Homeland Security's "Sweeping Plan to Deport Undocumented Immigrants" Came Out Today...Impact on Church Mbrs?

[notHagoth7]

30 minutes ago, provoman said:

https://www.lds.org/handbook/handbook-2-administering-the-church/selected-church-policies?lang=eng#21.1.16

 

Emigration of Members

Generally...

'nuf said.

 

And it says *nothing* of nonmembers.

Edited February 23, 2017 by notHagoth7

[notHagoth7]

28 minutes ago, Ahab said:

I'll tell you what I won't do....

Please tell me what you *will* do.

 

Better yet, please *simply do* whatever you prayerfully deem will bring the world in line with the will of a benevolent Father of man*kind*.

As in...Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done...on earth...as it is in heaven....

Edited February 23, 2017 by notHagoth7

[Ahab]

2 minutes ago, notHagoth7 said:

Please tell me what you *will* do.

Better yet, please simply do it.

Read it this way:  I will "not tell"...

And I think it is a good thing that I will do.

[Rain]

On Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 11:00 PM, cipriano said:

Every single human being is a refugee.

Just to be clear. The definition of refugee and immigrant is not the same. A refugee can be an immigrant, but there are many immigrants who are not refugees. And legally, the definition is even more distinct from what I've learned from someone who deals with refugees in the state of AZ. 

These are 2 separate issues.

On Wednesday, February 22, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Tacenda said:

I'm grateful the church is on board with keeping families together. My son-in-law is illegal, brought over by his father, but he was just out of high school. 

I worry every day he'll be deported. We've hired an immigration lawyer and are getting all the paperwork done. But like in the past when we hired a lawyer, we backed out and got cold feet that he may not return. My daughter and he have two sons, they've been happily married for over ten years, and he's not a criminal or hasn't done anything wrong criminally. Maybe we shouldn't have held back many years ago, worried he'd be detained for 10 years. Now I feel sick to my stomach it may happen even more. I guess we had hopes that the country would do as Reagan did many years ago and give amnesty to them. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128303672 I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here, even though sometime back they may have entered illegally," Ronald Reagan said in 1984.

 

I hope things work well for them. 

3 hours ago, Atheist Mormon said:

Well Smac, while I am 100 empathizing with you here and have similar stories to tell about our Latino friends, Those in the Church who voted for Trump I don't think they will have the same type of empathy & concern. I love the fact that; "you make your bed & sleep on it too". proselytizing will go down the tubes.

This has been a horrible ordeal for undocumented people who lived with us forever, Mexico or anywhere is not they know, they lived here most of their lives.  

I find it disconcerting  that Church doesn't come forward and condemn this kind of ICE action, more like they resemble Brown Shirt round up...... 

 

Many who voted for Trump will have empathy and concern. Most I know personally felt their hands were tied. I do not agree with their vote, but many are very empathetic.

[notHagoth7]

7 minutes ago, Rain said:

Just to be clear. The definition of refugee and immigrant is not the same....

Depends on your meaning.

According to the NT faith (and elsewhere), we are all pilgrims...or should be.

Edited February 23, 2017 by notHagoth7

[Danzo]

I think what we have here is a classic example of conflicting rules and laws.

we have 

"Honor, obey and sustaining the law"

and we have 

"Love thy neighbor (even those from south of the border) as thyself"

and 

"when I was a stranger"

This kind of conflict between two different commandments is part of the gospel of plan (see story of Adam and Eve especially as told in the temple).

Most of the time we can obey both "honor and sustain the law" and "love thy neighbor" at the same time.

But sometimes we can't.  Then we have to chose.

I think the new testament is clear about the higher laws of the gospel.

Also "If you have not charity, you are nothing" comes to mind.

Another aspect is that we all have a duty to seek to change the law of the land when it conflicts with the higher laws. I hope that everyone here who thinks that current  immigration law conflicts with the Lords law has communicated with their legislators about changing it.

 

 

[notHagoth7]

7 minutes ago, Danzo said:

I think what we have here is a classic example of conflicting rules and laws.

we have 

"Honor, obey and sustaining the law"

and we have 

"Love thy neighbor (even those from south of the border) as thyself"

and 

"when I was a stranger"

This kind of conflict between two different commandments is part of the gospel of plan (see story of Adam and Eve especially as told in the temple).

Most of the time we can obey both "honor and sustain the law" and "love thy neighbor" at the same time.

But sometimes we can't.  Then we have to chose.

I think the new testament is clear about the higher laws of the gospel.

Also "If you have not charity, you are nothing" comes to mind.

