Quantcast
Faith

LDS Church reaffirms stance on immigration

Comments

Return To Article
  • gdog3finally West Jordan, Utah
    April 15, 2014 1:20 p.m.

    There isn't a stance made at all, let alone a reaffirmation of it. There is a collection of warm fuzzy statements that at different times give creedence to both main immigration positions. I suggest reading the provided link in this article if you have not done so.

    The main bullet points:

    *We follow Jesus Christ by loving our neighbors. The meaning of the term 'neighbor' includes all of God's children, in all places, at all times.

    *We recognize an ever-present need to strengthen families. Families are meant to be together. Forced separation of working parents from their children weakens families and damages society.

    *We acknowledge that every nation has the right to enforce its laws and secure its borders. All persons subject to a nation's laws are accountable for their acts in relation to them.

    So here we see sensitivity for the needed love of neighbors (immigrants). But we don't see definition of anything regarding limitations or none at all on how they come to our nation.

    Given is an acknowledgement of a nations rights to secure its' borders. Except there isn't a stance made on what this should be defined as.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    April 15, 2014 1:34 p.m.

    Is breaking the law an act of love?

    Sure, it can be, whether it be illegal immigration or robbing a bank. If a person robs a bank to give money to their children that's as "admirable" and illegally immigrating to better provide for your children.

    Is it right?

    No.

    Should it be rewarded?

    No.

    Is it tough when bad decisions by bank robbers or illegal immigrants cause families to be separated?

    Yes

    Should we stop sending bank robber to prison so that we wont be breaking up families?

    No

  • But seriously folks! Salt Lake City, UT
    April 15, 2014 1:34 p.m.

    I for one am very surprised that Obama would even care enough to meet with religious leaders of Christian faiths. This is a huge step for him. Maybe there is a glimmer of hope for our country.

  • FatherOfFour WEST VALLEY CITY, UT
    April 15, 2014 1:51 p.m.

    @But seriously folks,

    President Obama meets with Christian leaders all the time, and has since the beginning of his presidency. Just recently the DN published an editorial detailing his meetings with the Pope. He also recently met with prominent Buddhist leaders. And Jewish leaders. Google this and you can find news stories about these issues almost every month.

  • techpubs Sioux City, IA
    April 15, 2014 2:12 p.m.

    LAW ENFORCEMENT We respect the rule of law and support law enforcement’s professional judgment and discretion. Local law enforcement resources should focus on criminal activities, not civil violations of federal code.

    The question still remains as to whether or not the Church Elders believe that those who have been deported at least once before should be removed since re-entry after deportation is considered a felony. And a few million have done just that.

  • RichardB Murray, UT
    April 15, 2014 2:27 p.m.

    Will God allow illegal immigration into Heaven? I doubt it. He is strictly about following rules to strengthen families and help future generations. I don't see him allowing people to steal, lie or covet as a way of showing love to their families. It's forbidden no matter the reason one chooses to follow these paths.

    Amnesty in any form has failed this country seven times. It encourages more law breaking, and should never be used again. We need to follow the example of other countries and start enforcing our laws.

    Arguing family separation over criminal activity is a waste of time. Especially when it's only applied to breaking immigration laws (that leads to id theft, social security fraud and perjury on I-9 forms).Love is sending people down the path of righteousness; rewarding illegal/dishonest behavior is not love.

  • ThinksIThink SEATTLE, WA
    April 15, 2014 2:31 p.m.

    I think it's great that LDS leaders are willing to meet with President Obama to discuss immigration reform. I also think it shows respect for the President, which may go a long ways to mend some of the public perception of the LDS Church's history with respect to race and the priesthood.

    We can all work together to make progress.

  • Samson01 S. Jordan, UT
    April 15, 2014 2:33 p.m.

    I don't have a great appreciation for the Utah Compact on Immigration. It is long on ideals and short on solutions.

    It was our disregard for the rule of law that has created the situation we are in now. A return to the strict rule of law at this point would hurt so many. I really don't know if there is a viable solution to the whole illegal immigration problem.

    If I were to enforce change though...It would be to make extraordinary efforts to secure the border. As for the illegals that are here now? Make them choose where they want to be. The defacto choice would be to remain here. Those that remain, full citizenship.

    Then, only after the border is reasonably secure (is that even possible?) enforce the rule of law strictly.

    Then, I would streamline the path to legal immigration and citizenship. The current system is so broken!

    Is this even viable? If it were, would we have the will to do this?

    This will probably have to be solved by greater minds (or crueler) than mine.

  • RichardB Murray, UT
    April 15, 2014 2:55 p.m.

    The Utah compact was the work of business leaders in an effort to obscure the line between legal and illegal immigration, and to make illegal immigration an accepted way of coming here.

  • Christopher B Ogden, UT
    April 15, 2014 3:04 p.m.

    @RichardB,

    "Will God allow illegal immigration into Heaven? I doubt it"

    You're great Richard. Well said. Keep up the good work

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    April 15, 2014 3:15 p.m.

    And once again,
    We see from comments that some Utah Mormon conservatives will put politics AHEAD of the Prophets.

    I support Pres. Uchdoft and the Utah Compact -- which the GOP soundly rejects.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    April 15, 2014 3:38 p.m.

    Completely agree with gdog. A bunch of warm fuzzy statements that clear up absolutely nothing.

    Why even make a statement so vague?

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    April 15, 2014 3:40 p.m.

    I love President Uchtdorf but I'm afraid this meeting with Barack was nothing more than a dog and pony show for the media as well as a way to pressure the GOP to soften its illegal immigtant policy to something closer to out right amnesty which is preferred by the Democrats for obvious political reasons with the up coming election. Of course we love people but we also beleive in honoring - sustating and obeying the law of the land. Illegals from Mexico and Cuba etc... will find IF they are willing to obey the law and come here legally they will find an open hand to pull them in. Barack and the Democrat's have no intention of having a common sense immigration policy - it is amnesty or nothing with Barack and forget about securing the border too. Instead of securing the border we will however send M-16 carrying ATF agents to Nevada to gun down and intimidate a 67 year old cattle rancher and his family. Welcome to AmeriKa.

  • Say No to BO Mapleton, UT
    April 15, 2014 3:40 p.m.

    @But seriously folks!
    President Uchtdorf met with Obama and a similar group in March of 2013 with pretty much the same message.

    If you ask me, Obama is just checking it off the list. Amnesty is a bad idea, especially in an election year. He is probably setting up the GOP for another message to Latinos that they are "the enemy."

    It is similar to his spin that Republicans hate women, equal pay, students, sick people, minorities, ponies, puppies...well, you get the idea.

  • Lone Eagle Aurora, CO
    April 15, 2014 3:43 p.m.

    12th Article of Faith, except when families are impacted by the "obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law." Then, ignore the law to keep the families together. Hard to reconcile the two.

    Just curious, is there such concern for impacted families who are in other countries illegally, for example, in Mexico? Has the Church leaders spoken out for the harsh penalties of breaking Mexican immigration law leading to the separation of families?

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    April 15, 2014 3:43 p.m.

    I call for a unified socialist system to include all of North America. Passing NAFTA without political union was an exercise is disaster. You may not like the socialist part, yet, but given population shifts the unity concept is practically accomplished.

  • AllBlack San Diego, CA
    April 15, 2014 4:08 p.m.

    Chris B et al,

    Yes they are currently breaking the law.

    But this is about changing the law for a common sense one so that these people aren't in a 'breaking the law' situation. Most just want to work and build a better life and the law should allow you to do that.

