The Church and members who aren't documented

[Jeff K.]

Mark Tuttle, a spokesman for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,

Elder Pingree said, does everything it can to encourage its members to stay in their home countries to strengthen local stakes and wards. "But once they're here, we want to make them feel like part of the community, a valued part of the community," he said.

Tuttle said Thursday that statements Elder Pingree made then remain accurate

I think this gives it the correct context, without spin.

[Calm]

So for those who believe we should obey the law by turning in illegal immigrants or at least not allowing them to be baptized, etc.

Do you think that Daniel and his friends were in the wrong for refusing to obey the law of their land?

[frankenstein]

John 8:7

7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her

already addressed

The above verse means we must do away with the entire judicial and legal systems as none are worthy to stand in judgment of another.

[O-Brother]

Yea, apparently you DID miss it. You seem unable to see that the church's position, under the leadership of the Prophet, is the compassionate stance and he expects to lead by example.

Did anyone say the church had an 'official' position? I don't think I did and I don't think others did.

You said:

but there can be no doubt of the Prophet's position.

President Monson has chosen compassion over the Law.

Doesn't the Prophet speak for Christ and what the prophet says is the will of the Lord for the entire Church? You stated the Prophet's position above. Your own statement not mine.

The church baptizes, ordains, offers temple blessings and allows illegal immigrants to serve missions, hold callings, serve in the temple, receive welfare assistance, etc--all blessings and services that any other member enjoys. That is fact and IMO, it IS the compassionate way to handle this very complex situation which has developed over generations here in the US.

The activities above are mind-boggling. These activities mock the Priesthood and the AOF #12 and #13. There is nothing complex about the situation. It has not been developed over generations but only since 1986 when the last amnesty was granted. That makes it 24 years, hardly many generations.

I understand that you and others haven taken a very hard stance against this, and I am sorry. I hope that you will be able to prayerfully come to understand and accept how the church has chosen to handle this

.

We have failed to comment on the theft of social security numbers by those living illegally in the country. So, while some think that compassion absolves the obligation to be honest and obey the laws of the land, consider this in D&C 42:

4 And if a man or woman shall rob, he or she shall be delivered up unto the law of the land.

85 And if he or she shall steal, he or she shall be delivered up unto the law of the land.

86 And if he or she shall lie, he or she shall be delivered up unto the law of the land.

"Let no man break the laws of the land, for he that keepeth the laws of God hath no need to break the laws of the land." --- D&C 58:21 (this scripture has not been declared invalid)

D& C 98

4 And now, verily I say unto you concerning the laws of the land, it is my will that my people should observe to do all things whatsoever I command them.

5 And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me.

6 Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;

Immigration law has not be declared unconstitutional. Therefore it's still enforceable by the authorities and we are commanded to obey the laws and not enforce them.

D&C 51: 6

6 And thus all things shall be made sure, according to the laws of the land.

D&C 83: 3

3 And if they are not faithful they shall not have fellowship in the church; yet they may remain upon their inheritances according to the laws of the land.

Notice how the Lord is strict about the laws of the land. Laws that many want to bypass and others want to say it's no big deal or akin to nothing. The compassion you speak of should be directed toward the victims of illegal immigration and there are victims, lots of them. Thousands and thousands.

Let me ask if you're OK with children being victimized so that compassion can justify wrong-doing and cheating to go on.

[Nofear]

How is [the Church's allowing illegal immigrants to be members in standing] reconciled with your more draconian view?

O-brother answered that earlier. He believes the Church does it "for the sake or Public Relations and conversions."

[O-Brother]

O-brother answered that earlier. He believes the Church does it "for the sake or Public Relations and conversions."

I've answered a lot of things eariler. LOL. Problem is, some just bypass what I say and go off on some tangent about compassion and mercy, except that such compassion and mercy doesn't want to see the victims of illegal immigration, only the perpetrators of it. To simplify this debate, let's look at what some people are proposing and endorsing by their actions and words:

1. That mercy and compassion absolves the requirement that ALL of us, including illegal immigrants should obey the laws of the land and basically not cheat to work or reside in the United States.

2. That the fact that they are breaking federal laws has no bearing on Priesthood advances, ordinances and when they go out representing the Church. Basically, illegal immigrants as missionaries and Priesthood holders.

3. That if you do not not go along and ignore illegal activity that you are draconian, have no mercy or compassion. In other words, condone illegal activity or you're labeled as cold-hearted.

4. That there is no problem with a growing membership that has illegal status in the country.

5. That the misuse of social security numbers to work is not an issue. Notice that nobody wants to discuss how misused social security numbers play a part into the worthiness factor.

6. Violation of the 12th and 13th articles of faith seem to apply to the rest of us but NOT to illegal immigrants because they will "starve" if they go back primarily to Mexico and Central America.

