The Church and members who aren't documented

[Jeff K.]

Can't you figure this out on your own? It's actually very simple. If a person cannot provide restitution, i.e., confess the sin of theft, abandon the theft, feel bad about the theft, never use the social security number again, no longer work illegally and reside in the country illegally, then that meets the LDS description of the process of repentance. We learn this stuff in primary and teach it to people during our missions. It gets interesting when one illegal alien is preaching this process to another illegal alien. Very inspiring.

Now let's look at your traffic ticket analogy.

If I speed, the repentance process is quite different.

1. I can pay a fine if I am detected by a police officer and get a speeding ticket.

2. I can dispute the ticket

3. I can take a class and have the ticket voided

4. I can learn a lesson and never speed again

There is NO theft involved in speeding unless you're driving a stolen getaway car after breaking into a Latino market and stealing a box of Cafe Con Leche, Horchata, Cafe De Olla, Atole and Champurrada.

Theft violates one of the Ten commandments and, if a person is concerned with being a good LDS member in good standing, it requires confession to a Bishop prior to going on a mission or obtaining a temple recommend. Especially if the theft involves damage to another person in some form or if the theft involves a felony (actual USE of social security numbers)

That's just the theft part of the problem The second problem is illegal entry which requires a return in order for repentance to be complete. Illegal entry into the United States is just that, illegal.

8 U.S.C.

[Jeff K.]

You speak of illegal alien law citations

I take it there are no illegal speeding citations

http://www.mit.edu/~jfc/laws.html

[Jeff K.]

The Devil and his legions are working extra hard in trying to erode and destroy things. He's confusing the people in ways that I never thought possible. Even our home teacher said the same thing. By small and superficially harmless things he can cause much damage. I just hope I don't become part of the problem but part of the solution. The Lord knows His Church and His people and I leave it all in His hands.

Gathering your confusion between detection and obeying speeding laws, he is indeed working extra hard and confusing people immensely. I suggest you look up the word irony.

[O-Brother]

If people are breaking the law and there is a consequence for doing so, why are they not being prosecuted?

There are already hispanic wards and I don't see why you think this is a bad thing.

You talk like you think that the leadership of the church are making mistakes, being foolish and not seeing the dangers ahead.

They are not being prosecuted partly because of what I stated in the last 2 paragraphs of my post above. As for Hispanic Wards where members are happen to be predominantly illegal immigrants, they're simply in violation of the 12th and 13th articles of faith which as I mentioned earlier, doesn't carry any weight anymore. And, as for the leadership, they themselves will tell you that they're not immune to making mistakes. I would not characterized them quite negatively with the word "foolish." The other day I raised my arm to the square and sustained them as SEERS and REVELATORS so they must have the ability to see and reveal. Zion prospereth.

"All the laws of God and the laws of nature and the laws of the land are made for the benefit of men, for his comfort, enjoyment, safety, and well-being; and it is up to the individual to learn these laws and to determine whether or not he will enjoy these benefits by obeying the law and by keeping the commandment

[O-Brother]

You have just shown it to be apples to apples. If an illegal immigrant is "detected". In other words, no law is broken until the person is detected? I find that to be a somewhat problematic issue. The murder, unless detected is not a crime. Illegal immigration, unless detected, is not a crime.... Wow. Thanks for clearing it up. It is so obvious.

You have indeed broken the law, you simply haven't been detected breaking it. Whether theft or not is irrelevant, if the law is the law of the land, you have broken it.

My point stands, yours seems to confuse breaking the law with capturing someone breaking the law. I don't see it that way.

Anyone with common sense reading your reply realizes that you're the one confusing what I said. I never said it wasn't a crime unless detected. In order to get a ticket a police officer has to pull you over after detection of your breaking a traffic law. Same for the other stuff. In order for an illegal immigrant to be deported he must be detected first. If you weren't LDS, I'd say put the bong away. You have made a fruit salad out of what I said which was pretty basic.

[Jeff K.]

