war of conquest against Mexico (not to mention the illegal annexation of Texas before that), all that Gold people were rushing for in California would've been funding decades of industrialization in Mexico, not the US. History would be a lot different.

But my point isn't to blame everything on the USA. The point is that the fact that you think that us Hispanics coming to America bring poverty and nothing else, basically equating us to a plague that will destroy the country is rather offensive. Did the Puritans, Irish, Italians, who populated the North East, all coming here impovershed, doom this country to perpetual poverty? Did it happen with the Chinese immigrants who built railroads out West? Why do you think so bad of us then?

Beyond that, they don't all actually want to live here. Many people come here to work hard and support families in their countries and after a good number of years go back, not stay and depend on social security or any other government programs. Let this go on for a little while and the situation will improve enough over there that very few will have the motivation to come work in the US.

You know, nobody really ever figured out why Latin America is poor, but it seems to be a common denominator that wherever the Spanish settled, they left a big mess behind. I don't think Mexico would be rich if the U.S. hadn't taken over the west. The west would probably look just like Mexico does now had it not been taken over, just as Colombia, Brazil, and Argentina look like they do with basically no Anglo involvement.

The fact is that illegal immigration is hurting the middle class of the U.S.A. and if it goes unrestricted it will drive our standard of living down. The only question is how far. I know that this is of no concern to Hispanics, but don't be surprised if I'm not happy about it. Yes it is my country. My forefathers were not immigrants. They fought for this land and it became theirs. If you want to say that the Hispanics are reconquering it, and we're to scared to do anything about it, I agree. But don't call it anything other than what it is.

[karl61]

"You know, nobody really ever figured out why Latin America is poor"

(cough) catho (cough)

[No Touch]

You know, nobody really ever figured out why Latin America is poor, but it seems to be a common denominator that wherever the Spanish settled, they left a big mess behind. I don't think Mexico would be rich if the U.S. hadn't taken over the west. The west would probably look just like Mexico does now had it not been taken over, just as Colombia, Brazil, and Argentina look like they do with basically no Anglo involvement.

The fact is that illegal immigration is hurting the middle class of the U.S.A. and if it goes unrestricted it will drive our standard of living down. The only question is how far. I know that this is of no concern to Hispanics, but don't be surprised if I'm not happy about it. Yes it is my country. My forefathers were not immigrants. They fought for this land and it became theirs. If you want to say that the Hispanics are reconquering it, and we're to scared to do anything about it, I agree. But don't call it anything other than what it is.

Unless you're a pure-blooded Native American, you are an immigrant. Fighting doesn't change that. There's nothing wrong with that, but that is how it is. There is nothing that makes White Anglos more American than Hispanic Mestizos. And when you look at at how this nation was built, and what is implied by symbols that stand for it, like that Statue of Liberty, I'd argue that we are more American.

And you can take it however you want. If you want to call it the Reconquista, be my guest. To me, it is free people going where there is work to be done. I am believer in a free market, and that anyone willing and able to provide goods or services that are in and of themselves legal should not be restricted to do so anywhere by any government. An honest person, wanting to do nothing but do honest work shouldn't have to be forced into the shadows to find an opportunity. You deny them that and believe you, by virtue of birthplace, are entitled to those and better opportunities. I say that a man has a right to make his living "by the sewat of his brow", not the seal on his passport.

[karl61]

Unless you're a pure-blooded Native American, you are an immigrant. Fighting doesn't change that. There's nothing wrong with that, but that is how it is. There is nothing that makes White Anglos more American than Hispanic Mestizos. And when you look at at how this nation was built, and what is implied by symbols that stand for it, like that Statue of Liberty, I'd argue that we are more American.

And you can take it however you want. If you want to call it the Reconquista, be my guest. To me, it is free people going where there is work to be done. I am believer in a free market, and that anyone willing and able to provide goods or services that are in and of themselves legal should not be restricted to do so anywhere by any government. An honest person, wanting to do nothing but do honest work shouldn't have to be forced into the shadows to find an opportunity. You deny them that and believe you, by virtue of birthplace, are entitled to those and better opportunities. I say that a man has a right to make his living "by the sewat of his brow", not the seal on his passport.

then lets stop asking for passports from the law abiding people who visit. lets do away with the whole thing and just let everyone walk freely across the border for the "free market".