Another aspect is that we all have a duty to seek to change the law of the land when it conflicts with the higher laws. I hope that everyone here who thinks that current  immigration law conflicts with the Lords law has communicated with their legislators about changing it.

Why does the board software limit us to adding only one heart to a comment like that...?

I appeal to the board administrators to tweak the PHP to allow for thousands of hearts with a single click. An Easy button. Please.

In Danish, the common way to say a genuine thank you is not just "tak", but "mange tak" (many thanks) or "tusinde tak". (a thousand thanks).

Edited February 23, 2017 by notHagoth7

[Danzo]

1 hour ago, Storm Rider said:

I appreciate the sob story about how difficult US laws are.  I can even appreciate your moral indignation about how the US enforces their laws; however, that has nothing to do with individuals choosing to ignore a nation's laws and enter illegally.  It is the equivalent of thinking that - "It is too hard to save money to buy a house; therefore, I deserve that house and I will bust in the front door and take over it because for you to have a house and me not is immoral!"  I find such a position untenable and the epitome of being immoral.

 

Why do you equate entering a country without a visa or staying after a visa has expired with stealing a house.

Is the only reason you don't steal houses because there is a law against it?

Would you start stealing houses if the law were changed to allow it?

Do you think that being brought to america as a child is the same as stealing a house?

[Rain]

So back to the subject.

Many go back to the articles of faith about this. I do too, but I also go back to Daniel in the Lion's den. Obviously the law to not pray was a bad law. Daniel chose to break it and prayed anyway because that was a higher law. The king regretted the law when he understood what it meant, but felt bound by it. Daniel suffered the consequences by being thrown in with the lions. God showed mercy, justice  and love and stepped in so the full effects were not felt by Daniel.

Many illegal immigrants (and I'm not positive that is the right legal term) chose to break the law by coming here illegally because taking better care of family is a higher law for them. They should be willing to face consequences for that. However, we, as Christ's hands, can, and in my my believe should, step in so the full effects of consequences are not felt because of the higher law. 

To me that means I advocate for making making it easier for illegal immigrants to become legal. It means I don't rush to kick them out before that process can be done. It means that I don't have revelation for them so I let them decide whether they should be here or not. 

[thesometimesaint]

23 hours ago, Black Moclips said:

The emotion is strong with this one......

If you personally want to follow your heart and deem yourself above the laws of our country when it suits your purpose, go right ahead and house as many illegal immigrants as you can take in your house. If you are okay ignoring the damage and crime caused illegal immigration because it doesn't fit with your politics, keep on sleeping soundly.  But when we are talking about the church and the position it should take - mind you, an actual legal entity (a corporation) that exists in the United States of America and operates using the benefits of the US government's rules, laws, tax code, etc......I think it would behoove them follow its own council by obeying the laws of the land encouraging its members to do so. Do you think the church would stand for one nano second if people started baptizing themselves and giving themselves the priesthood without following the proper rules and procedures in its wards? In the same vein, why should our government not be able to control who comes here and who enjoys the benefits of being American? "Because I feel bad for them, that's why!" yells Nehor.  

And yes, they IGNORED the proper process. If they aren't educated enough to figure that out, do we want them here in our country? Don't we already have enough poor and uneducated here already that we can help? Do we really need to import more? I don't get how that makes us a stronger country. 

It is true we are reaping the consequences of government inaction on immigration from both sides, but that doesn't mean we should just forget about solving the problem. I think most people in the US realize this and support action. You can argue whether this is the most effective first step, but at least its a step in the right direction. I think in the long run, we would probably help more people if we had an effective, secure, and enforced immigration policy. It would ensure those that come here are setup to succeed and contribute.

Like this man? NASA scientist detained at border.

SEE http://www.theverge.com/2017/2/12/14583124/nasa-sidd-bikkannavar-detained-cbp-phone-search-trump-travel-ban

[Ahab]

6 minutes ago, Danzo said:

I think what we have here is a classic example of conflicting rules and laws.

we have 

"Honor, obey and sustaining the law"

and we have 

"Love thy neighbor (even those from south of the border) as thyself"

and 

"when I was a stranger"

This kind of conflict between two different commandments is part of the gospel of plan (see story of Adam and Eve especially as told in the temple).

Most of the time we can obey both "honor and sustain the law" and "love thy neighbor" at the same time.

But sometimes we can't.  Then we have to chose.

I think the new testament is clear about the higher laws of the gospel.

Also "If you have not charity, you are nothing" comes to mind.

Another aspect is that we all have a duty to seek to change the law of the land when it conflicts with the higher laws. I hope that everyone here who thinks that current  immigration law conflicts with the Lords law has communicated with their legislators about changing it.