When anyone reverts to calling upon "common sense" without the ability to clearly articulate the difference, the issue tends to be settled in a manner not pleasing to the one making the plaintive cry.

I never said it wasn't a crime unless detected. In order to get a ticket a police officer has to pull you over after detection of your breaking a traffic law. Pretty basic stuff.

I never said it wasn't a crime unless detected. In order to get a ticket be deported a police officer an immigration officer has to pull you over find you, after detection of your breaking a traffic law immigration law. Pretty basic stuff.

[Jeff K.]

When you speed, you break the law of the land. Do you then, in effect to make restitution to the law, which provides for such fines which you now owe, go to the nearest court ask the amount of the fine, and then subsequently pay that fine? Do you also then contact your insurance agent so that they may also adjust your insurance to its proper level, otherwise you are insured under the false premise of not speeding. In effect, you have broken the law of the land, and are not honest with your dealings towards your fellow man.

Pretty basic stuff.

[O-Brother]

When anyone reverts to calling upon "common sense" without the ability to clearly articulate the difference, the issue tends to be settled in a manner not pleasing to the one making the plaintive cry.

I never said it wasn't a crime unless detected. In order to get a ticket be deported a police officer an immigration officer has to pull you over find you, after detection of your breaking a traffic law immigration law. Pretty basic stuff.

You are too anxious. I was still editing my response. By the way English is a second language for me so I think I do better than most in my position. I am not a writer or English teacher. I also speak two other languages so sometimes my grammar isn't that great. What is your excuse?

[Jeff K.]

German is my first language, English my second. I am not too anxious I simply respond to what is written.

[O-Brother]

German is my first language, English my second. I am not too anxious I simply respond to what is written.

Were you born in Germany and how old were you when you began speaking English? Don't lie, that's a sin, you know.

[Jeff K.]

Post script

Latin for me, also Spanish, and at one time a dialect rarely used outside the Andes.... I am stake translator for the Spanish speaking members of the ward during Stake Conferences and enjoy publications in various languages. I have no excuse, for my English.

[Jeff K.]

Were you born in Germany and how old were you when you began speaking English? Don't lie, that's a sin, you know.

Berlin, Neu Koln district was where I lived. I came to the US at 13, and went back, half my family is German, my mother is Gudrun Annegret Schoenicke, maiden name. Our family is tied to the Hohenzollern dynasty. My uncles still come to America to visit and Volka will be seeing me this summer, perhaps his last trip.

I spoke broken English until I came to the US. I presumed my mission would be German, it was Spanish instead.

I have no need to lie.

[Jeff K.]

Post - post script - Oma was Jewish in Berlin during WWII - Think about it.

Its one reason I don't put "law of the land" uber alles.

[O-Brother]

Post script

Latin for me, also Spanish, and at one time a dialect rarely used outside the Andes.... I am stake translator for the Spanish speaking members of the ward during Stake Conferences and enjoy publications in various languages. I have no excuse, for my English.

You mean you are a stake translator. I can see your passion towards Hispanics then. I also speak Spanish, Portuguese (all fluently and without accents) and my family is Jewish Italian so I used to know Hebrew but not anymore. I understand Italian by virtue of Spanish and Portuguese and some French. Same for Latin. I too have been a translator, interpreter and hence my familiarity with Hispanics and the Latino community, unlike you, I am not in favor of what they're doing to themselves because I think what they do is bringing condemnation upon themselves. I know many Hispanics and Brazilian people who are using false social security numbers to work, going on missions, temples and all the things we've been discussing and I fear for them. I also know people who have paid people to get married. I know people who have purchased social security numbers and lie on their employment applications, etc. I have excuses for my English because I realize it isn't perfect. I think your defense of illegals is because of your love for them. I love them too but what I've been saying all along is that we have a conflict with what we preach, what we stand for and our core beliefs and I am disappointed because I would rather see all these brothers and sisters come here, one at a time through the right channels. In fact, I have seen many who do, either via legitimate marriages or work visas and some even came as tourists, fell in love and got their green cards. No problem there. When people

tell me they're illegal I don't preach my views to them. I usually suggest that they see an immigration lawyer for advice on how to legalize their situation.