[No Touch]

A slippery slope not in regards to the leaders reasoning, but the reasoning in general when there are other criteria on the interviews that seem smaller an "offense" in contrast. I don't have a problem with it either, I'm just saying I understand why people have a problem with it in some ways.

Again I'll point you to the fact that we are talking about laws passed by the secular government, which has really never been all that friendly with us (either Mormons or Hispanics since both apply to me). I'm sure that in 1888 you could be denied a Temple recommend for being publicly known as a drunkard while someone openly violating Federal anti-polygamy laws would receive theirs. It's not for us to decide what laws constitute fair criteria for judging worthiness.

[No Touch]

then lets stop asking for passports from the law abiding people who visit. lets do away with the whole thing and just let everyone walk freely across the border for the "free market".

Works for me

I have no problem with registering everyone mind you. But someone who's never commited a criminal offense, who is coming to work. I have no problem with them coming, and niether should you.

[karl61]

Works for me

I have no problem with registering everyone mind you. But someone who's never commited a criminal offense, who is coming to work. I have no problem with them coming, and niether should you.

So if a mexican citizen were arrested in mexico for running a business with illegal aliens you wouldn't let them cross....do you also think mexico would let people from central america come up and do work cheaper. every knows what mexico thinks about people from central america.

[No Touch]

"Carol ____, owner of an asphalt paving company in Ramona, Calif., said it was hard for her firm to compete against those who hire illegal immigrants. She visited lawmakers with Ray Boettinger of Escondido, who is angry about the border's effect on national security and "the fact that the federal government is not trying to do anything about it."

I love how this statement so openly displays the dishonesty of this "movement". It's not about national security. If national security were the issue you would register and keep track of everyone and let them in, and deny anyone with a rap sheet or on a watch list.

It's not about national security. It's about people like this woman, unable to compete or do what is needed to compete in an open market, want the government to bail them out and stack the deck in their favor. They see protecting their business from competition as the government's duty.

That and all those well educated xenophobes who think every language other than English is a "ghetto" language.

[No Touch]

So if a mexican citizen were arrested in mexico for running a business with illegal aliens you wouldn't let them cross....do you also think mexico would let people from central america come up and do work cheaper. every knows what mexico thinks about people from central america.

By everything you've posted on this board, it's clear to me that you know nothing about what any Hispanics think.

But I'll answer the question - I wouldn't let them in. America is in a different situation than Mexico. We don't exactly have a surplus unskilled labor force, and yet we have a culture and economy addicted to low prices. You can't grow oranges without planting a tree and taking care of it. Mexico has different needs. And whether you want to admit it or not, this country's needs are met by "illegal" immigration.

[karl61]

By everything you've posted on this board, it's clear to me that you know nothing about what any Hispanics think.

But I'll answer the question - I wouldn't let them in. America is in a different situation than Mexico. We don't exactly have a surplus unskilled labor force, and yet we have a culture and economy addicted to low prices. You can't grow oranges without planting a tree and taking care of it. Mexico has different needs. And whether you want to admit it or not, this country's needs are met by "illegal" immigration.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070429/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush

nothing specific but just general news about the issue.

[No Touch]

LOL, I am Miami-born and raised. Virulently anti-communist/leftist and very familiar with the immigrant experience. Most of my best friends were born outside of the US.

Glad to see Mr. President spending some time at MDC. For as dense as critics think he is, at least he can speak in Miami with verbally eating it the way Romney did by quoting Castro.

[mbh26]

By everything you've posted on this board, it's clear to me that you know nothing about what any Hispanics think.

But I'll answer the question - I wouldn't let them in. America is in a different situation than Mexico. We don't exactly have a surplus unskilled labor force, and yet we have a culture and economy addicted to low prices. You can't grow oranges without planting a tree and taking care of it. Mexico has different needs. And whether you want to admit it or not, this country's needs are met by "illegal" immigration.

No Touch I can understand you saying that in this case the free market is going to dump my standard of living and if I don't like it, that's too bad cause that's capitalism. But don't tell me we need cheap labor here. Maybe the 1% upper class needs cheap labor. The 1% who are geniuses and smart enough to become doctors, the 1% born into wealth. But for the common Joe Schmo it's bad news and you know it.

