LDS Church issues statement on immigration

[smac97]

Here:

SALT LAKE CITY -- In advance of Gov. Gary Herbert's meeting on illegal immigration, leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have issued a new statement on the issue.

Scott Parker will represent the LDS Church's Salt Lake Public Affairs Council and will represent the Church at the governor's immigration meeting Tuesday.

Church leaders issued a new statement that says the complex issues surrounding immigration are a matter of increasing concern.

It reads in part, "Elected officials have the primary responsibility to find solutions in the best interests of all whose lives will be impacted by their actions."

The Church is again asking for civil discourse when addressing immigration, noting, "Finding a successful resolution will require the best thinking and goodwill of all across the political spectrum, the highest levels of statesmanship and the strongest desire to do what is best for all of God's children."

Tony Yapias with Proyecto Latino de Utah said Monday that he is very grateful for this new statement because many lives have already been affected by the release of the list.

"I don't know of any other statement in the past that's been more direct, and so I thank The Church for this strong statement, a very compassionate statement," Yapias said.

Yapias says the statement may make a difference as they approach the upcoming meeting.

Ron Mortensen, spokesman for the Utah Coalition on Illegal Immigration, said his group also agrees with Latter-day Saint Church leaders.

"We would surely encourage fixing the immigration system so people can come here in a responsible period of time. That's part of what our program will be looking at," Mortensen said. "The Utah Coalition on Illegal Immigration will have a plan before the legislative session... that will coordinate a guest worker program with our developmental assistance program overseas."

Yapias says the statement is significant in that it comes on the eve of the roundtable discussion convened by Gov. Herbert.

"I am very pleased," he said. "I hope people will reflect upon it, will think about it, even those who are on the other side... will step back a little bit."

To read the entire statement from the LDS Church, CLICK HERE.

And here's the full statement:

Statement from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints:

"The complex issues surrounding immigration are a matter of increasing concern and debate for all in this country.

"Elected individuals have the primary responsibility to find solutions in the best interests of all whose lives will be impacted by their actions.

"We repeat our appeal for careful reflection and civil discourse when addressing immigration issues. Finding a successful resolution will require the best thinking and goodwill of all across the political spectrum, the highest levels of statesmanship, and the strongest desire to do what is best for all of God's children."

(Courtesy The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints)

-Smac

[USU78]

Yup. Those who have the duty to do something about it ought to be doing something about it.

Churches have neither authority nor expertise in handling other people's border and security problems.

The Church is wise to remind those who have authority and alleged expertise to do what they were hired to do.

[ERayR]

Yup. Those who have the duty to do something about it ought to be doing something about it.

Churches have neither authority nor expertise in handling other people's border and security problems.

The Church is wise to remind those who have authority and alleged expertise to do what they were hired to do.

What he said.

[Hamba Tuhan]

to the words and the spirit of the Church's statement.

[sunstoned]

What he said.

QFT

[USU78]

QFT

ERay's got TB?

[cdowis]

I thank the Lord every day that we have such wise and compassionate leaders in the Church.

[DanGB]

Living in a border state brings the issue of immigration and border security to the top of my concerns. We have huge problems and costs brought about by illegal immigration and a porous border. The official who sponsored the bill in Arizona was a member of the Church and was honest enough to stand by our doctrine of obeying the laws of the land. I agree with him.

On this one, I am a bit disappointed that IMO, based on this statement, the Church seems to be putting membership rolls ahead of doctrine.

[Jason]

On this one, I am a bit disappointed that IMO, based on this statement, the Church seems to be putting membership rolls ahead of doctrine.

I don't see that. It looks to me like all they're saying is "everybody be cool".

[ttribe]

On this one, I am a bit disappointed that IMO, based on this statement, the Church seems to be putting membership rolls ahead of doctrine.

How do you figure?

[BCSpace]

On this one, I am a bit disappointed that IMO, based on this statement, the Church seems to be putting membership rolls ahead of doctrine.