7. That if they can live better lives here ($ and education, etc) despite the fact that there are plenty of opportunities in their own home countries to live righteously and without breaking laws, that somehow they're justified in violating the laws of the land and engage into unauthorized work by illegal means.

8. That the adulteress story justifies not casting the first stone. As mentioned by another poster, that would do away with our judicial system despite the fact that adultery and illegal wages, work, etc. are totally unrelated. Jesus was not dealing with 15 Million+ adulteresses and he only forgave that one, partly because we know nothing about the man she was committing adultery with. The other side of the story.

9. That somehow, it's no big deal to break laws, misuse social security numbers and be less than honest on temple recommend interviews

10. Finally, that the fact that millions of would-be legal immigrants don't even become part of the conversation, $338 billion dollars in annual fiscal damage and children's ids are stolen so people can work, makes no difference. In other words, the victims of illegal immigration do not become part of the debate. Notice that those who favor illegal immigration ignore the real issues and implications associated with what's involved in being an illegal immigrant and an LDS member. They only focus on compassion and mercy. AOF #12 and #13 are usually ignored and anything that addresses worthiness and honesty is quickly disconnected from the debate.

Faithful LDS saints should probably ask the question:

What's closer to righteousness and truth? Condoning and rationalizing illegal activity or teaching people correct principles and obedience to the laws of the land? Who wants to build the Kingdom of God on earth by making concessions to illegal activity and practices? What kind of kingdom will be built? A kingdom of compassion based on rationalizations or a Kingdom of righteousness? The word righteousness stars with the word "RIGHT" in it. Some think that starting out "wrong" is righteousness. We must really be living in the last days and the symptoms are clear: good is called evil and evil is called good. Right is considered wrong and wrong is considered right. Who in the world wants to teach their children that the end justify the means, even if the means including some illegal actions and activity or some law-breaking for a better life?

Why not preach order in all things instead of preaching chaos?

The answer should be straight-forward.

We're not talking about refugees here who are fearing for their lives and the drug cartels in Mexico are not killing every citizen there anymore than here. We're talking about people breaking the law in order to make more $, enjoy a better life and opportunities that normally require people to qualify for and be entitled to either by the sacrifices of our ancestors or by obedience to the laws of the land. Cheating the system should never be something that LDS people look upon with the least degree of allowance because every time the system is cheated, there is real damage and negative consequences to someone somewhere in the U.S. whether it be a person whose social security is misused or a taxpayer paying more than he or she should to offset the huge costs associated with illegal immigration. And there are huge costs, fiscal, human, societal, ethical and legal. CFR available upon request.

Some folks even justify the fact that visas are hard to get, so they go around the process anyway. Imagine if we all adopted this philosophy in life. None of us would want to sacrifice or pay the price for anything. We'd just go around whatever gets in the way of us living a better life, earning higher wages or receiving the blessing of the Gospel by righteousness means. Ridiculous. But that's the reality we're living now and so many adopt it as being "OK". I suppose that someday we will be accountable for our complacency towards illegal activity, ignoring the victims of wrong-doing and placing our compassion towards perpetrators instead of the victims.

[deadeye]

This in effect dictates clearly how we treat them. We do not kick them out of our homes, we do not make them a pariah, we do not drive them back to poverty. I feel strongly when someone callously says "not my problem" because it overlooks the humanity of what we are dealing with. The approach should never be dismissal or "deal with it". Nor do I advocate open borders as some do. I think step one should be an immediate stronger presence to mitigate the need for such compassion and tis costs in the future. But if you are here in this great nation, and if you are attempting to live up to the best part of who we are, then by all means, you should be welcomed.

Yet, the church still builds fences and implements other security devices around its temples? I wonder if there would be the same level of compassion extended to indigent people who seek refuge inside a temple? At least in the past, trespassers would be arrested and evicted from the property.

It seems to me that compassion is being used by some to justify dishonest or unethical behavior in taking advantage of illegal aliens for financial gain. My father-in-law and his son own a construction company and recently have begun to knowingly hire illegal aliens for some of their projects. In listening to them, they're thrilled that they can get them to work on Holidays without complaining and for lower wages then they're used to paying for the same work. Ironically, his wife is a school teacher who has a lot of problems with the behavior of the children of illegal alien laborers.

[Vindicator]

I've answered a lot of things eariler. LOL. Problem is, some just bypass what I say and go off on some tangent about compassion and mercy, except that such compassion and mercy doesn't want to see the victims of illegal immigration, only the perpetrators of it. To simplify this debate, let's look at what some people are proposing and endorsing by their actions and words:

1. That mercy and compassion absolves the requirement that ALL of us, including illegal immigrants should obey the laws of the land and basically not cheat to work or reside in the United States.

