Lds Church Issues New Statement Re: Immigration

[HeatherAnn]

I may have quite the imagination. However, actually having gone to Iraq and Afghanistan; I think I am entitled to my paranoia.

It only takes one bad apple to ruin the whole bunch. Every illegal should be treated as a potential criminal, and hazard to public safety; and that beyond already being a criminal for being in the country illegally.

It's not paranoia when they are out to get you, and you should know (after 9/11) that they really are out to get us.

Elf,

Thanks for serving our country.

I understand that some want to kill us - citizens included because as one terrorist explained, "Since the US has a democracy, citizens are partly responsible for political leaders' decisions." What they fail to realize is that that's only about 1/2 - who voted for most politicians... & sometimes Mickey Mouse would be a better candidate of the options.

I worry that the government, news & others are already starting to blame our country's problems on the scape-goat of illegal immigrants.

I understand that we need to stand up for what's right... but sometimes that's not clear cut.

SeriouslyHonestly,

Speaking of hypocricy... How would you feel, if you were an illegal immigrant with a dependent family?

Most of our ancestors were immigrants... if they got deported, imagine how different your life would be!

Edited June 23, 2011 by HeatherAnn

[Calm]

I read that over 35% of illegal immigrant males are involved in gangs. I also read that a similar percentage flunks out of school - regardless of whether they live in the inner city or not.

CFR (call for reference)

[ELF1024]

Elf,

Thanks for serving our country.

I understand that some want to kill us - citizens included because as one terrorist explained, "Since the US has a democracy, citizens are partly responsible for political leaders' decisions." What they fail to realize is that that's only about 1/2 - who voted for most politicians... & sometimes Mickey Mouse would be a better candidate of the options.

I worry that the government, news & others are already starting to blame our country's problems on the scape-goat of illegal immigrants.

I understand that we need to stand up for what's right... but sometimes that's not clear cut.

I don't agree that it is all scape-goat-ing. There is an amount of money that does go out to assist them, in particular health care dollars. Employed, unemployed, legal or illegal your gonna need healthcare at some point, even if it's just to have a baby delivered.

I'm sure at some level it may be scape-goat-ing but I'm not sure where addressing the issue, and just blaming them for problems ends.

The current unemployment rate isn't (all) the illegals fault. Maybe a percentage point or two at most, but NOT all of it. I think the E-Verify laws will fix that issue.

Yes, some illegal immigrants do pay taxes, by using a false SSN. Which is a kind of identity theft. All of a sudden the IRS has an extra w-2 for you that you didn't know you had. How many man hours does that cost to work out? Does it cost more than it brings in? I don't know the answer to those questions.

It's not a problem that has an easy fix; and I don't believe that we as American's can fix the problem entirely. It has to be addressed from the country of origin, and not just our side.

[TAO]

Hmmm... to be quite honest... I sympathize with those who can't immigrate here.

I have heard stories of what people will do to get green cards - and how little of a chance you have of getting one.

It seems as if the problem is less along the lines of people immigrating here, and more along the lines of them sending money out. Perhaps we need to find a way to solve this... not sure though.

So yah... I agree with the church quite well on this issue, but that's my opinion =).

I think immigration to here needs to be a bit more... quick...and fair... and that perhaps we should encourage the whole families to move here, rather than have them send out money to other economies, perhaps. But this could have other problems it causes, I guess.

Best Wishes,

TAO

Edited June 23, 2011 by TAO

[thesometimesaint]

ELF1024:

You'be surprised at the level of tax monies the undocumented pay. They pay the payroll taxes, like Social Security, Medicare, even federal witholding on Income Taxes, but as a undocumented they recieve none of those services.

http://www.visalaw.com/01apr3/15apr301.html

Also the undocumented are more likely to be victims of crime rather than the perpertrators.

http://utsa.edu/swjcj/archives/7.2/Bucher%20Article%20(3).pdf

[ELF1024]

ELF1024:

You'be surprised at the level of tax monies the undocumented pay. They pay the payroll taxes, like Social Security, Medicare, even federal withholding on Income Taxes, but as a undocumented they recieve none of those services.

http://www.visalaw.c...3/15apr301.html

Also the undocumented are more likely to be victims of crime rather than the perpetrators.

http://utsa.edu/swjc...%20Article%20(3).pdf

I doubt that. I am more likely to be surprised at how little they pay. Filling out a W-2 so that it withholds the least amount of tax is "so easy a caveman can do it" (to adopt an ad campaign).

And if they were truly being victimized; why come here at all?