I agree. The Church should be encouraging enforcement of the law and it can still tell everyone to "be cool" and that would still not be taking a position on the issue of what's to be done about illegal immigration. I understand that the Church is growing the wheat with the tares, but at some point inaction causes wheat to become tare.

[ttribe]

I agree. The Church should be encouraging enforcement of the law and it can still tell everyone to "be cool" and that would still not be taking a position on the issue of what's to be done about illegal immigration. I understand that the Church is growing the wheat with the tares, but at some point inaction causes wheat to become tare.

Oh Puleeeaze.

[BCSpace]

Oh Puleeeaze.

Need a hanky?

lol

Frankly, though you may not like it, I'll bet you can't rationally disagree with the first sentence. The second sentence also is quite rational. We attract all sorts of people who still have fundamental disagreements with various doctrines and policies of the Church and admit them into the fold anyway. However, the longer they go on in disagreement, the more likely they are to fall away or cause problems. In other words, wheat becomes tare.

[ttribe]

Need a hanky?

lol

Frankly, though you may not like it, I'll bet you can't rationally disagree with the first sentence. The second sentence also is quite rational. We attract all sorts of people who still have fundamental disagreements with various doctrines and policies of the Church and admit them into the fold anyway. However, the longer they go on in disagreement, the more likely they are to fall away or cause problems. In other words, wheat becomes tare.

I see absolutely no need for the Church to weigh in on this issue.

[frankenstein]

Yup. Those who have the duty to do something about it ought to be doing something about it.

Churches have neither authority nor expertise in handling other people's border and security problems.

The Church is wise to remind those who have authority and alleged expertise to do what they were hired to do.

I agree.

The statement is entirely neutral expressing only that Political Officials fulfill their duty. It is disconcerting that anyone would claim to identify the LDS Church position in the statement, that is a position other than "official do your duty". Successful resolution is a broad brush, which will offend many on all sides of the issue.

[BCSpace]

I see absolutely no need for the Church to weigh in on this issue.

On the issue of immigration, I agree. However, to tell everyone to "be cool" and yet not encourage the laws to be upheld and enforced is a significant ommission that plays directly to the aforementioned numbers game which is the game of the tares growing with the wheat. Quite a valid game imho until wheat becomes tare.

Can there be any doubt that the LDS Church is playing to the Latin American community? Of course not. Is there any shame in that? Of course not. It can get out of hand however, when people use it as a justification to ignore or disobey the law.

[ttribe]

On the issue of immigration, I agree. However, to tell everyone to "be cool" and yet not encourage the laws to be upheld and enforced is a significant ommission that plays directly to the aforementioned numbers game which is the game of the tares growing with the wheat. Quite a valid game imho until wheat becomes tare.

Can there be any doubt that the LDS Church is playing to the Latin American community? Of course not. Is there any shame in that? Of course not. It can get out of hand however, when people use it as a justification to ignore or disobey the law.

I simply don't see all the strategic maneuvering that you do. Sorry.

BTW, I have some up-close experience with counsel given to members of the Church in the country illegally while I was serving my mission and the situation that I saw would not be popular with the open borders crowd.

[BCSpace]

I simply don't see all the strategic maneuvering that you do. Sorry

I am actually somewhat close to some of the decisions made and the reasoning for them and the strategic maneuvering is definitely there. The same type of maneuvering, while not necessarily directly related to the issue at hand, is pervasive throughout the Church at the local level in bishoprics and stake presidencies and can even be found in the CHI. The general rule of thumb is do what you can to keep members and keep them active without sacrificing too much. I think we sometimes do sacrifice too much.

BTW, I have some up-close experience with counsel given to members of the Church in the country illegally while I was serving my mission and the situation that I saw would not be popular with the open borders crowd.

Sure. Any good Bishop would counsel one to obey the law.