2. That the fact that they are breaking federal laws has no bearing on Priesthood advances, ordinances and when they go out representing the Church. Basically, illegal immigrants as missionaries and Priesthood holders.

3. That if you do not not go along and ignore illegal activity that you are draconian, have no mercy or compassion. In other words, condone illegal activity or you're labeled as cold-hearted.

4. That there is no problem with a growing membership that has illegal status in the country.

5. That the misuse of social security numbers to work is not an issue. Notice that nobody wants to discuss how misused social security numbers play a part into the worthiness factor.

6. Violation of the 12th and 13th articles of faith seem to apply to the rest of us but NOT to illegal immigrants because they will "starve" if they go back primarily to Mexico and Central America.

7. That if they can live better lives here ($ and education, etc) despite the fact that there are plenty of opportunities in their own home countries to live righteously and without breaking laws, that somehow they're justified in violating the laws of the land and engage into unauthorized work by illegal means.

8. That the adulteress story justifies not casting the first stone. As mentioned by another poster, that would do away with our judicial system despite the fact that adultery and illegal wages, work, etc. are totally unrelated. Jesus was not dealing with 15 Million+ adulteresses and he only forgave that one, partly because we know nothing about the man she was committing adultery with. The other side of the story.

9. That somehow, it's no big deal to break laws, misuse social security numbers and be less than honest on temple recommend interviews

10. Finally, that the fact that millions of would-be legal immigrants don't even become part of the conversation, $338 billion dollars in annual fiscal damage and children's ids are stolen so people can work, makes no difference. In other words, the victims of illegal immigration do not become part of the debate. Notice that those who favor illegal immigration ignore the real issues and implications associated with what's involved in being an illegal immigrant and an LDS member. They only focus on compassion and mercy. AOF #12 and #13 are usually ignored and anything that addresses worthiness and honesty is quickly disconnected from the debate.

Faithful LDS saints should probably ask the question:

What's closer to righteousness and truth? Condoning and rationalizing illegal activity or teaching people correct principles and obedience to the laws of the land? Who wants to build the Kingdom of God on earth by making concessions to illegal activity and practices? What kind of kingdom will be built? A kingdom of compassion based on rationalizations or a Kingdom of righteousness? The word righteousness stars with the word "RIGHT" in it. Some think that starting out "wrong" is righteousness. We must really be living in the last days and the symptoms are clear: good is called evil and evil is called good. Right is considered wrong and wrong is considered right. Who in the world wants to teach their children that the end justify the means, even if the means including some illegal actions and activity or some law-breaking for a better life?

Why not preach order in all things instead of preaching chaos?

The answer should be straight-forward.

We're not talking about refugees here who are fearing for their lives and the drug cartels in Mexico are not killing every citizen there anymore than here. We're talking about people breaking the law in order to make more $, enjoy a better life and opportunities that normally require people to qualify for and be entitled to either by the sacrifices of our ancestors or by obedience to the laws of the land. Cheating the system should never be something that LDS people look upon with the least degree of allowance because every time the system is cheated, there is real damage and negative consequences to someone somewhere in the U.S. whether it be a person whose social security is misused or a taxpayer paying more than he or she should to offset the huge costs associated with illegal immigration. And there are huge costs, fiscal, human, societal, ethical and legal. CFR available upon request.

Some folks even justify the fact that visas are hard to get, so they go around the process anyway. Imagine if we all adopted this philosophy in life. None of us would want to sacrifice or pay the price for anything. We'd just go around whatever gets in the way of us living a better life, earning higher wages or receiving the blessing of the Gospel by righteousness means. Ridiculous. But that's the reality we're living now and so many adopt it as being "OK". I suppose that someday we will be accountable for our complacency towards illegal activity, ignoring the victims of wrong-doing and placing our compassion towards perpetrators instead of the victims.

O Brother,

I suppose you and I can pound our heads against the wall all we want, it's not going to do us any good. So I believe I would attempt another approach. Rather than Black and White or Right or Wrong, lets look at this as a belief system instead. I talked with my Bishop yesterday with awe in his replys on this subject.