I'm not sure how I would suggest changing the current immigration laws of the USA.  Illegal aliens should be deported simply because they are illegal.  They should be legal instead.

I suppose I could suggest that we make it super super easy for anyone to become a citizen of the USA, but even if it was super duper easy to be legal the people who wanted to become citizens should have to follow the legal process, however long that took, and whatever it takes.

As Sheriff Bufford T. Justice said about Smokey and the Bandit, I think what we have here is a disrespect for the law.

To be legal all it takes is to obey the law.

[thesometimesaint]

4 minutes ago, Rain said:

So back to the subject.

Many go back to the articles of faith about this. I do too, but I also go back to Daniel in the Lion's den. Obviously the law to not pray was a bad law. Daniel chose to break it and prayed anyway because that was a higher law. The king regretted the law when he understood what it meant, but felt bound by it. Daniel suffered the consequences by being thrown in with the lions. God showed mercy, justice  and love and stepped in so the full effects were not felt by Daniel.

Many illegal immigrants (and I'm not positive that is the right legal term) chose to break the law by coming here illegally because taking better care of family is a higher law for them. They should be willing to face consequences for that. However, we, as Christ's hands, can, and in my my believe should, step in so the full effects of consequences are not felt because of the higher law. 

To me that means I advocate for making making it easier for illegal immigrants to become legal. It means I don't rush to kick them out before that process can be done. It means that I don't have revelation for them so I let them decide whether they should be here or not. 

I seem to remember when LDS members fled their homes to live in Mexico. We were strangers and they still took us in.

Colonial Juarez SEE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_colonies_in_Mexico

[notHagoth7]

As to man-made borders and such things...

"Forgive us our trespasses.

As we forgive those who trespass against us..."

Edited February 23, 2017 by notHagoth7

[notHagoth7]

4 minutes ago, Ahab said:

As Sheriff Bufford T. Justice said about Smokey and the Bandit, I think what we have here is a disrespect for the law.

But disrespect for which/whose law?

To be legal all it takes is to obey the law.

Which/whose law?

(Your Javert logo is showing...) ;0)

[Rain]

1 hour ago, notHagoth7 said:

Depends on your meaning.

According to the NT faith (and elsewhere), we are all pilgrims...or should be.

Since the OP is talking about US law I am talking about the legal meaning. 

And pilgrim does not have the same definition of refugee either. A refugee is someone who has been forced to leave their country because of war etc. A pilgrim is someone who is someone who goes somewhere for religious reasons. We came to earth for bodies and  be tested. That makes us all pilgrims. We did not come because the war in heaven forced us out, so we are not refugees.

I make the distinction with refugees and immigrants because many who hear "refugee" automatically assume that how we should deal with them legally is the same we we should deal with illegal immigrants. While all should have compassion and mercy, there are differences that must be dealt with. 

 

Edited February 23, 2017 by Rain

[Rain]

26 minutes ago, Danzo said:

I think what we have here is a classic example of conflicting rules and laws.

we have 

"Honor, obey and sustaining the law"

and we have 

"Love thy neighbor (even those from south of the border) as thyself"

and 

"when I was a stranger"

This kind of conflict between two different commandments is part of the gospel of plan (see story of Adam and Eve especially as told in the temple).

Most of the time we can obey both "honor and sustain the law" and "love thy neighbor" at the same time.

But sometimes we can't.  Then we have to chose.

I think the new testament is clear about the higher laws of the gospel.

Also "If you have not charity, you are nothing" comes to mind.

Another aspect is that we all have a duty to seek to change the law of the land when it conflicts with the higher laws. I hope that everyone here who thinks that current  immigration law conflicts with the Lords law has communicated with their legislators about changing it.

 

 

 

9 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said:

I seem to remember when LDS members fled their homes to live in Mexico. We were strangers and they still took us in.

Colonial Juarez SEE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_colonies_in_Mexico

Rep points for both of you because I am out of them.

[Ahab]

1 minute ago, notHagoth7 said:

But disrespect for which/whose law?

Which/whose law?

(Your Javert logo is showing...) ;0)

God's law is that we be subject to laws of the land we live in.

Try to square all of that in your mind before you carry this any further.

Fortunately as average citizens we are not legally required to report illegal aliens if we know any, but if you accept a job as a fed for ICE or something like that it will then be your job to follow the laws the current President has enacted as well as all of the other laws that the enforcement officials are supposed to uphold in regards to illegal aliens, so I would guess you would not want that kind of job.  And I don't blame you because I wouldn't either.  

But as citizens of our country we should believe that our laws should be obeyed, rather than thinking it is okay for people to do illegal things.  Otherwise you are siding with law breakers and those who do illegal things, and that would not be good.