I don't think we're handling this the right way, but that's my opinion. My opinion has no relevance or importance on what the Church does or its position on illegal immigration . If I thought illegal immigration was OK, I'd probably be the first one to defend it like you do. But it's not OK. Time will tell.

[Jeff K.]

My Oma in Germany was an assimilated Jew we did not study Hebrew, for all the help it gave her during the war years.

And yes, Portuguese and Italian when I worked as controller in Brazil.

[O-Brother]

Berlin, Neu Koln district was where I lived. I came to the US at 13, and went back, half my family is German, my mother is Gudrun Annegret Schoenicke, maiden name. Our family is tied to the Hohenzollern dynasty. My uncles still come to America to visit and Volka will be seeing me this summer, perhaps his last trip.

I spoke broken English until I came to the US. I presumed my mission would be German, it was Spanish instead.

I have no need to lie.

Interesting. You're not related to Michael I of Romania, are you?

[O-Brother]

My Oma in Germany was an assimilated Jew we did not study Hebrew, for all the help it gave her during the war years.

And yes, Portuguese and Italian when I worked as controller in Brazil.

That's impressive. Where in Brazil? Were you a controller for the Church?

P.S> I've got to go work out but tomorrow is a new day.

[Jeff K.]

No, I was regional controller for a corporation in the US.

[O-Brother]

No, I was regional controller for a corporation in the US.

Nice. I did business with with Brazil and Mexico, Taiwan, Hong Kong and South Korea. I've been to Argentina and have past relatives who were born in Uruguay, living relatives in Brazil, Italy and a few in Israel. I have a few friends in Brazil who are in the mining, precious and metals business. In fact, many of them are in Toronto this week for a Mining & Prospecting convention http://www.pdac.ca/p...conv/index.html

I used to travel to Mexico City, Santiago, Chile and most of southern Brazil. I'm sure we share similar knowledge about Latin cultures. Yet, you and I have different opinions on illegal immigration.

While I understand why so many people, primarily the poor from Mexico and Central America come here to work and satisfy the needs of employers seeking cheaper - not cheap - labor and some of the economic benefits that an illegal labor force brings into the United States, I think the process of illegal immigration is detrimental to the country for the long-term. It provides short-terms benefits and long term negative consequences as already established by a $338 billion dollar per year cost to the American taxpayer. Studies suggest that the costs associated with illegal immigration far outweigh the benefits.

As far as the Church is concerned In my view, illegal immigration creates a doctrinal conflict between what Mormons have been taught to believe in theory and what's been happening in practice. In theory, we're supposed to obey the laws of the land per the 12th and 13th articles of faith and scores of D&C scriptures related to obedience such as D&C 58:21. Now, I understand that the Church is about salvation of souls, etc. But, after giving the subject a great deal of thought and having no intention to bang my head against the Church or its leaders, I've concluded that we have a contradiction between what we preach and what happens in real life.

The way I see it, breaking the law is wrong but once they break the law and are here, the idea is to be nice, compassionate and tolerant anyway. I am ALL for that. I don't think I've ever mistreated a person based on their legal status in the U.S. In fact, I have personally helped a few. I don't propose that we "round 'em up" as second-class non-citizens and send them back to Mexico or wherever they happen to be from. They are GOD's offspring the same as you and I, worthy of respect, dignity, love, compassion and understanding. I've never been in favor of the die-hard, kick-them-all-out anti-illegal immigration crowd. I have lived immigration. I understand it.

I know why people cheat the system and they do cheat it, there is no other way to describe it without camouflaging the truth. They cheat the system out of necessity. Most use other people's social security numbers because that's a way to get jobs, etc. Misuse or theft of social security numbers (a felony) poses serious problems including issues that have come up in the medical industry. One example is a person using someone else's social security for ER care. Serious problem can happen. Statements about being allergic to a medication using someone else's medical record. Creating a medical chart using someone else's social security number and having illnesses and treatment appearing on some else's record. Doctors depending on medical charts become exposed to potential malpractice suits, etc.