We all know, that these illegal aliens are criminals. That is clearly defined by the laws of our land that you and I have clearly and redundantly pressed that issue. So with all due respects to Alter Idem, to suggest that our Prophet has chosen compassion over the Laws of the Land is absurd. But, let's agree to disagree. Try telling that to a parent who has a son/daughter serving a mission teaching the lessons to the illegals in this country as Alter Idem has indicated she does. Agree or disagree with the Iraq war, try telling the mother of a Son on his second or third tour in Iraq that his son is doing something wrong. Your going to have a fight. In defense of Alter Idem she has a right to feel the way she does. Why? I would have rather her made the statement in here, assuming she is a Currant Temple Recommend holder, that although she dissagrees with her daughter teaching criminals, I would feel better hearing a more sensible, mature answer in that "Well, the Lord Called her to a Mission, that I support, the General athorities sent her where she is. It is in their hands and I support my Daughters mission. More so than to make a public post in an international website stating that the Prophet of the LDS church is above the law. Same as a Son in Iraq. If he " Believes in what he is doing" he's good to go. Some people believe we shouldn't be there. They don't "Believe" in the war. Tell that to the young patriotic men and woman in uniform. There have been threads in here discussion the differences between an LDS mission and a Tour of combat in Iraq.

To say the Missionarys have it as tough is patently absurd. I have both served a mission and served in the U.S. Army. Don't take my word for it. Watch "The Hurt Locker" and then come back in here and tell me Missionarys have it as hard as these guys do. I served a mission. I don't remember ever on a day to day basis going through that kind of stress and anxiety, wondering moment to moment if I was going to die.

My Bishop dropped a bombshell on me yesterday. He stated that the Church actually looks at transgressions on an expotential method. So O brother, like your and I believe, your not a little pregnant, your either pregnant or your not. Not so in the church. Example: An extra marital affair in the Churchs eyes, If you have only been with the other person two maybe three times in a month or two period, they see a verbal repremand appropriate. If you have been involved for months and months with continuous contact, Disfellowship applies. If you have conducted this affair for over a year or more, and don't really have a good reason, your excommunicated. To you and I, it's adultry, period. That is against the rules, beliefs and teaching of our church and gospel.

I asked what the church was going to do when all the Morman gay rights groups start demanding that they go on missions and work in the Temples. The Bishop told me that that was a completely different situation. Really, I thought a sin was a sin? Apparently our church leader don't feel that way. They seem to differentiate between sins of Morality and Criminality. HUH?

So, I'll agree to dissagree with Alter Idem and others in here that feel somes sins are okay and others aren't.

I will respect her daughters mission and agree with it, but dissagree with where she is and what she is doing, but will except that our leaders put her there and it's in their stewardship and therefor the "Bad" falls on them if so be it.

I've said enough. I'm staying neutral because as Anijen states it- "My head hurts"

We will see how it goes from here. But I will also add- "All Fools names and all Fools faces, always appear in Public Places"---

We must except one's belief system and show them the respect they deserve.

The Vindicator

[Vindicator]

Yet, the church still builds fences and implements other security devices around its temples? I wonder if there would be the same level of compassion extended to indigent people who seek refuge inside a temple? At least in the past, trespassers would be arrested and evicted from the property.

It seems to me that compassion is being used by some to justify dishonest or unethical behavior in taking advantage of illegal aliens for financial gain. My father-in-law and his son own a construction company and recently have begun to knowingly hire illegal aliens for some of their projects. In listening to them, they're thrilled that they can get them to work on Holidays without complaining and for lower wages then they're used to paying for the same work. Ironically, his wife is a school teacher who has a lot of problems with the behavior of the children of illegal alien laborers.

Great Point!

The Vindicator

[Nofear]

It seems to me that compassion is being used by some to justify dishonest or unethical behavior...

I haven't seen any such thing argued in this thread, at least from the perspective of the Church.

Everybody agrees illegal immigration is illegal. Everybody agrees that something should be done. What some don't agree with is whether or not the Church should consider immigration status for the good standing of a member. Specific examples might include:

Is giving a temple recommend to an illegal immigrant dishonest or unethical?

Is the Church sending an illegal immigrant member on a mission dishonest or unethical?

Is failure of a Bishop to report an illegal immigrant family to INS dishonest or unethical?

Is allowing an illegal immigrant to be eligible for most ward level callings dishonest or unethical?

To all these questions, the Church has answered "no". And because of those responses, some of the interlocutors here have accused the Brethren of lack of ethics.

[Jeff K.]

Mark Tuttle, a spokesman for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,

Quote

Elder Pingree said, does everything it can to encourage its members to stay in their home countries to strengthen local stakes and wards. "But once they're here, we want to make them feel like part of the community, a valued part of the community," he said.

Tuttle said Thursday that statements Elder Pingree made then remain accurate

I think this gives it the correct context, without spin.

I do not believe the issue is being accurately addressed given what the spokesman for the church has said, even when asked to verify if it was the church's position.

I note that no one has spoken to this very important point.

[O-Brother]

I haven't seen any such thing argued in this thread, at least from the perspective of the Church.

Everybody agrees illegal immigration is illegal. Everybody agrees that something should be done. What some don't agree with is whether or not the Church should consider immigration status for the good standing of a member. Specific examples might include:

Is giving a temple recommend to an illegal immigrant dishonest or unethical?