    Draconian and victorian-era type laws are ultimately a mistake.

  • Samwise Eagle Mountain, UT
    April 15, 2014 4:10 p.m.

    LDS Liberal,

    There are also LDS liberals who also put politics ahead of the prophets, for example when they support the "ordain women" movement, oppose the church's stance on abortion, and oppose the Church's stance on gay marriage. I don't know you so I am not saying you are one of these LDS liberals, but some of your fellow LDS liberals do indeed put politics ahead of the prophets. Not to mention, the Church doesn't really have a strong position on immigration (as others have pointed out), but does have quite a strong stance on gay marriage and abortion.

  • play by the rules SOUTH JORDAN, UT
    April 15, 2014 4:34 p.m.

    I hope he rememebered the sustaining the law portion of the 13th article of faith.

  • David Centerville, UT
    April 15, 2014 4:49 p.m.

    I believe that most, if not all, Americans want growth and prosperity. We all want happiness. We all want to be together with our families.

    Immigrants represent a wonderful opportunity to learn from other cultures and people. Immigrants also represent potential for economic growth and prosperity. They represent new small businesses, new homes, new schools, and so much more.

    I agree with the LDS Church's stance that we must try to keep families together.

    I believe if Congress would enforce the borders and make it possible for faster immigration, but reduce the ability of illegal crossings, drugs, human trafficking, and other terrible things to occur, that we could achieve the good things that immigration represents: strong families and a strong, growing economy.

    All people can benefit from America, and what we represent: freedom and opportunity.

  • kargirl Sacramento, CA
    April 15, 2014 4:56 p.m.

    I wonder if the people got to heaven who came to this country and summarily did away with people who lived here who were different from them in beliefs, languages, culture, and dress. Even though, I could add, many of them fed those people and taught them to live in the land that was, to the newcomers, so strange and unenviting. For their efforts, the original residents lost their lives, were herded like cattle to be relocated and had their land taken. Yes, I do wonder, did they make it to heaven?

  • Isaiah 1:15 Ogden, UT
    April 15, 2014 5:06 p.m.

    @Chris B.

    So please Chris, if you live in Utah, then you'll recall that Utah was part of Mexico. If I start a war against you, then put a puppet ruler in charge with a gun to his head and say, "Now sell me the land you refused to sell be before the war I started," is that a legal transaction? I think not. Most of Colorado, Utah, Nevada, Arizona, California and parts of Texas were stolen at gun point from Mexico. What makes you NOT the illegal alien is you live in one of those states and are not of native indian or Mexican descent?

  • RRB SLC, UT
    April 15, 2014 5:21 p.m.

    It's coming here illegally that separates families. If we want to stop it, then we need to enforce our laws, and force people to come here legally. We allow over a million people a year on green cards, more than the rest of the world combined, and more than any other time in this countries history. If you add in the 3.2 million work visas each year, good for 3 years, we do not need illegal immigration.

    Fathers come here without their families, parents hire people to bring their children here illegally, many times the rest of the family is in their home country. This is illegal immigration, it breaks families.

    Parents know they are breaking the laws, separating families is is a result of their actions, and the business owners that hire them.

  • Mexican Ute mexico, 00
    April 15, 2014 5:27 p.m.

    I follow the prophets on this one.

    No, entering into a country without proper documentation is nowhere near the same crime as robbing a bank. Especiallly if you are a minor and you have to cross with your parents.

    When the prophets speak, the debate is over. The Church is concerned with the current immigration laws that seperate families.

    I am also concerned with the current immigration laws are so tough to meet that the people that are looking for work to feed their families have no other choice but to cross illegally because they cannot meet the high financial constraints of a work visa in the USA or even a tourist visa.

    Even Mexico has liberalized its immigration laws with Calderon and now Peña Nieto. There are even signs discouraging illegal immigration to the USA in the immigration centers in Mexico.

    The USA would do good to do the same. No amnesty. But yes, ease up the financial constraints so people are more apt to follow the law.

  • 4601 Salt Lake City, UT
    April 15, 2014 6:20 p.m.

    Isaiah 1:15
    Ogden, UT

    And how did Mexico obtain the right to the lands mentioned? At gun point. Mexico was unable to control the land they claimed and realized that selling it was better than having it taken without payment. They did not pay anyone (Native Americans) when they "acquired" it.

  • Grover Salt Lake City, UT
    April 15, 2014 6:40 p.m.

    From the sound of most of these comments, I hope Jeb Bush isn't planning on throwing his hat in the ring. His words that illegal immigration is an "act of love" appears a non starter. The right will hand him his hat if he tosses it in. And the status quo which everyone defines as "unacceptable" just rolls on. Why not just give Congress a year off to think about a solution since not one in the House even wants to mention it...election coming you know.

  • delasalle Sandy, UT
    April 15, 2014 6:42 p.m.

    I'm amazed at how obtuse so many people are when it comes to "the law". How many of you standing on your pedestal arguing nothing is more important than the law were also the first to grab your guns to head to Nevada to support Mr. Bundy? Isn't Mr. Bundy also breaking "the law". Oh, I see, you support the law only when it aligns with your ideals. Sorry, you can't have your cake and eat it too. If you support rigid interpretation of one, then you need to for another.

    Many laws exist on the books that are either not enforced, are contradictory or are considered obsolete, even though they exist as laws. Immigration laws have been arbitrarily or not enforced for some years. Fix the law, fix enforcement, but don't apply retroactively to those who were just trying to find a better life through hard work and opportunity, particularly if they have committed no crime. It's the only way, particularly for true Christians.

  • Wasatch Rebel Kearns, Utah
    April 15, 2014 6:48 p.m.

    We need to have compassion for famiies. We need compassion for those who are the victims of illegal immigrant criminals...those who rob, rape, and murder, or kill people by driving drunk. We need to have compassion for the families of those who can't find a job because there are illegals willing to work for lower than minimum wage to do those same jobs. Yes, there needs to be a sensible immigration policy, beginning with enforcing the borders, and some kind of earning of citizenship should be made possible, such as serving in the military for a specified number of years. But those who commit felonies and those who have D.U.I.s should be sent packing. I only wish we could send regular citizens who do these things packing as well.

    There are solutions, but we should start with the current laws and enforce them. If we aren't a nation of laws, but instead a nation of feelings, we are doomed indeed.

  • Ronald Mortensen Salt Lake City, UT
    April 15, 2014 7:03 p.m.

    Religious leaders support amnesty for the vast majority of illegal aliens who routinely commit serious felonies in order to get jobs– document fraud, forgery, Social Security fraud, perjury on I-9 forms and child identity theft. At the same time, they turn their backs on an estimated 80,000 Utah children who are victims of illegal alien driven identity theft. They allow the illegal aliens who use these children’s Social Security numbers to become full members of their religious organizations without requiring them to stop their job-related, criminal activities. They show no compassion for the innocent American children who have their credit destroyed, are saddled with arrest records, have their medical records corrupted with life threatening consequences and who are denied means-tested benefits.

  • Mack2828 Ft Thomas, KY
    April 15, 2014 7:34 p.m.

    I believe in obeying, honoring and sustaining the law. Does President Uchtdorf?

  • ThinksIThink SEATTLE, WA
    April 15, 2014 7:38 p.m.

    @Wasatch Rebel:

    You said "If we aren't a nation of laws, but instead a nation of feelings, we are doomed indeed."