[thesometimesaint]

ELF1024:

They pay far more than 72% of companies. But that's easy enough to do if you pay anything at all that metric is met.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/08/12/us-usa-taxes-corporations-idUSN1249465620080812

Beats starving where they're coming from.

[ELF1024]

Beats starving where they're coming from.

Which is main part of the problem and the issue that needs to be addressed. Call me hard hearted , but a failure to govern on the part of their home country does not require an emergency on ours.

Yes, people are staving all over the world, people are dying in Sudan because they are the wrong lineage, females babies are being drown in China. Does that mean we have to take them all in? We are in the middle of a financial meltdown not unlike the great depression. We cannot save everyone, nor should it be our responsibility to save everyone. The home country must fix their own issues; we are not helping by allowing the home country to continue to fail to govern.

[thesometimesaint]

ELF1024:

We are a nation of immigrants, built by immigrants, for the express pupose of adding the talents and abilities of immigrants to our betterment as a nation.

The New Colossus

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,

With conquering limbs astride from land to land;

Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand

A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame

Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name

Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand

Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command

The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she

With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Emma Lazarus, 1883

[ELF1024]

ELF1024:

If you had phrased it as follows, I would agree with you.

We are a nation of LEGAL immigrants, built by LEGAL immigrants, for the express purpose of adding the talents and abilities of LEGAL immigrants to our betterment as a nation.

And if you care to make an argument about us being Illegal, and the Indian's having the right to kick us off the Continent, that's fine, but it makes the point that the Indian's also had lousy immigration policy, and look what it got them.

Edited June 24, 2011 by ELF1024

[thesometimesaint]

ELF1024:

Most of my ancestors came over from England in 1620, and a few others met the boat. They just took what they wanted. As a very wise man once told me. "We stole it fair and square, and we ain't giving it back".

I'm all for legal immigration too. But I'm also for the treating of the illegal ones with fairness and with compassion. We need a rational policy for admiting immigrants, and helping them become citizens. It seems that right now Georgia is having some problems.

http://mdjonline.com/pages/full_story/push?article-Georgia+Voices-+Farmers+can-t+grow+labor%20&id=14227846

[ELF1024]

ELF1024:

Most of my ancestors came over from England in 1620, and a few others met the boat. They just took what they wanted. As a very wise man once told me. "We stole it fair and square, and we ain't giving it back".

I'm all for legal immigration too. But I'm also for the treating of the illegal ones with fairness and with compassion. We need a rational policy for admiting immigrants, and helping them become citizens. It seems that right now Georgia is having some problems.

http://mdjonline.com...%20&id=14227846

I'm in Arizona. I am all for a system that makes sense, however non-enforcement of current laws doesn't make sense.

[thesometimesaint]

ELF1024:

Arizona keeps shooting itself in the foot.

The Feds have sole jurisdiction on immigration, and Congress can't seem to agree on how to fix the problem. It doesn't help when they won't agree with their own recommendations.

Edited June 24, 2011 by thesometimesaint

[ELF1024]

ELF1024:

Arizona keeps shooting itself in the foot.

The Feds have sole jurisdiction on immigration, and Congress can't seem to agree on how to fix the problem. It doesn't help when they won't agree with their own recommendations.

The current situation in the courts make it look like our set of laws is going to be shown to be constitutional. This based on the most recent ruling on an immigration matter they made. At least until Congress changes the laws so that our SB1070 is in conflict.

(yes, I have two loves (other than my wife) in life, politics and religion)

Edited June 24, 2011 by ELF1024

[LeSellers]

The Feds have sole jurisdiction on immigration, and Congress can't seem to agree on how to fix the problem. It doesn't help when they won't agree with their own recommendations.

But the Constitution specifically gives the states the right to act in this kind of case.

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, ... engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

It's arguable that the state of Arizona is being invaded (I believe it is), but there is no argument to be made that there is no "imminent Danger" and that this danger "will not admit of delay", which has certainly been the case. You words underscore that point.

Lehi

Edited June 24, 2011 by LeSellers

[seriously honestly]

SeriouslyHonestly,

Speaking of hypocricy... How would you feel, if you were an illegal immigrant with a dependent family?

Well, personally, if I were to immigrate to a different country, I wouldn't do so illegally...I'm not sure what the point of that question was.

Most of our ancestors were immigrants... if they got deported, imagine how different your life would be!

Are you insinuating that everyones ancestors came here illegally? Or that we should thus not be concerend with illegal immigation and the issues it causes today because our ancestors immigrated to this country?