I still say that Latin America could do themselves and the world a favor by being more responsible in their reproductive habits. I don't think this conflicts with the gospel message either. Having more children than you can afford to feed or educate seems contrary to the gospel to me.

The question becomes, once the U.S.A. become Mexico del norte, where will people immigrate. It will be a sad state of affairs for the working class, and simply couldn't be better for all business owners and investors.

[karl61]

I love how this statement so openly displays the dishonesty of this "movement". It's not about national security. If national security were the issue you would register and keep track of everyone and let them in, and deny anyone with a rap sheet or on a watch list.

It's not about national security. It's about people like this woman, unable to compete or do what is needed to compete in an open market, want the government to bail them out and stack the deck in their favor. They see protecting their business from competition as the government's duty.

That and all those well educated xenophobes who think every language other than English is a "ghetto" language.

I think for the lady it was that she can't compete because she needs to pay federal tax, state tax, workman comp, comply with state and federal labor laws. The person that hires and illegal alien doesn't have too.

to the man it was an issue with national security.

lets stick with facts also and not conclusions.

[Olavarria]

As a firm believer in the dream of a "Great Wall of America". I dont think anyone should be denied a temple recomend for being an illegal immigrant.

[No Touch]

No Touch I can understand you saying that in this case the free market is going to dump my standard of living and if I don't like it, that's too bad cause that's capitalism. But don't tell me we need cheap labor here. Maybe the 1% upper class needs cheap labor. The 1% who are geniuses and smart enough to become doctors, the 1% born into wealth. But for the common Joe Schmo it's bad news and you know it.

I still say that Latin America could do themselves and the world a favor by being more responsible in their reproductive habits. I don't think this conflicts with the gospel message either. Having more children than you can afford to feed or educate seems contrary to the gospel to me.

The question becomes, once the U.S.A. become Mexico del norte, where will people immigrate. It will be a sad state of affairs for the working class, and simply couldn't be better for all business owners and investors.

I know nothing of the sort. I consider myself a common middle class person (I work as a public school teacher), and I benefit to no end by the fact that I can buy food and other goods at the prices that immigrant labor makes them available at. Who is this common Joe Schmo who doesn't benefit from fruits and vegetables priced at cents on the pound, hotel rooms for under $150 a night, etc? Immigrant laborers arent coming and taking management jobs to hold down "hard-working" Americans. They also aren't relegated to simply cleaning the homes of the rich and famous. They clean the hotels you and I stay at whenever travelling, they clean the buildings we work at, they pick the food you eat, they stock the shelves at your favorite low-priced store, and they make living off 30,000-40,000 a year in an actual city possible. Does the common Joe Schmo want those jobs? Does he want their salary? If he's not willing to compete, then what do I owe him and why? Because of where he was born? Sorry, but you can't convince me that ANYONE who has grown up in the US has any excuse for not being educated and needing jobs like those being taken by immigrant workers. You can and should have a better job and not be competeing for fruit picking positions.

BTW, I'd love to hear you support that notion, that having "too many" children is contrary to the Gospel.

And the USA will never become "Mexico del Norte". And the only extent to which anyone would even want to is only as a response to how they are being treated. Even then, the fact that you say something like is funny given the fact that half the US really is Mexican territory that was illegally siezed in an unprovoked war of aggression.

[No Touch]

I think for the lady it was that she can't compete because she needs to pay federal tax, state tax, workman comp, comply with state and federal labor laws. The person that hires and illegal alien doesn't have too.

to the man it was an issue with national security.

lets stick with facts also and not conclusions.

Contradiction. You/she can't say that she needs to pay for these things and then say that the competitor doesn't. She could just as easily hire migrant workers and remain competetive. But then I guess she doesn't want to have to associate people who are a bit darker and perhaps speak something other than English.

And again, the national security angle is a joke. Terrorists will never come in through Mexico. They have to need to put up with all that trouble when they have the money to get all the VISAs they need from wonderful folks "protecting" our borders, as well as come in on a plane from Europe and then move into a nice upper-middle class area from where to operate their sleeper cells.