Not to mention the misuse of children

[ERayR]

Nice. I did business with with Brazil and Mexico, Taiwan, Hong Kong and South Korea. I've been to Argentina and have past relatives who were born in Uruguay, living relatives in Brazil, Italy and a few in Israel. In Brazil, Rio Grande Do Sul, I have a few friends in the mining, precious and metals business. In fact many of them are in Toronto this week for a Mining & Prospecting convention http://www.pdac.ca/p...conv/index.html

I used to travel to Mexico City, Santiago, Chile and most of southern Brazil. I'm sure we share similar knowledge about all these cultures. Yet, you and I have a different opinion on illegal immigration.

While I understand why so many people, primarily the poor from Mexico and Central America come here to work and satisfy the needs of employers seeking cheaper - not cheap - labor and some of the economic benefits that an illegal labor force brings into the United States, I think the process of illegal immigration is detrimental to the country for the long-term. It provides short-terms benefits and long term negative consequences as already established by a $338 billion dollar per year cost to the American taxpayer. Studies suggest that the costs associated with illegal immigration far outweigh the benefits.

As far as the Church is concerned In my view, illegal immigration creates a doctrinal conflict between what Mormons have been taught to believe in theory and what's been happening in practice. In theory, we're supposed to obey the laws of the land per the 12th and 13th articles of faith and scores of D&C scriptures related to obedience such as D&C 58:21. Now, I understand that the Church is about salvation of souls, etc. But, after giving the subject a great deal of thought and having no intention to bang my head against the Church or its leaders, I've concluded that we have a contradiction between what we preach and what happens in real life.

The way I see it, breaking the law is wrong but once they break the law and are here, the idea is to be nice, compassionate and tolerant anyway. I am ALL for that. I don't think I've ever mistreated a person based on their legal status in the U.S. In fact, I have personally helped a few. I don't propose that we "round 'em up" as second-class non-citizens and send them back to Mexico or wherever they happen to be from. They are GOD's offspring the same as you and I, worthy of respect, dignity, love, compassion and understanding. I've never been in favor of the die-hard, kick-them-all-out anti-illegal immigration crowd. I have lived immigration. I understand it. I know why people cheat the system and they do cheat it, there is no other way to describe it without camouflaging the truth. They cheat the system out of necessity. Most use other people's social security numbers because that's a way to get jobs, etc. Misuse or theft of social security numbers (a felony) poses serious problems including issues that have come up in the medical industry. One example is a person using someone else's social security for ER care. Serious problem can happen. Statements about being allergic to a medication using someone else's medical record. Creating a medical chart using someone else's social security number and having illnesses and treatment appearing on some else's record. Doctors depending on medical charts become exposed to potential malpractice suits, etc.

Not to mention the misuse of children

[Kenngo1969]

... [T]he church has added "child support" questions to the Temple recommend interview perhaps its timely to add a LEGAL RESIDENT question.

(I Tim. 5:8, KJV) But if any aprovide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.

There. I've shown you a scripture that specifically mandates child support. Show me one that says anything specific about [il]legal immigration.

[O-Brother]

Hey brother we are not so far apart. Although my post came accross as hardnose in favor of , that is not the case. I understand the problems involved. I have been on the receiving end of the dark side of illegal immigration. I am also aquainted with some really fine people who are of Mexican decent of which I have no idea whether they are here illegally or not. I just don't ask them.

My opposition to comes from what I perceived as an attempt to put the Church (Bishops & Stake Presidents) in the position of being enforcement agents for the government.

It is indeed a complex problem with no easy solutions. Perhaps more should be done to assist them in legalizing their status.

Peace.

No problem. The dark side of illegal immigration cost me: 1. my driver's license. 2. Concealed Weapon Permit. 3 A few credit cards. 4. Invasion of privacy (break into my garage) 5. A cell phone. 6. Wallet cash

7. $4,500 in Best Buy illegal electronic purchases. 8. Time wasted filling out a police report and 9. Someone using my ID to purchase stuff.