[thesometimesaint]

ELF1024:

I don't see the courts giving jurisdiction on immigration to 50 separate states. Talk about nightmares for Equal Protection under the law of the 14th Amendment, and the Federal Supremacy Clause of the Constitution.

But given the courts truly bizarre rulings(at least in our 21st Century minds))See Dred Scott, and Plessy v Ferguson, amongst other more recent decisions.)) Who knows?

[ELF1024]

ELF1024:

I don't see the courts giving jurisdiction on immigration to 50 separate states. Talk about nightmares for Equal Protection under the law of the 14th Amendment, and the Federal Supremacy Clause of the Constitution.

But given the courts truly bizarre rulings(at least in our 21st Century minds))See Dred Scott, and Plessy v Ferguson, amongst other more recent decisions.)) Who knows?

The Feds aren't giving the States a choice. The Fed are refusing to do their job. SB1070 was specifically crafted to work in coordination with the current federal laws. The only thing it provides is the State's right to enforce the current Federal laws.

If the Feds would do their job, it wouldn't be an issue.

This is a "states right" issue, IMHO.

I'm specifically reffering to the Hazleton ruling.

Edited June 24, 2011 by ELF1024

[frankenstein]

IF the Fed really cared about SB1070, the Napalitona would have issued a directive to the Federal Immigratin to not cooperate with Arizona law enforcement, when and if AZ law enforcement called ICE/Immigration to check someones status. But nothing of the sort happened. Should law enforcement check status of a person who does not speak english and does not have a valid ID, yes, it is reasonable in that circumstance to inquire about a persons legal presence in the United States. Should law enforcement pull a back seat passanger out of a vehicle, when the driver is pulled over for speeding? No, if the driver is speeding the driver is trouble, pulling over a vehicle isn't carte blanche to question everyone inside, without something more than the driver was speeding.

[LT123]

ELF1024:

We are a nation of immigrants, built by immigrants, for the express pupose of adding the talents and abilities of immigrants to our betterment as a nation.

And all this time I thought the US of A's roots went back to the British colonies of the late 16th century. Apparently it all started at Ellis island in 1892.

[thesometimesaint]

ELF1024:

I don't like the situation anymore than you do. However regardless of the Feds unwillingness to act. The individual states have no legal authority to make immigration policy/law.

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding." U.S. Const. art. VI, Paragraph 2".

[ELF1024]

ELF1024:

I don't like the situation anymore than you do. However regardless of the Feds unwillingness to act. The individual states have no legal authority to make immigration policy/law.

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding." U.S. Const. art. VI, Paragraph 2".

You are correct, and SB1070 does not make policy or law. It allows the enforcement locally instead of just by the feds.

[LeSellers]

I don't like the situation anymore than you do. However regardless of the Feds unwillingness to act. The individual states have no legal authority to make immigration policy/law.

Arizona did not make "immigration policy/law". That's a red herring.

All Arizona did was enforce its constitutionally guaranteed right to protect herself when the federal governent refused/s to act. The Constitution specifically gives the states the right to act in this kind of case.

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, ... engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

It's arguable that the state of Arizona is being invaded (I believe it is), but there is no argument to be made that there is no "imminent Danger" and that this danger "will not admit of delay", which has certainly been the case.

Arizona did not set a different standard for imigration, nor did it refuse to admit legally authorized immigrants. All she did was enforce the already established, passed and signed-into-law requirements the feds had in place. Since the feds won't do it, Arizona has a perfect right to do so, under the Constitution.

Lehi

Edited June 24, 2011 by LeSellers

[thesometimesaint]

Lehi:

Sophistry.

SB1070 is a state law. By definition State law can not supercede Federal law without Federal permission. There is NO Federal law giving individual states authority over immigration. Also the Federal Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution directly prohibits individual states from enacting/enforcing any law in conflict with Federal law.

[LeSellers]

Sophistry.

What is "sophistry"? It would really be helpful if you would use the "Reply" feature like nearly everyone else.

Half the time, I don't know what you're talking about.

SB1070 is a state law. By definition State law can not supercede Federal law without Federal permission. There is NO Federal law giving individual states authority over immigration. Also the Federal Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution directly prohibits individual states from enacting/enforcing any law in conflict with Federal law.

There is nothing in SB1070 that is in conflict with any federal law. Nothing in SB1070 affects immigration at all. Nothing in SB1070 tries to supercede federal law.

You're implying things here that you should back up. So CFR for all of the above points.

And, as I said, Arizona is perfectly within her constitutional rights to protect herself from invasion and imminent danger.

Lehi

Edited June 24, 2011 by LeSellers