smac97 Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, rongo said: What's the point of the statement, then? Why even make it? To provide the Church's assessment and make recommendations about guiding principles. This happens all the time. As an attorney, I regularly work with judges who are tasked with applying generalized principles of law to specific circumstances and disputes. They extrapolate from the general to the specific, but they don't do so by just making things up as they go along. They are guided by the principles found in the Constitution, the state Constitution, state and federal statutes, procedural and evidentiary rules, learned treatises, and so on. One particular resource is a "friend of the court" brief, as described here: Quote An amicus curiae (literally, "friend of the court"; plural, amici curiae) is someone who is not a party to a case and is not solicited by a party, but who assists a court by offering information that bears on the case. The decision on whether to admit the information lies at the discretion of the court. The phrase amicus curiae is legal Latin. The LDS Church wanted its views known, both by legislators and by the general public, essentially an equivalent to a "friend of the court" brief. So it issued its statement, with the apparent intention that the statement could provide "information that bears on the case," but also with the understanding that "whether to admit the information lies" with the discretion of legislators and lawmakers. This seems like an eminently good thing. Immigration policy is a very polarizing issue. The Church is acknowledging that there are merits to both sides of the debate, but is reminding all of us of some overarching and important principles: Quote "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is established in 188 nations around the globe. Issues of immigration and legal status are of concern for many of our members. Most of our early Church members emigrated from foreign lands to live, work and worship, blessed by the freedoms and opportunities offered in this great nation. "Immigration is a complex and sometimes divisive issue. As we have stated before, we believe that our first priority is to love and care for one another as Jesus Christ taught. Each nation must determine and administer its policies related to immigration. The church does not advocate any specific legislative or executive solution. Our hope is that, in whatever solution emerges, there is provision for strengthening families and keeping them together. We also acknowledge that every nation has the right to enforce its laws and secure its borders and that all persons subject to a nation's laws are accountable for their acts in relation to them. "We welcome the sincere efforts of lawmakers and leaders to seek for solutions that honor these principles and extend compassion to those seeking a better life. Specifically, we call upon our national leaders to create policies that provide hope and opportunities for those, sometimes referred to as ‘Dreamers,’ who grew up here from a young age and for whom this country is their home. They have built lives, pursued educational opportunities and been employed for years based on the policies that were in place. These individuals have demonstrated a capacity to serve and contribute positively in our society, and we believe they should be granted the opportunity to continue to do so." Personally, I was a bit surprised that the Church took the affirmative step of publicly encouraging accommodations for DACA kids. That seems like a faily concrete policy position. The particulars, however, are being left by the Church to lawmakers. Quote The "guiding principles" of a) and b) are of no help to legislators in making the ultimate decisions (which will probably be a form of kick the can that resolves or pleases no one). I disagree. I think guiding principles can be very helpful. Quote Sure. That was ten years ago, and other than the ERA, it's pretty much the only foray into that by the modern Church. Can you name another? That was ten years ago. The Church has all appearances to me of licking its wounds after its Prop 8 experience. The Church has - by even your accounting - been very limited in its forays into the political sphere. It's default position is one of political neutrality, but exceptions are made for significant social and moral issues. I don't get your complaint here. Are you saying the Church should be more involved in partisan politics? Quote Yes, but the Church's PR statements on this are completely unhelpful in helping members hungry for guidance on how to resolve this, since by definition the people in question (or at least, their parents, who are grandfathered in under the principle of "don't break up the families") are not law abiding. I disagree. I think the statement is quite helpful. There is no simple answer to the immigration issue in the U.S. It is complex. It is difficult. It involves good actors and bad. It involves enforcement of laws after many years of non-enforcement or lax enforcement, which was understandably construed as a de facto "open door" policy. Unwinding this mess will take a lot of time. And effort. And compromise. And concessions. And patience. And good will. And, in some ways, some hard decisions. Both sides have extremist views ("kick 'em all out!" on the one side, and "tear down the borders and let 'em all in" on the other). In these difficult times, the LDS Church has proffered its insights as to some important guiding principles (including respect for the rule of law, and also compassion and understanding and some accommodation (such as for children who were brought here illegally). Again, I don't understand your grievance. Quote It's admittedly a difficult conundrum, but there are many upset members for whom this is disturbing. I understand and respect that. I'm right there with you, in fact. Quote I've had this question from otherwise solidly people in stakes, and the Church's guidance and stance isn't helpful. I think it's quite helpful. For example, a member could read it and soften his previous opposition to DACA kids, while also wanting a secured border and enforcement of existing immigration laws. Thanks, -Smac Edited January 27, 2018 by smac97 3
Bobbieaware Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 16 hours ago, The Nehor said: I really hope one day I will stop having the urge to punch anyone who uses that stupid "fake news" term. If I do not I may end up skewing criminal figures towards citizens committing more crimes. Okay, we have an opinion piece from a guy at the Heritage Foundation there. And all he argues is that the numbers are probably skewed for various reasons and there is no way to know for sure but he suspects immigrant crime is much higher. Good to know. Yep, I'm convinced. A few posts earlier I posted another article that addresses where you say you stand in doubt. I hope you’ll feed it. In order to help calm your urge to sock me, I’ll use the term ‘dishonest news’ from now on.