    Well, I think the LDS leaders position is based on their "feelings" or promptings. Facts or various arguments carry no weight.

  • cmsense Kaysville, UT
    April 15, 2014 7:47 p.m.

    I find Elder Uchtdorf's comments reassuring. I went to my caucus meeting and all the candidates to be delegates just wanted to ship everyone back, one even prefacing her stance as "I know this sounds cruel". It sounds cruel because it is cruel and deep down she knew it was wrong. It is not realistic or practical either to ship 12 million people back, many of whom have been here for decades. Yes ship people back who just got here. Yes ship people back that have criminal histories. Yes build a fence and make it difficult to cross and enforce our borders. No don't ship people back who have been here for years and their children grew up here. No don't break up families. Yes make them pay a penalty and earn the right to vote through a significant process. If they are veterans of our military, yes grant them citizenship. Yes let there be a workable program for mirgrant workers.

  • U-tar Woodland Hills, UT
    April 15, 2014 8:07 p.m.

    I liked the part about border security! That MUST come first, before any solution can be found. It would take care of a big part of the problem.

  • dave4197 Redding, CA
    April 15, 2014 8:12 p.m.

    Common sense tells us to abandon the fence, it's a fool's errand, it's an expensive gimmick that's easily bypassed and will not work. Common sense tells us we are neighbors with Mexico, so act like neighbors, and remember in the west we share historically common lands. Common sense plainly requires us to be neighborly, so those whose shrill call to follow the rule of (a bad) law are plainly out of touch with reality. The law needs to be changed and those who broke? a bad law need to be forgiven, Congress can do that except it's common knowledge that Congress is broken.
    My ancestors came here as parts of families, so today they'd be a broken family, but back then they were allowed, thankfully. We need to return to more sane policy about immigration from our friends and neighbors. Mexico is not our enemy, so the border should be like our border with Canada.

  • BYU Joe MISSION VIEJO, CA
    April 15, 2014 8:20 p.m.

    How does this help BYU football - I don't see the angle.

  • prelax Murray, UT
    April 15, 2014 8:22 p.m.

    Common sense tells us if we want it to stop, then we need to enforce the laws. Encouraging people to come here illegally with "reform" doesn't work.

    To those who want legal immigration to be easier, we already have the most liberal laws in the world. Before 1976 we allowed in 500,000 people a year, now we let in over a million. In 2011 we let in 1.2 million people when 26 million Americans were looking for full time work.

    Do we let in everyone from China and India that want to come here?

  • Pops NORTH SALT LAKE, UT
    April 15, 2014 8:25 p.m.

    Most of the animosity toward the "undocumented" expressed in the comments seems to be misplaced. We should be upset with our federal government for not dealing with the border in appropriate ways. Many of the people who come here illegally are simply doing what any reasonable person would do, given the circumstances. (I've lived in Guatemala - I've had at least a taste of what it's like to live without hope for the future.)

    The Utah Compact does in fact provide common-sense guidance towards resolving the problem. A big part of it is to provide a reasonable way for people to square themselves with the law. That in necessary so that we can sort out the bad guys and send them back, whilst keeping the good ones who, quite frankly, are Mexico's (and Guatemala's, and El Salvador's, Honduras', Nicaragua's, Panama's, etc.) loss. There are a lot of people here illegally who make America a better place. I think we ought to figure out a way to keep those people, and we especially shouldn't punish their children.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    April 15, 2014 8:27 p.m.

    allblack,

    Should we change the law so bank robbers who have robbed banks can keep the money they've stolen?

  • thebudmiller American Fork, UT
    April 15, 2014 8:55 p.m.

    Given that crossing the border illegally is less of an offense than exceeding the speed limit by more than 10 mph I think most of these comments are misplaced. Huge problem, no easy answer. Some of the hardest working, law abiding people I know came here by non-legal means. Chris B, just like most of your anti BYU comments you are way off target. Stick to sports, at least then you are entertaining.

  • Pops NORTH SALT LAKE, UT
    April 15, 2014 8:59 p.m.

    Chris B,

    I don't know why we keep comparing illegal immigrants to bank robbers. That's pretty harsh. Go live in Mexico for a few years and then come back and say you wouldn't do exactly the same as many have done in coming here illegally because, all things considered, it was their best option. Judging from many of the comments, one would think that illegal immigration is the most heinous crime one could ever commit.

    Many of the commenters here apparently identify with Javert in Les Miserables. Might I suggest that a better alternative would be Bishop Myriel. I say let's provide a way for illegal immigrants to square themselves with the law, which will then allow us to keep the good ones (there are many) and throw the bad ones back. Many of their kids are awesome. We could come out of this smelling like a rose. I don't understand why so many are so fiercely focused on making a bad situation worse.

  • Twin Lights Louisville, KY
    April 15, 2014 9:08 p.m.

    Chris B

    Immigration does not equal robbing a bank.

    techpubs

    I think it should be obvious that Church leaders do not want most immigration infractions to be treated as felonies.

    RichardB,

    God is perfect. Men and governments are not. I assume Church leaders are aware of what God requires.

    Patriot,

    There are no illegals from Cuba. The so called Wet Foot, Dry Foot policy guarantees amnesty to every Cuban who reaches US soil. Each and every one is here legally.

    Lone Eagle,
    Is there any reason for the church to worry about how illegal immigrants to Mexico are treated? Is there a wave of such folks? Seems unlikely.

    Play by the rules and Mack2828,

    I am quite sure President Uchtdorf knows the Articles of Faith and that the First Presidency (who he represented here) does as well. The Church is advocating for a change in the law (which many law abiding folks do for various laws).

  • wrz Phoenix, AZ
    April 15, 2014 9:17 p.m.

    @Samson01:
    "I really don't know if there is a viable solution to the whole illegal immigration problem."

    There is no solution because Hispanic immigrants (from across our southern borders) are starting to control our elections. And since politicians want to continue to reelected, they continue to cow-tow to the Hispanics vote... which means no meaningful immigration controls. Face it folks, our country is very rapidly being taken over by foreigners...without a shot being fired, by the way.

    "If I were to enforce change though...It would be to make extraordinary efforts to secure the border."

    Never happen. Many cross the border submissively placing themselves in the hands of the border patrol seeking asylum, who are then put up in hotels and fed awaiting court decisions, then silently sneak away.

    And many come on visas but overstay.

    "Then, I would streamline the path to legal immigration and citizenship."

    Disagree. Illegals should never obtain citizenship unless they go about it in the legal fashion. Stay if they want, but no citizenship.

  • SLars Provo, UT
    April 15, 2014 9:22 p.m.

    I'm surprised at the number of people that ignore the id theft, social security fraud and i-9 perjury, all felonies. Coming across the border illegally carries a fine, deportation and jail time. It's much more than a speeding ticket.

    I'm also surprised at the Church leaders who ignore three of Gods ten commandments, lying, stealing and coveting.

    In the 1986 and 1996 amnesties we passed building the border, interior enforcement, e-verify, more judges and law clerks. We also passed a visa entry-exit check in 1996. None of them were ever enacted. In my opinion, Church leaders would better serve by wanting enforcement, instead of the political stand they take with amnesty (including letting them stay).

    Anyone who supports amnesty, supports continuing illegal immigration.Reform provisions dealing with enforcement in the past have been ignored, there is no reason to believe they will be enforced in the future.

  • Steve C. Warren WEST VALLEY CITY, UT
    April 15, 2014 9:25 p.m.