Is the Church sending an illegal immigrant member on a mission dishonest or unethical?

Is failure of a Bishop to report an illegal immigrant family to INS dishonest or unethical?

Is allowing an illegal immigrant to be eligible for most ward level callings dishonest or unethical?

To all these questions, the Church has answered "no". And because of those responses, some of the interlocutors here have accused the Brethren of lack of ethics.

I see it like this:

1. Illegal status, no TR until that's been corrected.

2. Illegal status. No Mission until that's corrected or make arrangements to serve where it is legal, i.e., home country and let the parents worry about the rest.

3. Baptism of illegal immigrants, a no-no. They cannot repent or make restitution without going home, cease and desist. Conferring the Holy Ghost or the Priesthood, a no-no for the same reasons.

4. Temple attendance, a no-no.

5. Working illegally and paying tithing from unauthorized work, no.

All legal residents and citizens, refugees and others within the law: welcome! It's that simple. That's how it used to be. It should have never been changed just because the conversion numbers are highly attractive.

Basically, we can't ignore the fact that a) they brought their illegality upon themselves - not their poverty or misery and b) Repentance requires restitution.

Some people see this is being inhumane and harsh. I think that's nonsense. Some people see this as denying the Gospel. I think that's nonsense. Some people say, what if the tables were turned and you were an illegal immigrant, I'd refer them to D&C 58:21.

Why bother with temple and pre-baptismal interviews then? Why bother with teaching our kids about the 12th and 13th articles of faith? Why bother sending our missionaries out to teach people what we believe in?

Now, let's not kid ourselves here. Here are the real issues that are causing the complacency to go on.

1. IF the Church said: we cannot baptize you and ordain you in a Priesthood office until you're legal in the country because of our AOF.

Repercussion: those affected would throw a fit and scream racism, lack of compassion, bring up the black and the Priesthood ban. This would travel all the way to Mexico and hinder missionary work THERE and HERE. The consequences would be ugly. It would make the news. Pro-illegal immigration groups would use this against the Church and Mormons in general. Standing up for what's right would cause persecutions and criticism. The Cathorlic Church would distance itself from us because we're in partnership with them and have adopted their position on illegal immigration.

2. Conversions in the Latino community would come to a halt. Some members in Hispanic Wards would take offense and leave or probably exodus.

3. Missionaries who served missions in Mexico and Central America and learned to love the people would strongly protest against a position PRO law and PRO AOF.

4. Those that employ hard-working illegal immigrants and who happen to be LDS would also protest the loss of their loyal workers or their hard feelings

5. The Chamber of Commerce would protest (Not saying which one to stay apolitical)

6. The Association of Manufacturers would protest (Not saying which one to stay apolitical)

7. The Catholic Church would not be happy

8. Bloggers would be debating this back and forth and heated debates would cause contention between those pro and against

And more...

Soooooooooooo, it's easier to condone the issue and let things go on as they have, patiently waiting for the government to give all illegals amnesty than disturbing the current status that's been going on for years now. There is also the belief that birth citizenship rights will eventually self-correct the problem. Those members who are against illegal immigration have no say in the matter because only a few would support them. If an amnesty is granted, those who have been pro-illegal immigration would say that the Lord blessed all illegals and all of us haters were wrong and lacked compassion, etc. etc. Clearly, it's easy to see why some people are even proud to have illegal immigrants being baptized, going on missions, attending temples, advancing in the Priesthood, blessing the sacrament, performing baptisms, etc. They really feel that the Lord is on their side and against us cold hearted and unmerciful souls.

Yet, on Sundays we all sing "Do what is right and let the consequence follow..." Perhaps we should actually DO what's right instead of just sing it.

What I think the Brethren have done is considered 1 through 8 above. Also the attorneys. Then, it's probably been decided that the worth of souls is greater than the worth of the law. But there is a slight problem with this line of thinking: a revelation where the Lord says that illegal immigrants are exempt from AOF 12 and 13 and that the both Priesthood and the Holy Ghost will be bestowed upon those breaking the law because they're excepted from following the same laws the rest of us are required to. For example, if I need to establish a new credit profile to feed my family or make higher wages, I would expect an exemption for me as well. Americans are also going hungry, homeless, losing their homes, cars, etc. Using the same logic illegal immigrants do, the poor among us who happen to be LDS could basically do the same thing illegal immigrants do to better themselves and get away with it.

That's why, in principle, illegal activity is wrong. In practice, it's acceptable. Another problem is that illegal immigration has been monopolized by one major group and not all illegal immigrants. One groups has a much higher voice than any other which poses the question: why would they be so special above all other groups?