[ttribe]

I am actually somewhat close to some of the decisions made and the reasoning for them and the strategic maneuvering is definitely there. The same type of maneuvering, while not necessarily directly related to the issue at hand, is pervasive throughout the Church at the local level in bishoprics and stake presidencies and can even be found in the CHI. The general rule of thumb is do what you can to keep members and keep them active without sacrificing too much. I think we sometimes do sacrifice too much.

Somehow, I sense there is a gap between the degree to which you think you are close to the decision, and how close you really are; but I digress.

Sure. Any good Bishop would counsel one to obey the law.

Not really what happened, but it's always interesting to see how confident you are in your mind-reading skills.

[Ahab]

On the issue of immigration, I agree. However, to tell everyone to "be cool" and yet not encourage the laws to be upheld and enforced is a significant ommission that plays directly to the aforementioned numbers game which is the game of the tares growing with the wheat. Quite a valid game imho until wheat becomes tare.

Can there be any doubt that the LDS Church is playing to the Latin American community? Of course not. Is there any shame in that? Of course not. It can get out of hand however, when people use it as a justification to ignore or disobey the law.

The immigration laws may need to be changed to find a solution that is in the best interests of all of God's children.

That's what I think the Church is endorsing, rather than just advising everyone to obey the law that is already in place.

[DanGB]

The immigration laws may need to be changed to find a solution that is in the best interests of all of God's children.

That's what I think the Church is endorsing, rather than just advising everyone to obey the law that is already in place.

Do you believe the Church endorses food storage by members to take care of all God's children?

[Ahab]

Do you believe the Church endorses food storage by members to take care of all God's children?

Yes, and I believe the Church endorses food storage to non-members, as well, because that's just a good thing to have.

[DanGB]

Yes, and I believe the Church endorses food storage to non-members, as well, because that's just a good thing to have.

And I believe the Church has a doctrine to obey the laws of the land because that's a good thing to do as well. I would just lke to see them stand up and enforce the doctrine as I would like to see our Govt enforce our laws! Both are good things!!!

[Black Moclips]

Back in California, I was called to attend a spanish speaking branch that was largely attended by illegal immigrants. When some were baptized, I asked how we could let them be baptized seeing how they were here illegally and breaking federal law. I was told by leadership that the church does not consider immigration issues when it comes to decisions of worthiness related to baptism.

I wholeheartedly disagree with this position. I think the church should come out and specifically say that the act of illegally immigrating to this country violates the principles of truthfulness and honesty and obedience to civil law; consequently, such a person is not worthy of membership in the church until such issues are resolved. I think anything less than this shows the church is trying to court membership numbers rather than staying true to principle.

[Ahab]

And I believe the Church has a doctrine to obey the laws of the land because that's a good thing to do as well.

As a general rule, yes, it's good to obey the laws of the land, because laws are meant to govern a society and to ignore laws can lead to anarchy, but as I was saying, sometimes the laws need to be changed to find a solution that is in the best interests of all of God's children.

Just because something is "law" doesn't necessarily mean it's a good law, so when making our laws we should try our best to make sure they are laws that are in the best interests of all of God's children.

For example, in this case we're talking about whether or not to allow people to become citizens of our country, the US of A, and the people who make the laws governing whether or not to allow that should have "the best interests of all of God's children" in mind when deliberating on that issue, which is what the Church is endorsing.

I would just lke to see them stand up and enforce the doctrine as I would like to see our Govt enforce our laws! Both are good things!!!

Do you claim to understand Church doctrine concerning whether or not people should become members of this country?

Who do you think should be allowed to become a citizen of this country, and what should motivate others to want to be here ?

Do you see any laws of our land preventing people from moving into this country, as a place of refuge ?

The following approach doesn't seem very charitable to me, and I wouldn't want to say this to anyone:

You can't be here because it's against our laws for you to be here, and if you're already here, you should leave!

Instead, I'd like to find some way to allow everyone to be here who wants to be here, because I think that would be in the best interests of all of God's children who want to be here.

If anyone doesn't agree with me, though, I would simply ask that they bear this in mind:

Find a solution that is in the best interests of all of God's children.