    Helping the families of illegal immigrants stay together may not conform with the law, but it tends to usually be the right thing to do. To say that obeying the law is always the right thing to do is a comfortable position only for those who know little of history. People sometimes are put in a position where they must choose to obey a higher law and disobey a lesser law. That was the case with Adam and Eve, with the prophet Daniel, with the patriots at the Boston Tea Party, with the comparative handful of German Christians who illegally worked against their nation's duly elected leader, etc.

    I believe in obeying, honoring and sustaining laws except in cases where doing so isn't in harmony with the will of God.

  • SLars Provo, UT
    April 15, 2014 9:31 p.m.

    Pops

    There already is a way to become square with the law. Stop doing what they are doing, return home, and come back legally. The business owners that commit felonies by hiring them need to get square with the laws also.

    Rewarding illegal actions harms society at it's most basic core.

    It seems we are being led into conversations to divert discussion away from enforcement of immigration laws.

  • hamaca Baton Rouge, LA
    April 15, 2014 9:39 p.m.

    "There are also LDS liberals who also put politics ahead of the prophets, for example when they support the "ordain women" movement, oppose the church's stance on abortion, and oppose the Church's stance on gay marriage."

    I'm not aware the Church tells its members what political views they should have. The Church is entitled to speak out on issues that may be considered political. Many folks who simply believe that the government's role in such issues should be different are not necessarily opposing the Church's stance. Rather, they simply have a different take on the role government should play.

  • Pops NORTH SALT LAKE, UT
    April 15, 2014 9:59 p.m.

    @SLars,

    Our legal system is not obliged to hand out the stiffest possible sentence for every infraction. We can do better than demand a pound of flesh, particularly since we're dealing with a lot of people who are a net positive. We should not be so completely appalled that someone might commit a civil infraction in order to obtain freedom and opportunity or to survive. Jean Valjean, anyone?

    Speaking of France, I suppose we should send the Statue of Liberty back to France because we obviously no longer believe in what it represents. By that I'm not suggesting we should have an open border policy. What I'm suggesting is that rules, principles, and laws exist in a hierarchy, and we would do well to recognize situations in which one principle takes precedence over another. The day that overstaying a visa becomes a higher law that is used to subvert human beings seeking freedom and opportunity in the best way they know how is the day that we've officially lost the recipe.

  • RichardB Murray, UT
    April 15, 2014 10:11 p.m.

    Bank robbery, illegally crossing the border, id theft, social security fraud, and lying on a I-9 form are all Federal offenses. Crossing the border illegally is a misdemeanor, the rest are felonies. So it is a valid comparison.

    @Steve C. Warren
    God never said illegal immigration was OK. He told us to live the law of the land.

    Making life better for your family is not a reason to break the law. There are billions of people in the world with worse lives than our neighbor to the south. (Mexico has the 12th best economy in the world).

    “Good, law-abiding citizenship is a key to more abundant, joyful living. Taxes could be much lower, people would be more happy with their neighbors, homes would be strengthened, and each individual would find more inner peace, if laws were better observed.”---LDS President Spencer W. Kimball

  • wrz Phoenix, AZ
    April 15, 2014 10:16 p.m.

    @AllBlack:
    "But this is about changing the law for a common sense one so that these people aren't in a 'breaking the law' situation."

    Then you should welcome that same law change re bank robbing.

    "Most just want to work and build a better life and the law should allow you to do that."

    In the mean time they come here taking jobs that unemployed Americans should be working... and depressing wages as well.

    @play by the rules:
    "I hope he remembered the sustaining the law portion of the 13th article of faith."

    You mean the portion of the law that says it's a felony to aid and abet an illegal (USC 1324)?

    @Isaiah 1:15:
    "Most of Colorado, Utah, Nevada, Arizona, California and parts of Texas were stolen at gun point from Mexico."

    No, no. They were part of the American Indian nation.

    @Mexican Ute:
    "The Church is concerned with the current immigration laws that separate families."

    Then the Church should encourage illegal immigrants to stay home with their families.

  • Mexican Ute mexico, 00
    April 15, 2014 10:35 p.m.

    @prelax

    What I am talking about are the financial constraints that go behind the laws. Imagine. Getting married to a foreign national HERE on a student visa, and then have USCIS say that she has to go back to her country because she came here on a student visa. Then have bank accounts and stock options proving that your wife won't become a public charge in the USA...stock options!

    The Immigration laws are liberal...for those that have no visa requirement to enter the USA. For those that do have it, it's extremely tough and costly.

    Mexico on the other hand has liberalized their immigration laws. You marry a Mexican national and you are automatically fast tracked to the equivalent of the green card if you so desire. The cost of said residency is MUCH cheaper than in the USA.

  • prelax Murray, UT
    April 15, 2014 10:39 p.m.

    "In 1979 testimony to Congress, Chavez complained, "... when the farm workers strike and their strike is successful, the employers go to Mexico and have unlimited, unrestricted use of illegal alien strikebreakers to break the strike."

    Some things don't change, do they? In 1986 the LDS church supported amnesty also, and never complained when the enforcement part of the laws were not enacted. (To be fair, neither did other churches).

    D&C 42: 79, 84-86
    84 And if a man or woman shall rob, he or she shall be delivered up unto the law of the land.
    85 And if he or she shall steal, he or she shall be delivered up unto the law of the land.
    86 And if he or she shall lie, he or she shall be delivered up unto the law of the land.
    That says it all.

  • Mexican Ute mexico, 00
    April 15, 2014 10:45 p.m.

    I would also have everyone on the board know that the wave of Mexicans crossing the border has slowed down to a trickle. Most of them that come through now are of Central American origin.

    That has been the case since at least 2010.

    I could show you guys an image that is shown in most immigration centers in Mexico, where it shows a grpahic picture saying, "Crossing into the USA without documents is very dangerous, and you could be playing with your life as well as your family's. Obtain legal documentation."

    The Church's handbook is clear in that it does not support illegal immigration. Nevertheless, there are still many people that do it even members of the Church. I never support immigrating to another country wo proper documentation.

    The second one is the most sustainable for the health of the nation. And the sentiment against the Latin Americans is really no different than it was against the blacks in the Jim Crow Era or the Irish in the Civil War era. Anytime the economy goes down in the USA immigrants (the most recent ones) always get the blame.

  • ulvegaard Medical Lake, Washington
    April 15, 2014 10:54 p.m.

    I think it was great that Pres. Uchtdorf was invited to this meeting and I appreciate what he said at it. I didn't hear him advocating breaking the law, but writing a law that was humane and effective all around. Only time will tell if this is even possible, but we need to at least hope for the best and then go from there.

    Do I think the President will endorse and act upon any of the counsel gleaned at this meeting? No. As stated already, I'm sure this whole thing was just for show, but I think these religious leaders needed to speak up all the same.

  • prelax Murray, UT
    April 15, 2014 11:29 p.m.

    Exactly what immigration laws are inhumane? Deportation? And why is it just America, when other countries enforce much stricter laws?

    @Mexican Ute, your example is no longer relevant, as a spouse is covered by one of Obama's waivers, so is family unification. Marry someone here on a visa, and you should expect problems. It's that way in most countries.

    This looks like another big push for business to continue flooding our labor market. After 28 years of no enforcement, haven't we had enough? Amnesty just brings more families here illegally, and encourages them to break our laws. It just continues the problem. The only way to stop it is through enforcement, and it has to happen now. California no longer has a white-non Hispanic majority, Hispanics, both legal and illegal have become the majority. It's gotten out of hand.