The guy was caught on video surveillance. Yeah, we got an idea that he was most likely an illegal based on several factors. There were two of them.

The way I look at it is that Bishops and Stake Presidents should not be in "enforcement" but I think they're called to be moral judges in a sense. That's why TR interviews include moral questions about worthiness and any unresolved issues with the proper authorities. On the other hand, when missionaries apply to go on a mission, the forms do require more details information. At that point, a moral and administrative judgment could be made. For a TR, it's up to the individual to be honest with the Bishop but that would mean a lot of people not going to the temple or going on missions!

The Church is NOT causing illegal immigration. It's dealing with it. The Government is not patrolling the entire border, only certain check points. The rest is wide open. Corporate interests are to blame, chambers of commerce, manufacturers association, lobbyists and a number of other people benefit from illegal labor.

On moral grounds, could Bishops and Stake Presidents ask if there are any legal issues that involve violation of the lands of the land? Sure they can. They don't have to ask about immigration specifically to avoid sounding discriminatory. I can see a question like this: "Are there any unresolved issues in your life which involve violation of any laws of the land?" That question would apply to all of us. If the person is honest and says: "Well, I don't have a green card.." The Bishop could refer him to the Stake President. The Stake President then would kindly explain that the person could wait until their legal status is resolved. That's more work for the SP. But you see, that creates another problem which becomes similar to not allowing blacks to receive the Priesthood! Now illegal aliens wouldn't be able to receive the Priesthood but for a different reason: 12-13 AOF. That is one of the biggest problems. Imagine the headlines :"Mormon Priesthood Ban On Illegal Aliens!" So I think the root of the compromises are more serious. It's not just a matter of compassion and mercy.

[Jeff K.]

My stance of accomodation for those without prison records exists on several perceptions I have.

1-One thing that makes us different from the US (and you will need to forgive the somewhat mildly humurous reference to "Stripes") is that our nation is based on those who are looking for a future, an improvement, better than the place they are. In effect a drive.

We're Americans, with a capital 'A', huh? You know what that means? Do ya? That means that our forefathers were kicked out of every decent country in the world.

One reason our nation is so different is that the people who come here are so different from those who remained abroad. Ours is a forward looking people, and I see much of the same in those immigrants coming here.

As I have said, a perception.

2-If we move most of these families back to their country of origin, we move them back to poverty, and it will be our collective decision to take away, which to me is distinct from prevent (through a stronger border) their entry. It is the rubicon I do not wish to cross. And the results will be a minimizing of their economic horizon which I think would diminish our own. In as sense like abortion it removes a potential genius from our midst and places them in an environment that will squelch that genius.

3-The US has contenanced illegal immigration for the past 2+ decades. The government, through benign neglect, has actually encouraged illegal immigration. We in this republic therefore deserve part of the blame because we have known during the past 20 years that the problem existed, but while jobs were plentiful and the immigrants were willing to work for nothing, no one cared. And no one did care. We in effect made them our servants until jobs became more scarce, and a critical mass began ratcheting up the cost for their servitude upon us.

Now some things have been addressed that are legitimate concerns. These are concerns of mine as well. Those who legitimately have sought entry may be punished for their honesty. My answer to that would be two fold.

a-to accelerate their particular programs to reduce the delays of an inefficient immigration system which never truly reflected our national needs and requirements. We reasses every year how many should be integrated into citizenship, and those already in the process should be first.

b-those here illegally, without proper documentation would have to wait. And they must clear up their particular documentation issues. ID's would be given which showed their status as pending, and an additional immigration tax placed upon them to fully fund a revamped immigration program, in a sense, rather than a PEF (Perpetual Immigration Fund) we would have a PBCF (Perpetual Border Control Fund). Now this may take years, but if they truly wish to be here as Americans, they will appreciate the safe sure way to reach that status. If not, they can return to their native homes.