Darren10 Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 (edited) 4 hours ago, Gray said: He said to pay your taxes, but conservatives don't seem to agree with that either. If it's the law conservatives very much pay their taxes. Conservatives very much disagree with taxes and therefore support reducing them. That's when you and The Nehor punch them in their lying faces. Afterall, reducing taxes does not help the poor. http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-gop-tax-plan-companies-rush-to-announce-special-bonuses-pay-hikes-2017-12 Edited January 27, 2018 by Darren10
Darren10 Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 7 minutes ago, Bobbieaware said: A few posts earlier I posted another article that addresses where you say you stand in doubt. I hope you’ll feed it. In order to help calm your urge to sock me, I’ll use the term ‘dishonest news’ from now on. I think The Nehor needs a picture of Trump to glue to his punching bag just as much as a cast needs a good scratchboard.
Darren10 Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 3 hours ago, Kevin Christensen said: Give money rather than my soul. My Dad went through WWII in the 813th TD battalion from North Africa to Austria. One day after the Nordwind offensive had fizzeled, and a Captain in headquarters company asked him to put in a recommendation for the Captain for the Silver Star, Dad went back and said, "I can't think of anything you have done to deserve it." And he was transferred to Recon company for the rest of the war. Dad gave service, paid taxes, but did not offer up his soul. FWIW Kevin Christensen Canonsburg, PA If that's all you think Jesus said regarding God and Ceasar than I must have different Bible than you. It must be because I'm Mormon.
Darren10 Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 (edited) 3 hours ago, The Nehor said: Depends on which synapses are firing on the day he speaks. That's never predictable when it comes to Trump. My take was always a), Trump will Never do as much as he promised on the campaign trail and b) I hope Trump never does everything he promised on the campaign trail. Doing everything would require an massive police state to emerge and historically speaking, once am massive police force does its original purpose, in this case, round up illegals, it is then unleashed on its citizenry, not disbanded. "Historically not cool." - Tony Stark in The Avengers Edited January 27, 2018 by Darren10
smac97 Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 18 hours ago, Darren10 said: I’m fine with DACA but strongly disagree with Obama creating it via executive order. Same here. 18 hours ago, Darren10 said: I have long advocated a pathway to citizenship but to do this the borders must be secure first and certain standards should be met. That is my feeling as well. 18 hours ago, Darren10 said: Realisitically the latter will never happen but I still support it. Being pro DACA is not automatically anti conservative. If tour facebook friends disagree, point them to me. Yep. Thanks, -Smac 2
Anijen Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 I am for immigration and side with the Church. I would like to see those who come into the US either legally or illegally to try to assimilate with traditional US customs. When I say that, for example, I'd like to see people try to learn English it would help them (and us in communicating), get drivers licences, get jobs, and in general not be a burden on the country they entered but an assett. However, these values should never be forced upon them. When investigators come to church we would like to see them converted, become actively involved in the ward family, do missionary work, go to the temple, etc.. We never force them to do so.