    As far as the statue of liberty goes, it welcomed legal immigrants. They are not the focus of this discussion.

  • Alfred Phoenix, AZ
    April 15, 2014 11:34 p.m.

    @Mexican Ute:
    "I would also have everyone on the board know that the wave of Mexicans crossing the border has slowed down to a trickle."

    Could be... they've switched to coming on visas and overstaying. Cuts down on hiking through the US's southern desert.

    "Most of them that come through now are of Central American origin."

    Doesn't matter from whence they come. Illegal is illegal.

  • michael.jensen369 Lethbridge, 00
    April 15, 2014 11:37 p.m.

    @hamaca

    The Church as an institution is politically neutral. The issues mentioned are not solely political issues. The "ordain women" hoopla, is strictly doctrinal, so I won't comment on that one. But as for abortion and changing the definition of marriage, well, those have to do with human life, and changing the very definition of the basic unit of society, which definitely have moral implications. These are moral issues of eternal import, not solely political issues. As Elder Holland once said:"My young friends, there is a wide variety of beliefs in this world, and there is moral agency for all, but no one is entitled to act as if God is mute on these subjects or as if commandments only matter if there is public agreement over them." Think of the "watchmen on the tower" analogy.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    April 15, 2014 11:45 p.m.

    There are many repub posters here speaking out against the Utah compact endorsed by the LDS church.

    How many of you watched conference?

    How many of you sustained the prophets?

    How many of you have temple recommends?

    It's time to repent.

    Sustaining our leaders is more than just lip service on Sunday. It's pretty simple, you either follow the lord's anointed or not.

    I think that beck, skousen, John Birch Society, and other similar groups (false profits) are exactly what The Lord warned us against. As for me and my house, we will serve The Lord and follow his living prophets before ever bowing to political party ideology or am radio.

  • Informed Voter South Jordan, UT
    April 15, 2014 11:55 p.m.

    I am disappointed obeying honoring and sustaining the law is deemed to be non-applicable by the church leaders. So can I now decide which laws I will obey, sustain, and honor? And as one writer noted: what about harsh immigration laws in countries like Mexico? Is the Church objecting to them also? If not, why not?

  • One1 Utah, UT
    April 16, 2014 12:56 a.m.

    I really appreciate that the leaders of the Church are willing to participate in this issue that it's not easy.
    The only thing I can say is that anybody that has not been separated from their family cannot even understand the pain and hardship these people go through. You don't have to be Christian to understand this, this is just simple sense of humanity. Yes they should enforce security at the border and all that, but they haven't done it. Now, I read here if God will allow illegal immigrants into heaven, sorry, that does not makes sense at all. There will be no illegals trying to be with God because his laws are above our terrenal laws and he is a God of compassion and forgiveness and those attributes we are lacking in this country that we say was stablished because of our faith in God. For God there are no boundaries or countries. We are ALL his children and he welcomes everybody.

  • RRB SLC, UT
    April 16, 2014 1:22 a.m.

    Something is wrong here. I think the majority of people know it's a problem caused by business trying to cut labor costs. If families are the concern, why not take the battle to them? And why just immigration? It seems wanting to keep families together should apply to all people breaking laws. I don't understand why they have singled out one group that commits crimes daily.

    I have family that came here legally from Mexico. You would be surprised how many Mexicans have been in this country at one time or another working. Many times it's the husband that comes here and sends money back to his family. Our laws are not separating families, it's our lack of enforcement and their choice to come here and work, defying our laws.

    Amnesty will just keep repeating the problem, until we enforce the laws. And there is no better time to start than now. But it won't happen under Obama. Any actions should wait until we have someone in office that respects the law.

  • SLars Provo, UT
    April 16, 2014 3:32 a.m.

    Mercy cannot rob justice and remain righteous. If we can compassionately apply a painless death penalty, we can compassionately deny resident privileges to illegal immigrants

    March 30, 2011 The Examiner
    "The idea of the Utah Compact actually originated with us here at the Chamber", Rigg claimed. Rigg also explained that "the compact...we tried to make sure that it was something that was characterized as something that came from broader community and not from the Chamber...so if you look..I can tell this group that...if you look online or look anywhere, you're not going to find the Chamber's fingerprints on it".

    It concerns me that the Church has taken a moral position based on the business communities thirst for cheap labor.

    In 2009, Mexican President Felipe Calderon told the Associated Press: "Every
    single migrant to the United States is one family that is losing the father, or
    one family that is losing a son."

    Many husbands come here and start a second family, and never return to their first family.

  • Say No to BO Mapleton, UT
    April 16, 2014 5:34 a.m.

    What's missing is an explanation to members about why President Uchtdorf said what he said.
    This goes beyond "Love your Neighbor."
    We might understand better if President Monson said something like this in Conference:
    National borders are the creation of man. God does not distinguish between his children on one side vs the other. Many people have moved north into Spain, England, France...and yes, the United States and have embraced the gospel. They are fellow citizens in the Kingdom of God. Their man-determined immigration status does not matter. As Saints we will accept them and ignore their legal troubles. We support amnesty for these brothers and sisters.

    No one said that at Conference.
    You have to step over some serious doctrine to support amnesty. We deserve an explanation.

  • Jamescmeyer Midwest City, USA, OK
    April 16, 2014 6:42 a.m.

    Many people seem to be hung up on the typical argument of letting people in vs. keeping them out.

    The leaders of the Church, according to this article, say nothing of it; their focus on immigration reform isn't to let people funnel into the United States, it's to keep families together, whether they stay here or leave. They also affirm the importance of border security. It isn't at all about amnesty or free pardoning.

  • Third try screen name Mapleton, UT
    April 16, 2014 7:05 a.m.

    @Mexican Ute
    We would all like to know the source of your information that Mexicans are no longer crossing the border, but they are mostly from Central America.
    I had heard that the flow into the USA had slowed due to the lousy economy, but your comments are interesting.
    Where did you get your information?

  • Wacoan Waco, TX
    April 16, 2014 7:11 a.m.

    I am surprised by the intransigence of many posting comments regarding immigration reform. Utah probably has more people per thousand who have lived in a developing country among common folk. You speak their language and ate their food. You tasted of their poverty

    The current system of immigration does not work well; it is time consuming and expensive and favors the politically connected in most countries. The Church supports it. That almost certainly means that reform would help the Church achieve its goals. Sure, undocumented people have entered or stayed in the U.S. illegally but I have driven highways in Utah. Let's just say that most drivers exceed the posted limit. People entering illegally generally are working to end the grinding poverty experienced in their home countries because of crony capitalism. Why do you break the law daily?

    It is true that their labor acts as a substitute for our low-skilled labor, but it also acts as a complement and their demand for goods and services creates jobs. I do not want to change the size and scope of government to resolve a small problem.

  • Riverton Cougar Riverton, UT
    April 16, 2014 7:11 a.m.

    "I'm not aware the Church tells its members what political views they should have. The Church is entitled to speak out on issues that may be considered political. Many folks who simply believe that the government's role in such issues should be different are not necessarily opposing the Church's stance."

    Sometimes the Church isn't as soft about it as you are implying they are. For example, in California during Prop 8 letters were read to all the congregation encouraging members to do what they can to get it to pass. When a political issue is also a moral issue (and same-sex marriage is, since it tramples under men's feet God's notion of marriage), the Church not only speaks out, but says what is the right thing to do.