Now, none of this will work if you cannot control the border, so all of this must sit on the foundation of a border that allows no one else in without permission. A much stronger presence, is required, along with biometric (electronic fingerprinting is old technology that is easily available) scanners at airports and entry points.

I think this best meets the needs of both sides. I believe our distinct position and the conflict we find ourselves in reflects an attempt to justify the present system, which I believe we cannot do since it is inefficient and makes creates an environment (benign neglect combined with an inefficient system) which puts everyone at pains.

I think a strong long term border is absolutley required. My compassion however asks that we work with those here in order to align them to our nation.

Regarding the Articles of Faith and how this plays into this, I have recently studied up on the context and time and will, later today, post again my views as to what its original mandate was and how perhaps is was viewed originally to give us clues to its present status.

[O-Brother]

3-The US has contenanced illegal immigration for the past 2+ decades. The government, through benign neglect, has actually encouraged illegal immigration. We in this republic therefore deserve part of the blame because we have known during the past 20 years that the problem existed, but while jobs were plentiful and the immigrants were willing to work for nothing, no one cared. And no one did care. We in effect made them our servants until jobs became more scarce, and a critical mass began ratcheting up the cost for their servitude upon us.

True.

The problem is that we are propagating the government's mistake by saying it's OK once they're here. Jobs aren't plentiful now. IF we come to a point where Americans run out of unemployment benefits and begin to look for work where illegal immigrants have taken those jobs, employers won't trade an illegal immigrant worker for a U.S. citizen.

Now, none of this will work if you cannot control the border, so all of this must sit on the foundation of a border that allows no one else in without permission. A much stronger presence, is required, along with biometric (electronic fingerprinting is old technology that is easily available) scanners at airports and entry points.

I don't think the U.S. government wants to control the border because of NAFTA. I've always suspected some sort of deal that's encouraged us to never fully protect our borders.

We only secure certain check points and that's about it. It's so bad that many people just drive to certain areas to go pick up their friends and relatives. Vans full of illegal immigrants crisscross state lines every single day. It's comical. All we have is Border Insecurity. But overstaying visas is also part of the problem but immigration officials are usually much harder on people violating terms of their visas - they deport them quickly - than illegal immigrants from Mexico and other places south of the border. Visa violators also get picked up more quickly than "undocumented" immigrants. They're easier to find and deport and there is no adverse consequences. The Mexican government and special interest groups here in the U.S. scream bloody murder every time Mexican nationals are threatened with deportation.

Regarding the Articles of Faith and how this plays into this, I have recently studied up on the context and time and will, later today, post again my views as to what its original mandate was and how perhaps is was viewed originally to give us clues to its present status.

We might as well do away with the 12th and 13th Articles of faith. They don't apply to illegal immigration and I am not saying this pejoratively. The other point of view is that once the Church decided to bring in illegal immigrants into the fold as does the Catholic Church and many other faiths, then you cannot reverse the course. Looks to me like old values are being done away with to accommodate people's needs. If someone asked me if I would ordain illegal immigrants to the the Priesthood, I'd have to say not until they straighten things our like everyone else. I would not send illegal immigrants to represent the Church or Mormons if we still had the 12th/13th AOF in the books as a core belief. That seems logical to me to avoid potential conflict and divisions among the people. If you do away with certain laws, certain crimes become void according to the laws removed. Remove the 2 AOF and a few other scriptures and we can solve the doctrinal and core values problem.

Most people don't care about the issue one way or another.

Another issue with illegal immigration is that the rich are rarely affected by illegal immigration problems. Very few illegal immigrants are attending affluent Wards, except maybe for visa overstayers. Illegal immigrants don't usually attend schools with rich kids and rich people tend to use illegal immigrants to work for them and do their construction and landscaping work, etc. Most rich people are also away from problem areas where neighborhoods are directly affected by problems associated with illegal immigrants - the ones that are involved in gangs activity and crime. Illegal immigrants aren't competing to take rich people's jobs.

If illegal immigration affected the rich, laws would be changed more quickly.