Scott Lloyd Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 20 minutes ago, Bobbieaware said: A few posts earlier I posted another article that addresses where you say you stand in doubt. I hope you’ll feed it. In order to help calm your urge to sock me, I’ll use the term ‘dishonest news’ from now on. Manufactured news is another way to express it. Or contrived news. False or slanted reporting are more nuanced ways to say it. Editorializing or advocacy in the guise of straight news reporting would fall under the above. Regardless of what you call it, it has grown immensely more egregious during the Trump presidency. CNN and other prominent outlets stand guilty as charged.
Bobbieaware Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 7 minutes ago, Darren10 said: I think The Nehor needs a picture of Trump to glue to his punching bag just as much as a cast needs a good scratchboard. A great idea! It should be a punching bag with an audio feature that has Trump blurting out ‘fake news’ evert time the bag is hit. I can hear it now — “fake-news! fake-news! fake-news! fake-news! fake-news! fake-news! fake-news!” With every new punch Nehor’s rage would grow until he finally ends up blowing a gasket. Now that would be cool!
Bobbieaware Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 5 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Manufactured news is another way to express it. Or contrived news. False or slanted reporting are more nuanced ways to say it. Editorializing or advocacy in the guise of straight news reporting would fall under the above. Regardless of what you call it, it has grown immensely more egregious during the Trump presidency. CNN and other prominent outlets stand guilty as charged. Ironically, the people who lived under Soviet Russian Communism associated false news with the Russian word pravda.
Darren10 Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 31 minutes ago, Bobbieaware said: A great idea! It should be a punching bag with an audio feature that has Trump blurting out ‘fake news’ evert time the bag is hit. I can hear it now — “fake-news! fake-news! fake-news! fake-news! fake-news! fake-news! fake-news!” With every new punch Nehor’s rage would grow until he finally ends up blowing a gasket. Now that would be cool! "Fake news" from The Donald and also audio of Republicans saying "we need to be fiscally responsible". http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/69916-senate-tax-bill-will-hurt-mormon-tithe-payers/?page=7&tab=comments#comment-1209782484 Afterall, tax cuts do not follow Jesus' admoninition to give to the poor. https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2017/12/20/handful-companies-promise-bonuses-pay-raises/971199001/
Scott Lloyd Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 16 minutes ago, Darren10 said: "Fake news" from The Donald and also audio of Republicans saying "we need to be fiscally responsible". http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/69916-senate-tax-bill-will-hurt-mormon-tithe-payers/?page=7&tab=comments#comment-1209782484 Afterall, tax cuts do not follow Jesus' admoninition to give to the poor. https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2017/12/20/handful-companies-promise-bonuses-pay-raises/971199001/ Forced redistribution of wealth does not amount to obeying a commandment of Jesus. I already give to the poor. Maybe I can give more with a larger paycheck. 1
Danzo Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 8 hours ago, Rivers said: Those enforcement officers are there to protect our rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Only the rights of those born in the right country. Nobody else should have any of those rights.
Danzo Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 5 hours ago, Darren10 said: Conservatives believe in upholding the law and veryfying legal status to work is part of the law. If you are libertarian and do not believe so feel free to change that law. Chaos is California which is now fundamentally a sanctuary state defying federal law which constitutionally it has. Where I come from, true conservatives believe in smaller government, less government presence. The immigration hawks represent a bastardisation of real conservative principals. They want a large overreaching government to keep away the scary brown people. They want government involvement in employee employer relationships. They want to punish marriage. They want to keep families separated. They don't believe in the free market, they would rather use government qoutas. A want nothing to do with these fake conservatives, they should join the progressive, who agree with them that government is the best solution to their problems.
Danzo Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 5 hours ago, Darren10 said: What did Jesus say about God and Ceasar? He said we should pay taxes, what does that have to do with anything?
Darren10 Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 36 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Forced redistribution of wealth does not amount to obeying a commandment of Jesus. I already give to the poor. Maybe I can give more with a larger paycheck. Oh, I know, but you need to talk to The Nehor. http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/69916-senate-tax-bill-will-hurt-mormon-tithe-payers/?page=5&tab=comments#comment-1209776904
Atheist Mormon Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 On 1/26/2018 at 2:23 PM, bluebell said: I get a lot of anti-DACA stuff on Facebook from members. Do those members know all these lands we live on was taken from Native Americans either by exterminating or herding them to reservations?