    The Church's stance is that gay marriage should not be legalized (I hope you know that's not a secret). If somebody's stance is to legalize SSM, that person is in fact opposing the Church's stance. Simple as that.

  • hockeymom Highland, UT
    April 16, 2014 7:20 a.m.

    19 years ago, my family and I immigrated from Canada to Utah as "resident aliens" to work and live in this country. My Dad was a US citizen living in Canada, so I was able to get US citizenship through him. We filled out all the papers, paid all the fees, jumped through all the "flaming hoops" to do it. 10 years later, my husband and sons became US citizens, by filling out all the papers, paying all the fees and jumping through all the flaming hoops yet again. I never considered the system "broken", just what we had to do to gain legal access to this country. We pay taxes and have enjoyed a good life here. Not thrilled about the medical system even before Obamacare, (a whole other story), but we expect that since we are here we follow the law or suffer consequences which may include separation from our family. This isn't rocket science. Everyone has the same opportunity. It's tougher for some, I'm sure to come up with the fees, so maybe the humane part of it could be a "perpetual immigration fund" to assist those who can show dire need in their refugee status.

  • SLars Provo, UT
    April 16, 2014 7:26 a.m.

    @The Real Maverick

    We are suppose to question.
    "I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by Him. "--Brigham Young, "Eternal Punishment," Journal of Discourses

    We have our free agency to choose. We are not bound politically to the Churches political position on political issues.

  • CylonesRus sunamn, IN
    April 16, 2014 7:27 a.m.

    The problem is by not keeping the people in their country, lets those countries ditators keep up their current system. Cuba is still under Castro because we let so many Cubans into the States, if those millions stayed in Cuba, they could have have rebelled and sent Castro packing. It happened in Eastern Europe about fifteen years ago.

  • Nate Pleasant Grove, UT
    April 16, 2014 7:32 a.m.

    I trust Elder Uchtdorf. When he says that we can apply faith, hope, and charity to a solution; when he says that we should be motivated by love; when he says that our laws should favor keeping families together; when he calls the rule of law "one of the major pillars" of a common-sense solution -- in all these things he is telling the truth.

    The Latter-Day Saints worship a God who is perfect in both justice and mercy. Perhaps this is why one of his servants would favor immigration laws that include both punishment for infraction, and a way to put things right.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    April 16, 2014 7:48 a.m.

    Mike Lee, incremental reform is just another way of saying, "Let's not do much, if anything." The problem has been festering for too long, and the GOP approach is to do nothing. You and your party refuse to govern. In the end, the Church is far more correct than you, Senator, and certainly more so than the Republican Party.

    On another note, President Uchtdorf said "The president was warm and kind. In many ways, we don't always agree with this administration, for instance on marriage and other issues. I understand the marriage issue. But President Obama and his Administration has hardly been leading the charge on the issue. But what are the other issues? I think if you are going to put the idea out there, we deserve to know. How many of the issues are truly religious issues (institutional vs./and moral) and how many are merely political stances? As a member of the Church, I think we should know.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    April 16, 2014 7:50 a.m.

    One other thing. To the anti-immigrant folks who talk about obeying the law of the land, I say two things. First, the law of the land can be changed and that is what this is all about. Problem solved. Easy, right? Second, are you fastidious about obeying and sustaining the law when it comes to implementing the ACA (aka Obamacare), or are your principles situational, depending on the law and the issue? I think it's a fair question.

  • Steve C. Warren WEST VALLEY CITY, UT
    April 16, 2014 8:00 a.m.

    I very much appreciate the fact that many Latter-day Saints who are here illegally also hold positions in their wards and are allowed to take the sacrament, no questions asked. It shows that sensible Church leaders view the efforts of immigrants to provide for their families as commendable. "If any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." (1 Tim. 5:8)

  • RRB SLC, UT
    April 16, 2014 8:38 a.m.

    @Steve C. Warren
    It's up to the Bishop what leadership roles they are allowed to hold.

    It's not the same as a speeding ticket.
    Unlawful entry into the United States is up to six months in jail plus a fine, followed by deportation. Visa overstayers are subject to two years in jail. People who were previously deported have even stiffer penalties because they aren’t supposed to come back for at least ten years. Using someone else’s ID to obtain a job is another violation. I-9 document fraud carries a penalty up to $3,200 per document. Using fake ID to obtain a car loan, a cell phone, a home…makes you subject to ID theft laws. Falsifying or fraudulent use of a Green Card is a federal offense, as is a false claim of US Citizenship. Using that fake ID when stopped by police constitutes obstruction of justice. Accepting your pay in cash without the required reporting and deductions constitutes tax evasion. Failure to file a tax return, or to file one under a false name are serious federal offenses.

    Why should they move to the front of the line over people who follow the laws?

  • Steve C. Warren WEST VALLEY CITY, UT
    April 16, 2014 9:23 a.m.

    @RRB
    Yes, it's up to the bishop to decide what positions illegals are called to, and our general church leaders know and approve of the fact that bishops are calling them.

    I'm also pleased that members of the business community who need low-income workers are willing to hire immigrants who are trying to provide for their families. I worked six weeks picking apples in Yakima, Washington, and I was one of the very few U.S.-born people working in the orchards. I believe many of the others weren't here legally, but then the orchard owners didn't bother to ask--they simply needed good, hard-working people. These illegals didn't "move to the front of the line"; they were simply doing work that local residents didn't want to do.

  • Navigator13 Pleasant Grove, UT
    April 16, 2014 9:24 a.m.

    @LDS Liberal - "And once again,
    We see from comments that some Utah Mormon conservatives will put politics AHEAD of the Prophets."

    I definitely agree with you that it's hypocritical...similar to members who denounced the Church for its stance on Prop 8, or who disregarded its request for protesters to stay on the other side of street during the Priesthood Session of Conference. Often too much politics and too little faith on both sides.

  • kiddsport Fairview, UT
    April 16, 2014 9:31 a.m.

    As long as Democrats continue to renege on promises they made in the past to secure the border and enforce employee verification, the immigration impasse will continue. As far as compromise goes, remember the old saw, "You can't make a good deal with a bad politician."

  • edgeoftheabyss OC, CA
    April 16, 2014 9:54 a.m.

    Good to see that the involvement of organized religion in political matters is acceptable so long as it hews to the politically correct side of the matter. If these churches were to take contrary stands on other "political" issues--say, traditional marriage, gambling, abortion, contraceptives, etc.--they would never have a seat at the table and would instead hear the calls for IRS investigations and revocation of their tax-exempt status.

  • AllBlack San Diego, CA
    April 16, 2014 9:56 a.m.

    "Chris BSalt Lake City, UT

    "Should we change the law so bank robbers who have robbed banks can keep the money they've stolen?"

    Off course not.

    But immigration reform certainly isn't about felonies like bank robbing,stolen money or similar. Breaking basic immigration laws today is akin to speeding or other minor traffic offenses, which are subject to review and changes from time to time. Its the consequences of all the other laws that are the problem making good decent hard working people guilty of various frauds.

    Pres Utchdorf -or the church- are only asking that a more common sense law is passed so that families aren't split up as easily as they are today in some states, some because this doesn't happen as much in CA or NJ. i

    And remember that all studies, that's all serious studies, show that immigration ultimately helps both the economy and society at large, as it has done with Utah with all those european mormons who now inhabit the ute lands.

  • RedShirtUofU Andoria, UT
    April 16, 2014 10:01 a.m.

