Posted on 05/01/2010 6:30:15 AM PDT by Colofornian
No matter how much the LDS Church would like to remain neutral on the issue of illegal immigration, Mormon activists on opposite sides draw on their faith's doctrines or practices to buoy their positions.
Russell Pearce, the Arizona senator who proposed that state's tough anti-immigration law, is LDS and hails from Mesa, a stronghold of Mormonism. A former missionary for the faith, the Republican lawmaker points to LDS scripture to buttress his push for a crackdown on undocumented immigrants.
"We have a special duty [to] this land, this republic and to the rule of law," Pearce wrote in an e-mail. "It is our duty and well established in scripture and modern revelation."
He cites a verse from the Doctrine & Covenants, a part of the Mormon canon, that says to "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."
Pearce also refers to the Utah-based church's 12th Article of Faith, which says Mormons believe in "obeying, honoring and sustaining the law."
That also is a key teaching for GOP Rep. Stephen Sandstrom, a Mormon legislator from Orem who has met with Pearce several times and hopes to introduce a similar bill in Utah.
"We are a country with the rule of law," said Sandstrom, who served an LDS mission in Venezuela. "That's the only way a country can prosper."
On the opposite side are Latter-day Saints who argue for a more complex and humane approach to immigration. They point to church teachings about taking care of one's family, being hospitable to the stranger and building the kingdom of God.
"I don't think the intent of the Article of Faith was to make us vigilantes and gatekeepers and create anti-immigrant rhetoric and climate," said Ignacio Garcia, a Brigham Young University history professor.
Those who come into this country without documentation make hard choices, Garcia said. "It's a violation of the law, sure, but circumstances often force people to decide to break one law to obey the higher law."
Despite such roiling debates among its members, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has given no clear-cut guidance on this issue. The church has taken no stand on the Arizona bill, spokesman Scott Trotter said Thursday.
The church takes a sort-of "don't ask, don't tell" approach to the immigration status of its own members. Some estimate that 50 percent to 75 percent of members in Utah's 100-plus Spanish-speaking congregations are undocumented. That includes many bishops, branch presidents, even stake presidents.
The church sends missionaries among undocumented immigrants across the country, baptizing many of them without asking about their status. It also allows them to go to the temple and on missions.
"We're not agents of the immigration service, and we don't pretend to be," LDS apostle Jeffrey R. Holland told The Salt Lake Tribune last year, "and we also don't break the law."
In January 2008, Marlin Jensen, a member of the First Quorum of the Seventy, was assigned by LDS President Thomas S. Monson to urge Utah legislators to use "compassion" in their immigration legislation.
That didn't stop Utah's mostly LDS lawmakers from passing SB81, which took effect last July and tightened enforcement while limiting immigrants' access to some services.
Sandstrom does not advocate denying emergency care for undocumented immigrants, but believes "true compassion should be for those who can't come here legally because of the huge numbers who are here illegally."
And he doesn't care if they are Mormons, Catholics or adherents of any other faith. The law is the law.
On several occasions, Sandstrom said, he has shared his legislative proposals on illegal immigration with LDS officials.
"Not one of them told me to 'cease and desist,' " he said. "I've been told to do what I feel is right for the state and my constituents."
Garcia has, again, a different perspective.
No, the LDS Church has not come out as strongly against these anti-immigration measures as the Catholics or the Evangelical Association, he said.
Behind the scenes, however, Mormon leaders "do not support such draconian efforts."
Mormon conservatives seem to feel that not only is the United States being invaded by foreigners, but also their homes, their churches and their congregations, he said.
"But the Latter-day Saint who sees the work of the church as becoming a global faith," Garcia said, "[is] not running around complaining about immigrants."
I dunno if you have seen the violence that has broken out and is continuing, but they’re rioting and such today. When we began to tolerate terrorists, I’ll never know, but that is what they are, and the American (U.S.) Public is getting very, very sick of it. I think the FedGov is trying to foment a revolt, but even if they get it, they’ll rue the day they started it.
We’re tired and get no breaks, just one slam after another, and the slow creeping of invaders has become a tidal wave, years after year. It’s nuts.
Welcome to ANARCHY!!!
....and look at all the garbage on the streets!!!
YOU ALL MUST SEE THIS THING...there is NO police brutality...these people are masters at fear mongering & race baiting and they hate the cops!
May Day Immigration Reform Protest, Police Brutality
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1kEu6eRklo
Form Mormonism's CREED - the Articles of Faith:
|
THE ARTICLES OF FAITH
OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS History of the Church, Vol. 4, pp. 535—541
12. We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.
Joseph Smith
|
Unfortunately, I'll be posting authentic, genuine, published for years MORMON data.
If THAT somehow offends certain people; what does that say about them?
State??
It's a FEDERAL law that is being 'supported'!!
That line was not a quote from anyone, but rather merely commentary from the writer itself. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, as an organization, believes in sustaining the law, and takes issue on moral issues (Pornography, Prohibition, Marriage Definition, Abortion, etc.). The definition of Legal vs. illegal Immigration is not a moral one, and thus there is no position on the “Issue of Illegal Immigration,” other than to sustain the law, not how that law is defined.
That portion was written for the express purpose to mislead, as shown by the ambiguity and nature of language used.
“It’s a FEDERAL law that is being ‘supported’!!”
Bears repeating. I read several pages (all the pertinent ones that are being thrown around) today, and there is nothing wrong with this law, IMO, as it merely enforces the Existing Federal law, as you did us a favor in pointing out.
There is a loop hole, this doesn't disagree with the point that you are making, but just for trivia fun, I have traveled to Belgium, Holland for a week, France a couple of times for fairly long stays, and Germany many times, all with never a passport or visa, in fact having never had either. That included commercial flights.
Really? How did you get on a plane or get a hotel?
I have always been asked for my passport.
A piece of paper with NATO orders coming out of a copy machine. I don’t recall ever showing them, but I was always part of a several, to up to 21 other guys, so maybe they showed papers, perhaps I showed my piece of copied standard office paper too, but I don’t remember doing it.
We usually travelled in plain clothes also, with non military haircuts on most of us.
Dr. Gupta then asks “So you didn't bring your papers to Arizona?”
Shakira then feigns exasperation, saying “I didn't. NO”
Her business manager, or her personal assistant carried the documentation and cleared her through...these celebs don't do anything for themselves!
She was therefore able to make the point that she was on the side of the illegals that are flooding our country.
I gaurantee you that is not the way it happened. I have traveled with very wealthy people and they carry those documents themselves.
It is the law in every country.
Besides it’s just plain silly to walk up to customs and tell them “talk to my assistant”. That is an invitation for disaster and waiting around in an airport.
The assistants do have copies of those documents and they make the arrangements but they don’t carry them.
Not saying there aren’t some that carry them but, never the less, you aren’t getting on any private plane without your I.D..
They will ask for your passport before you even enter the facilities and your supporting documents sometimes.
Mostly, when in an international private facility, you only need to present your passport.
She did not get on any plane, in America, without showing her passport and I still say Bravo Sierra, she is a liar.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