Anyway, it used to be that people stood for what's right. Not so anymore and that's the real challenge we deal with. Common sense is no longer common practice in school, at work, in society and obviously, in religious circles too. Whatever we do, we set an example. Some think that we are setting the right example. Are we? Whatever happened to all those past General Conference talks about honesty, being obedient, honoring the laws of the land, being good citizens, love of country, etc? Those who oppose illegal activity are children of God too, no?

[Vindicator]

I see it like this:

1. Illegal status, no TR until that's been corrected.

2. Illegal status. No Mission until that's corrected or make arrangements to serve where it is legal, i.e., home country and let the parents worry about the rest.

3. Baptism of illegal immigrants, a no-no. They cannot repent or make restitution. Conferring the Holy Ghost or the Priesthood, a no-no for the same reasons.

4. Temple attendance, a no-no.

5. Working illegally and paying tithing from unauthorized work, no.

All legal residents and citizens, refugees and others within the law: welcome! It's that simple. That's how it used to be. It should have never been changed just because the conversion numbers are highly attractive.

Basically, we can't ignore the fact that a) they brought their illegality upon themselves - not their poverty or misery and b) Repentance requires restitution.

Some people see this is being inhumane and harsh. I think that's nonsense. Some people see this as denying the Gospel. I think that's nonsense. Some people say, what if the tables were turned and you were an illegal immigrant, I'd refer them to D&C 58:21.

Why bother with temple and pre-baptismal interviews then? Why bother with teaching our kids about the 12th and 13th articles of faith? Why bother sending our missionaries out to teach people what we believe in?

Now, let's not kid ourselves here. Here are the real issues that are causing the complacency to go on.

1. IF the Church said: we cannot baptize you and ordain you in a Priesthood office until you're legal in the country because of our AOF.

Repercussion: those affected would throw a fit and scream racism, lack of compassion, bring up the black and the Priesthood ban. This would travel all the way to Mexico and hinder missionary work THERE and HERE. The consequences would be ugly. It would make the media. Pro-illegal immigration groups would use this against the Church and Mormons in general. Standing up for what's right would cause persecutions and criticism. The Cathorlic Church would distance itself from us because we're in partnership with them and have adopted their position on illegal immigration.

2. Conversions in the Latino community would come to a halt. Some members in Hispanic Wards would take offense and leave or probably exodus.

3. Missionaries who served missions in Mexico and Central America and learned to love the people would strongly protest against a position PRO law and PRO AOF.

4. Those who employ hard-working illegal immigrations and who happen to be LDS would also protest

5. The Chamber of Commerce would protest (Not saying which one to stay apolitical)

6. The Association of Manufacturers would protest (Not saying which one to stay apolitical)

7. The Catholic Church would not be happy

8. Bloggers would be debating this back and forth and heated debates would cause contention between those pro and against

And more...

Soooooooooooo, it's easier to condone the issue and let things go on as they have, patiently waiting for the government to give all illegals amnesty than ruing a good thing that's been going on. Those members who are against illegal immigration have no say in the matter because only a few would support them. If an amnesty is granted, those who have been pro-illegal immigration would say that the Lord blessed all illegals and all of us haters were wrong and lacked compassion, etc. etc. Clearly, it's easy to see why some people are even proud to have illegal immigrants being baptized, going on missions, attending temples, advancing in the Priesthood, blessing the sacrament, performing baptisms, etc. They really feel that the Lord is on their side and against us cold hearted and unmerciful souls.

Yet, on Sundays we all sing "Do what is right and let the consequence follow..." Perhaps we should actually DO what's right instead of just sing it.

What I think the Brethren have done is considered 1 through 8 above. Also the attorneys. Then, it's probably been decided that the worth of souls is greater than the worth of the law. But there is a slight problem with this line of thinking: a revelation where the Lord says that illegal immigrants are exempt from AOF 12 and 13 and that the both Priesthood and the Holy Ghost will be bestowed upon those breaking the law because they're excepted from following the same laws the rest of us are required to. For example, if I need to establish a new credit profile to feed my family or make higher wages, I would expect an exemption for me as well. Americans are also going hungry, homeless, losing their homes, cars, etc. Using the same logic illegal immigrants do, the poor among us who happen to be LDS could basically do the same thing they do and get away with it.

That's why, in principle, illegal activity is wrong. In practice, it's acceptable. Another problem is that illegal immigration has been monopolized by one major group and not all illegal immigrants. One groups has a much higher voice than any other which poses the question: why would they be so special above all other groups?

Anyway, it used to be that people stood for what's right. Not so anymore and that's the real challenge we deal with. Common sense is no longer common practice in school, at work, in society and obviously, in religious circles too.