    I think most everybody is getting all wrapped up in the religion/politics of the situation. I don't think many took the time to think about what was said. Elder Uchtdorf said "The president mentioned in our conversation in the Oval Office he would not use executive orders through the summer because he hopes Congress can find a solution.."

    In other words Obama told this group of faith leaders that he is going to circumvent the law to impose his will on the nation. He is telling us that he is going to do something against the constitution if Congress doesn't do what he wants.

    Shouldn't we be more concerned about an out of control President of the US before we worry about the reason behind Obama talking to a group of faith leaders?

  • MapleDon Springville, UT
    April 16, 2014 10:08 a.m.

    The Church has been very outspoken in its support for open borders and amnesty. There has been no dissenting voice in any of its media.

    I understand the Church's desire to win over the Latin American people, just as I understand Obama's (U.S. Latinos are overwhelmingly Democratic). I understand the desire of business leaders who appreciate the cheap labor. They all have their self interests.

    But that doesn't mean that I need to agree with any of them.

    To me, the most important issue is the rule of law. Without it, we have anarchy. And rewarding people for breaking the law will only encourage others to do the same. We will be dealing with this same issue for decades to come until the borders are secured.

    Should the Church deny temple blessings to anyone who sneaks into a temple through the back door? Where’s the compassion?

    Let's be honest. If the 10 to 15 million people who are here illegally were devout atheists, sternly conservative (with a 90% likelihood of voting Republican), and demanded high pay, there would be no call for amnesty, compassion, or keeping families together. And this meeting would not have happened.

  • DrGroovey Salt Lake City, UT
    April 16, 2014 10:28 a.m.

    Which law or commandment is most important:

    1) to love your neighbor as yourself, or

    2) Sustain a man-made arbitrary law about who can cross an imaginary line drawn on a map.

    It seems that most people today vote for #2.

  • Concinnity Tooele, UT
    April 16, 2014 10:45 a.m.

    @ Esquire:

    Since you are obviously an Obama liberal, you haven't taken the time or effort to determine what Mike Lee is actually advocating. He is sensibly asking that border control be a first step before moving on to other immigration issues. That's akin to putting out the largest fire before worrying about the smaller ones.
    Since a lack of border control is the root cause of this problem, that needs to be dealt with as a high priority. Once we prove that that can be done, then we'll deal with the already here law-breakers.

    When Reagan was in office, this exact same situation existed. Democrats said if we allowed amnesty to the then illegals, it would be the absolute last time. More border control was also promised. But since that level of hoped for border control never happened, here we are a generation later back in the exact same boat, proposing the exact same empty solutions.

    Anyone old enough to remember the conditions and promises made in previous illegal alien amnesties have good reason not to trust the same lame promises attached to this proposal. More law enforcement is our biggest need.

  • Wacoan Waco, TX
    April 16, 2014 10:50 a.m.

    @RRB and Steve C. Warren

    No, illegally entering the United States is generally done for a more pure motive than speeding, increasing the economic welfare of a family and, as RRB nicely points out, carries a larger penalty. Although I haven't seen a comparison, I would bet that more property damage and death to third parties occurs because of speeding than illegal entry.

    I could have gone on about illegal actions taken by honest, and I mean honest, U.S. citizens. Do we help our children fill out tax returns on income earned mowing lawns or babysitting? Do we follow all gun registration laws? Do we talk on cell phones while driving? Well, I am not sure about Utah laws. It's legal in Texas and it drives me crazy to wait behind someone completing a text message.

    I too am appreciative of workers, here illegally or otherwise, who pick crops to keep the cost of food low.

  • Concinnity Tooele, UT
    April 16, 2014 11:01 a.m.

    @ DrGroovey:

    First of all, this isn't a matter of needing to choose one law over the other. But even if it was, by choosing to follow civil laws of our land, we are actually helping to show love toward our neighbors who happen to be unemployed because of others here illegally taking needed jobs.

    Following your suggested approach of not having any country borders thus allowing anyone in the world to come here unimpeded would result in a condition of anarchy and soon dilute America into a third wold country. There are valid reasons that literally every nation in the world maintains borders. It's extremely short-sighted not be able to see and understand that.

    Once all the problems of mankind are overcome and God rules over the entire earth, then it will make sense to do away with our borders. But that time is not yet, nor even close. As such, sensible laws, including with immigration, are needed more than ever before. And they need to be taken seriously and followed... something that hasn't been happening very well regarding illegal immigration. That's why this situation keep happening with each new generation.

  • Objectified Tooele, UT
    April 16, 2014 11:17 a.m.

    @ Wacoan:

    The percentage of illegal aliens here in the United States who are picking food crops is miniscule compared to the overall numbers. It's the other jobs that illegals are doing that many unemployed American would do and want to do that is causing the biggest problems.

    It also is a hindrance on our economy that many illegals send part of their wages back to Mexico rather than spending that money here to recirculate and help our economy. Sending money out of the country that was earned here actually helps Mexico's economy while hurting ours. That's the primary reason the president of Mexico and other Mexican leaders are pushing for amnesty and open borders, and/or trying to make illegal immigration more acceptable to the American public.

    We are having a hard time getting our economy out of a rut and getting our unemployment numbers to drop significantly. Harboring illegal workers who steal American jobs by working for less pay is hurting the situation, not helping. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand basic macro economic principles and why not adhering to them always creates problems. And yet here we go again...

  • RichardB Murray, UT
    April 16, 2014 11:56 a.m.

    March 30, 2011 The Examiner
    "The idea of the Utah Compact actually originated with us here at the Chamber", Rigg claimed. Rigg also explained that "the compact...we tried to make sure that it was something that was characterized as something that came from broader community and not from the Chamber...so if you look..I can tell this group that...if you look online or look anywhere, you're not going to find the Chamber's fingerprints on it".
    ----------------------------
    I had to check this out to see if it was true, and it is. I'm surprised someone from the LDS church still endorses this.

    Ignoring the id theft, social security fraud and perjury (all felonies) does not make them go away.

    The jobs being taken now, construction, service, hospitality etc. are jobs that can't be exported. They are jobs needed by Americans.

  • SNPTR Malta, MT
    April 16, 2014 12:03 p.m.

    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.

    Doctrine and Covenants 58:21

  • antodav TAMPA, FL
    April 16, 2014 12:17 p.m.

    Some members of the Church out west, having been so thoroughly indoctrinated by right-wing politics that it has blinded them to the true principles at the heart of the Gospel, may not like the Church’s stance on this issue, but frankly that’s just too bad. The stance is nevertheless the morally, politically, and theologically correct one, and I am grateful to belong to a Church that does not allow secular, worldly politics and a desire to win the praise of the world get in the way of championing the cause of the poor and oppressed, as any truly Christian organization ought to. The one Southern Baptist representative quoted in this article, unsurprisingly, does not seem to understand the correct purpose of comprehensive immigration reform…but the majority of the forces involved in this debate do understand it, and eventually (even if it does not happen until after 2016), the long overdue change that we need will come to pass.

  • Steve C. Warren WEST VALLEY CITY, UT
    April 16, 2014 1:01 p.m.

    @SNPTR "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."

    That would come as a surprise to women who become pregnant in China and find themselves in violation of the one-child policy. It would certainly have surprised Anne Frank's family during World War II, although I suppose a person who ratted on the Franks might feel like he had obeyed the laws of the land. I wonder how it would apply to the treatment of certain racial and religious minorities not only today but throughout history or how it might apply to certain "lawful" orders pertaining to treatment of prisoners.