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

I appreciate the sob story about how difficult US laws are.  I can even appreciate your moral indignation about how the US enforces their laws; however, that has nothing to do with individuals choosing to ignore a nation's laws and enter illegally.  It is the equivalent of thinking that - "It is too hard to save money to buy a house; therefore, I deserve that house and I will bust in the front door and take over it because for you to have a house and me not is immoral!"  I find such a position untenable and the epitome of being immoral.

Not really.  Immigrants don't kick citizens out of the country.  Even illegals generally contribute to the country more than they take out of it.

Edited February 23, 2017 by Calm

[thesometimesaint]

3 minutes ago, Ahab said:

God's law is that we be subject to laws of the land we live in.

Try to square all of that in your mind before you carry this any further.

Fortunately as average citizens we are not legally required to report illegal aliens if we know any, but if you accept a job as a fed for ICE or something like that it will then be your job to follow the laws the current President has enacted as well as all of the other laws that the enforcement officials are supposed to uphold in regards to illegal aliens, so I would guess you would not want that kind of job.  And I don't blame you because I wouldn't either.  

But as citizens of our country we should believe that our laws should be obeyed, rather than thinking it is okay for people to do illegal things.  Otherwise you are siding with law breakers and those who do illegal things, and that would not be good.

Mormons need to be exterminated, or driven from the state. HMMM

LDS flee to Mexico. Double HMMM

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Ahab said:

You do realize how much our Lord values the entrance requiremen's to become a citizen of his own kingdom, don't you?  There is only one way to enter it and we honor his requirements by coming in through the door rather than try to get in some other way. No baptism, no entrance. And visitors are only visiting without any legal right or claim upon all the blessings that are available to citizens of the kingdom of God.

I know some of man's laws on Earth need to be changed, and that some laws of man do not uphold righteousness, but the principle of honoring law and those in positions of authority in earthy governments is something our Lord wants his Church to observe. Otherwise we too could act as illegal aliens do when they try to ignore man's laws as if man's laws do not matter.

When in Rome, we are subject to Roman law.

And he invites in all who knock.  Your analogy is more aligned to allowing immigrants in by just asking (knocking) and then requiring obedience to his Will and personal alignment to be one with him through baptism and taking on his name (citizenship).

Edited February 23, 2017 by Calm

[Ahab]

1 minute ago, thesometimesaint said:

Mormons need to be exterminated, or driven from the state. HMMM

LDS flee to Mexico. Double HMMM

Yeah its been bad for us before, way back in Roman days too, and fortunately we are now free to legally live in any state or country on this Earth.

[Black Moclips]

20 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said:

Like this man? NASA scientist detained at border.

SEE http://www.theverge.com/2017/2/12/14583124/nasa-sidd-bikkannavar-detained-cbp-phone-search-trump-travel-ban

To what point of my post are you referring? This article is about someone who had a very minor travel inconvenience in the transition of this executive order. He still got here, and it sounds more like a local error by the customs agency that anything else. Looks like a very smart guy, who actually followed all the legal paperwork to be here in the US. I have no problem with him being here.  Not sure how this relates to my post. 

[notHagoth7]

28 minutes ago, Rain said:

Since the OP is talking about US I am talking about the legal meaning. 

And pilgrim does not have the same definition of refugee either. A refugee is someone who has been forced to leave their country because of war etc. [which includes persecution - religious *and/or* economic persecution.] A pilgrim is someone who is someone who goes somewhere for religious reasons....

Hence the two are most often one and the same.

Rev 13. Economic warfare...where some aren't allowed to buy or sell. Such war is at hand...and is clearly already under way....and has been for years. The day will soon come when those unwilling to lift their sword against their neighbor must needs flee to Zion.

Question being: where...in that day...will Zion(s) be?

Edited February 23, 2017 by notHagoth7

[Calm]

33 minutes ago, Rain said:

So back to the subject.

Many go back to the articles of faith about this. I do too, but I also go back to Daniel in the Lion's den. Obviously the law to not pray was a bad law. Daniel chose to break it and prayed anyway because that was a higher law. The king regretted the law when he understood what it meant, but felt bound by it. Daniel suffered the consequences by being thrown in with the lions. God showed mercy, justice  and love and stepped in so the full effects were not felt by Daniel.

. 

And the full effect was dropped down hard on the King's advisers who had tried to use the law for personal benefit.

[provoman]

26 minutes ago, notHagoth7 said:

As to man-made borders and such things...

"Forgive us our trespasses.

As we forgive those who trespass against us..."

In the context of unregulated borders the has published

"Unchecked and unregulated, such a flow may destabilize society and ultimately become unsustainable."