O Brother,

My man your preaching to the Choir! I concur completey with your thoughts. Again, you can't change someones belief system. 900 Jonestown residents didn't drink Cyinide laced Kookade knowing it was going to kill them because they didn't know Cyinide kills. I rest my case.

The Vindicator-

[Jeff K.]

Yet, on Sundays we all sing "Do what is right and let the consequence follow..." Perhaps we should actually DO what's right instead of just sing it.

The irony here is that someone actually believes that the state creates what is right. Amazing really, being both German and of Jewish blood, I have long since realized the "state" is not always right and should be viewed, as our founding fathers viewed teh state, "with suspicion". I find it disheartening that the "state" can decide who enters God's Temple and who doesn't. In effect that is exactly what some people are saying. I personally would not contenance that. The state is "amoral" and we cannot allow the state to control our ordinances of salvation for the people.

Nor do I believe that the prophet and apostles are somehow unethical or denying the core values of our church as some have suggested. And I do not believe they would put politics above salvation and exhaltation.

[staccato]

The irony here is that someone actually believes that the state creates what is right. Amazing really, being both German and of Jewish blood, I have long since realized the "state" is not always right and should be viewed, as our founding fathers viewed teh state, "with suspicion". I find it disheartening that the "state" can decide who enters God's Temple and who doesn't. In effect that is exactly what some people are saying. I personally would not contenance that. The state is "amoral" and we cannot allow the state to control our ordinances of salvation for the people.

Nor do I believe that the prophet and apostles are somehow unethical or denying the core values of our church as some have suggested. And I do not believe they would put politics above salvation and exhaltation.

Please tell that to Joseph Smith who wrote up the AoF. If the state is so evil, the "obeying, honoring and sustaining the law" probably should not have been included.

And all of the ensuing apostles/prophets who have urged members to obey the law. And the current curriculum which tells people to obey the laws of the land. Because to to this, and then allow for disobedience to the immigration law, is hypocritical.

[Jeff K.]

Joseph Smith was very aware of the shortcomings of the state. The church was made very aware of the short comings of the state, especially after they went to Utah.

I have shown how the church views the present situation and all of you assiduously avoid the point, do I need to cut and paste it again?

[Kumenonhi]

Wasn't it the state (Boggs) that legalized the killing of every Mormon man woman and child?

Didn't BY and some apostles disguise themselves because they were breaking the law?

[alter idem]

O Brother,

I suppose you and I can pound our heads against the wall all we want, it's not going to do us any good. So I believe I would attempt another approach. Rather than Black and White or Right or Wrong, lets look at this as a belief system instead. I talked with my Bishop yesterday with awe in his replys on this subject.

We all know, that these illegal aliens are criminals. That is clearly defined by the laws of our land that you and I have clearly and redundantly pressed that issue. So with all due respects to Alter Idem, to suggest that our Prophet has chosen compassion over the Laws of the Land is absurd. But, let's agree to disagree. Try telling that to a parent who has a son/daughter serving a mission teaching the lessons to the illegals in this country as Alter Idem has indicated she does. Agree or disagree with the Iraq war, try telling the mother of a Son on his second or third tour in Iraq that his son is doing something wrong. Your going to have a fight.

As a member of the church and the parent of a missionary, I support the way the church handles illegal immigrants. I don't have any problem with it. And this has NOTHING to do with Iraq so I'm not sure why you bring this into it.

In defense of Alter Idem she has a right to feel the way she does. Why? I would have rather her made the statement in here, assuming she is a Currant Temple Recommend holder, that although she dissagrees with her daughter teaching criminals, I would feel better hearing a more sensible, mature answer in that "Well, the Lord Called her to a Mission, that I support, the General athorities sent her where she is. It is in their hands and I support my Daughters mission. More so than to make a public post in an international website stating that the Prophet of the LDS church is above the law. Same as a Son in Iraq. If he " Believes in what he is doing" he's good to go. Some people believe we shouldn't be there. They don't "Believe" in the war. Tell that to the young patriotic men and woman in uniform. There have been threads in here discussion the differences between an LDS mission and a Tour of combat in Iraq.

Whether I hold a temple recommend is not your business and is not pertinent to the discussion.

Please do not misrepresent my views; I DO NOT disagree with my daughter teaching illegal immigrants. I have no qualms about it whatsoever. I believe that the work of the church is to proclaim the gospel, not worry about a person's immigration status.

I'm satisfied with everything I have written on this 'international website'--but rather you not put words in my posts. I never said "the Prophet of the LDS church is above the law".

Once again, I'm not sure why you are bringing soldiers in Iraq into this.

To say the Missionarys have it as tough is patently absurd. I have both served a mission and served in the U.S. Army. Don't take my word for it. Watch "The Hurt Locker" and then come back in here and tell me Missionarys have it as hard as these guys do. I served a mission. I don't remember ever on a day to day basis going through that kind of stress and anxiety, wondering moment to moment if I was going to die.