Darren10 Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Danzo said: He said we should pay taxes, what does that have to do with anything? No He did not try again. Am I the only one who reads the Bible here? It’s all related to Jevin’s very poor post here: http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/70124-lds-church-calls-on-congress-to-make-room-for-dreamers/?tab=comments#comment-1209790348 Edited January 27, 2018 by Darren10
Danzo Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 5 hours ago, smac97 said: From the Deseret News Editorial Board: I think this is an important point. While I recognize that reasonable minds can and do disagree about immigration policy, if there is any group of illegal immigrants who should be given some realy consideration for lenience and compassion as to their status, it is these children. Yes. Although I have some real reservations about characterizing citizenship as just a trivial detail, as this sentence seems to do. Citizenship matters. The law matters. A lot. I am really torn about this. I see the compassion in it, and I love that. But I also see the ramifications of it, including the incentives it creates for breaking the law. I can imagine some real and justified resentments from people who have followed the law, who have spent years seeking a lawful path to citizenship for themselves and their children, only to find out that had they broken the law, their children would have been given "a quick path" to it. I appreciate the Church's stance. It is measured. It recognizes that both sides have reasoned, good faith bases for their positions. But at the end of the day, these kids were brought here. They generally had no say in the matter. And we have spent years dithering about enforcement of our laws, which has ended up as a de facto "open door" policy. I'll also note that I don't like the term "Dreamers." It's manipulative. What are your thoughts about this reasoning? Huh. No explanation here. Just a "Nope, we don't like 'new restrictions on family-based immigration' or 'a lengthened border wall.'" Sorry, D News Board, you'll have to do better than that. I'm okay with this. Compassion as "a driving force." It cannot, however, be the only "driving force." Thanks, -Smac I am curious smac, as one who has studied law, what do you think about statutes of limitations. Do you think immigration violations are heinous enough to not have a statute of limitations? What makes unlawful presence worse than, say, attempted murder. One gets a statute of limitations where the other doesn't.
Gray Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 1 hour ago, Darren10 said: If it's the law conservatives very much pay their taxes. Conservatives very much disagree with taxes and therefore support reducing them. That's when you and The Nehor punch them in their lying faces. Afterall, reducing taxes does not help the poor. http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-gop-tax-plan-companies-rush-to-announce-special-bonuses-pay-hikes-2017-12 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2018/01/23/kimberly-clark-maker-of-kleenex-and-huggies-says-tax-bill-helps-fund-plan-that-includes-more-than-5000-layoffs/?utm_term=.85243501b16b
Danzo Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 4 minutes ago, Darren10 said: No He did not try again. Am I the only one who reads the Bible here? Why do you iluminate us with your vast biblical knowledge?
Darren10 Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 19 minutes ago, Danzo said: Where I come from, true conservatives believe in smaller government, less government presence. The immigration hawks represent a bastardisation of real conservative principals. They want a large overreaching government to keep away the scary brown people. They want government involvement in employee employer relationships. They want to punish marriage. They want to keep families separated. They don't believe in the free market, they would rather use government qoutas. A want nothing to do with these fake conservatives, they should join the progressive, who agree with them that government is the best solution to their problems. Where you come from conservatism does not obligate one to be Lazzaifaire. Modern-day Conservativism was founded by blending Repbublicanism with libertarianism and nationalism is a strong component of it. Not racism or xenophobia but nationalism. Typically conservatives absolutely want less government unless there is a question of certain principles including but not limited to national security, abortion, and immigration.
Darren10 Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 2 minutes ago, Danzo said: Why do you iluminate us with your vast biblical knowledge? Kevin started it. He can answer.
The Nehor Posted January 27, 2018 Posted January 27, 2018 3 hours ago, Avatar4321 said: It can get lower? Mine is shooting up. Thankfully it is currently assessed at about half its market value and can only raise 10% a year. Hooray for lower property taxes!
Recommended Posts