For someone who served a mission, I find it out of character to pit missionary service against missionary service. Those I've known who served in both did not harbor such a need to compare the two and find one wanting.

My Bishop dropped a bombshell on me yesterday. He stated that the Church actually looks at transgressions on an expotential method. So O brother, like your and I believe, your not a little pregnant, your either pregnant or your not. Not so in the church. Example: An extra marital affair in the Churchs eyes, If you have only been with the other person two maybe three times in a month or two period, they see a verbal repremand appropriate. If you have been involved for months and months with continuous contact, Disfellowship applies. If you have conducted this affair for over a year or more, and don't really have a good reason, your excommunicated. To you and I, it's adultry, period. That is against the rules, beliefs and teaching of our church and gospel.

Call for reference please

My husband serves as a Bishop and I know this is not true. There is no standard or guideline like this in the church. I am certain that your Bishop did not tell you this--but I suppose this is how it got through your 'filter'. I think you should discuss it with him more so that you can properly understand what he was trying to explain to you.

I asked what the church was going to do when all the Morman gay rights groups start demanding that they go on missions and work in the Temples. The Bishop told me that that was a completely different situation. Really, I thought a sin was a sin? Apparently our church leader don't feel that way. They seem to differentiate between sins of Morality and Criminality. HUH?

So, I'll agree to dissagree with Alter Idem and others in here that feel somes sins are okay and others aren't.

I will respect her daughters mission and agree with it, but dissagree with where she is and what she is doing, but will except that our leaders put her there and it's in their stewardship and therefor the "Bad" falls on them if so be it.

Because some of us consider illegal immigration differently, you accuse us of turning a blind eye to serious moral sins like adultery? Seems you are accusing church leaders of the same thing then. That's fine, at least I'm in good company.

I've said enough. I'm staying neutral because as Anijen states it- "My head hurts"

We will see how it goes from here. But I will also add- "All Fools names and all Fools faces, always appear in Public Places"---

We must except one's belief system and show them the respect they deserve.

The Vindicator

You're staying 'neutral'? Okaaay....

[O-Brother]

O Brother,

My man your preaching to the Choir! I concur completey with your thoughts. Again, you can't change someones belief system. 900 Jonestown residents didn't drink Cyinide laced Kookade knowing it was going to kill them because they didn't know Cyinide kills. I rest my case.

The Vindicator-

Sorry. I was adding to. I'd rather defend the victims of illegal immigration and the law of the land than rationalize illegal activity. For that you and I can get burned at the Stake.

[O-Brother]

Please tell that to Joseph Smith who wrote up the AoF. If the state is so evil, the "obeying, honoring and sustaining the law" probably should not have been included.

And all of the ensuing apostles/prophets who have urged members to obey the law. And the current curriculum which tells people to obey the laws of the land. Because to to this, and then allow for disobedience to the immigration law, is hypocritical.

So true.

...

12.We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

13.We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul--We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.

Problem solved.

[alter idem]

Please tell that to Joseph Smith who wrote up the AoF. If the state is so evil, the "obeying, honoring and sustaining the law" probably should not have been included.

And all of the ensuing apostles/prophets who have urged members to obey the law. And the current curriculum which tells people to obey the laws of the land. Because to to this, and then allow for disobedience to the immigration law, is hypocritical.

A number of my ancestors defied the law for years, they went to prison, they paid fines. They practiced polygamy. Members who've lived in oppressive countries have not been required to put allegiance to country above church.

As long as we LDS have this in our history, you can't take the harsh stance that LDS always 'obey honor and sustain' the law of a land. We do not take an oath to that.

[Vindicator]

A number of my ancestors defied the law for years, they went to prison, they paid fines. They practiced polygamy. Members who've lived in oppressive countries have not been required to put allegiance to country above church.

As long as we LDS have this in our history, you can't take the harsh stance that LDS always 'obey honor and sustain' the law of a land. We do not take an oath to that.

I'm sorry, are we all talking about the same Church here?

Vindicator-

[alter idem]

I'm sorry, are we all talking about the same Church here?

Vindicator-

Yes. Do you know church history?

[O-Brother]

A number of my ancestors defied the law for years, they went to prison, they paid fines. They practiced polygamy. Members who've lived in oppressive countries have not been required to put allegiance to country above church.

As long as we LDS have this in our history, you can't take the harsh stance that LDS always 'obey honor and sustain' the law of a land. We do not take an oath to that.

With all due respect, speak for yourself.

[alter idem]

With all due respect, speak for yourself.

I will. I've never taken an oath within the church to 'obey, honor and sustain' my govt. Are you saying that you have?