    It is an optimistic but incorrect teaching.

  • The Deuce Livermore, CA
    April 16, 2014 1:23 p.m.

    First, I am not a member of the LDS Church. Second, this topic is of concern to all of us in this nation. Yes, Congress needs to act and not keep kicking the can down the street. We are a nation of laws and order. I am not sure of the requirements of LDS members to enter their temples, however, if you are not honest in your dealings with others I can't see how you would be able to go into a temple. The LDS Church may as well open the doors for everyone at that point. It is hard to try and differentiate between breaking one law and breaking another law as to which one is important. Once a law is broken, everything after that is still based on breaking the law. Let's first get our house in order so that we may make it possible to invite others here who want to come.

  • The Deuce Livermore, CA
    April 16, 2014 1:29 p.m.

    I took the opportunity to review the document referred to in this article that the LDS Church supports. I still do not understand the position that the LDS Church has regarding illegal immigration. The document in question is a list of well intentioned thoughts but does not address the key issues of this problem. I still cannot understand what their position is regarding illegal immigration.

  • Informed Voter South Jordan, UT
    April 16, 2014 2:22 p.m.

    The Duece:

    The document was written to not be clear. I had the same problem when I read it. The church was brutalized due to its standing Prop 8 and they do not want another such attack via illegal immigration so the dodge the issue without a clear statement of their position.

  • xert Santa Monica, CA
    April 16, 2014 4:54 p.m.

    To Richard and Chris B. Is god going to allow the judgmental, and self righteous into heavens? I have a feeling he's going to put them somewhere in line behind those who go to disparate measures to feed their starving kids. Just a thought, but one the both of you might want to mull over before you continue to posit our fathers positions.

  • Wacoan Waco, TX
    April 16, 2014 5:23 p.m.

    @Allbalck

    You make a good point about economic studies and immigration,all most all serious studies do support immigration reform with freer entry. That is why 110+ conservative economists signed an open letter to to Congress supporting it. I tried and failed to include the link

    @Objectified

    I agree that remittances to Mexico are a small drain to the U.S. economy. They totaled $10.7 billion in 2013. Remittances from a worker to Mexico tend to end when the person gains citizenship.

    I disagree with your economic analysis about the impact of immigration on labor markets. Labor market are weak, but the recession was caused by a housing bubble fueled by federal programs encouraging home ownership and aggressive practices of banks too big to fail. Like any other worker, undocumented workers earn jobs. Their presence in labor markets would lower wages if all other variable are held constant but they are not. They buy goods and services which benefits owners and workers. In part, the open letter I cite reads

    Immigration reform is an opportunity...to improve the long-term prospects for economic growth, enhance the skills of the U.S. labor force, and augment the flexibility of the Nation’s labor market.

  • Mack2828 Ft Thomas, KY
    April 16, 2014 9:27 p.m.

    It is so easy for me as a latter day saint to see the correct way to apply the 3 points that the church emphasizes:

    1. Send all immigration law breakers home to get in line and come legally

    2. Make sure they take their families with them

    3. Do one and two above in a spirit of love and kindness. A genuine, Christ like love isn't permissive (see jefferey R Holland April 2014 Conference address).

  • SparkyVA Winchester, VA
    April 17, 2014 8:07 a.m.

    Since our president cherry picks which laws he will enforce, it is silly to give him more laws to pick from. If we pass a comprehensive law, he will throw out what he doesn't like and use the parts he does to again do what he wants, not what the American People want. I say wait until next year when things are different and we have a Senate that will stand up to the President when he is wrong.

  • Serve Jefferson, GA
    April 17, 2014 8:33 a.m.

    Having served a Spanish mission in California, we didn't deny baptism for converts who were here illegally. We are talking about imaginary lines that divide us as countries which exist now, but won't when Christ comes again on the earth. Remember we are all brothers and sisters and children of God no matter what country we were born in. I love the church's stance on this issue to resolve the matter with peace and love as the Savior would. We need to pass immigration laws which will bring us together and not divide us more as a country.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    April 17, 2014 11:43 a.m.

    @ Xert
    Not sure where God puts people into line when going into heaven but do know that having a fact based discussion with many posters on this blog is a useless endevor. Anything that will happen on immigration reform will be the result of political strength as the issue has been hijacked by the right wing radicals of the GOP. We've seen the Mike Lee's and Ted Cruz's destroy their own party and they would do the same for the country if given the chance. Much work is being done to improve the party in 2016 so we can get back to governing instead of groaning.

  • JayTee Sandy, UT
    April 17, 2014 12:10 p.m.

    I'd personally be very careful about trusting Obama to enforce our actual borders . . . or to allow you to keep your health plan, or allow you to keep your doctor, or have you save $2,500/year on your premiums, or have a transparent administration, or bring those Benghazi attackers to justice, or ensure that the IRS doesn't attack conservative groups, or not write rubber checks and run up the deficit like the previous administration, or etc, etc, etc, etc, etc. I'd be very careful about saying I'd agree with or align with him on ANYTHING of any substance.

  • SoCalChris Riverside, CA
    April 17, 2014 12:56 p.m.

    delasalle 6:42 p.m. April 15, 2014 stole my thunder. I wonder how many of those who are routinely shrill on immigration are cheering Clive Bundy?

    I'm at a loss as to how anyone can presume to understand LDS doctrine better than the First Presidency and advocate an unnecessarily harsh position on immigration based on the 12th AOF or some other scripture. I'm pretty sure Pres Uchtdorf is familiar with the 12 AOF.

    The laws can be changed to show compassion for those who made decisions many of us might have made under the same circumstances. Deport the bad apples but provide a way for decent members of the community to square themselves with the law.

  • NeilT Clearfield, UT
    April 17, 2014 1:13 p.m.

    Illegal immigration is an economic problem, not a criminal problem. The far right want to use immigration policy as a way to keep Hispanics from coming to America. They are terrified of amnesty because amnesty leads to citizenship which lead to voting rights. It is all political.
    I wonder how many who are opposed to immigration reform would do the exact the same thing if they lived in an impoverished third world country. It easy to say just come legally. What if your country is controlled by drug cartels and remaining could be a life or death decision. Would you be willing to wait five years for a visa. And what about cost. How many impoverished families can afford the immigration fees. My wife immigrated from Russia. Total cost twenty five thousand dollars without the services of an immigration attorney.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    April 17, 2014 4:30 p.m.

    To "NeilT" how is illegal immigration not a criminal problem? You do realize that when many of those illegal immigrants get jobs that they are often using stolen identities, including Social Security numbers? They can destroy the credit of your child before you child is in Elementary school.

    Also, if you look at the crime rate of the children of illegal immigrants, it is higher than for the nation as a whole.

    In addition to being both an economic problem and a criminal problem, it is a security problem. If you search the internet there are news articles about the border patrol finding known terrorists trying to get into the US. Do you want more bombings in the US?

  • oldcougar Orem, UT
    April 18, 2014 7:36 a.m.

    I support the prophet on this one. I believe by supporting him I am following God's will. I happen to agree with the Utah compact. If any of you think most of these "illegal immigrants" are vile criminals, you are naive and need to get out a little more. Sure, we hear about the very few bad ones every day, but we don't read about those who are doing so much of the work that makes our lives better. We celebrate baseball players who defect and receive deferential treatment upon entering illegally (all arranged with their potential millions of dollars), and we want to send back those who brave dangerous paths to get here to make a modest living.

    We could easily have "rule of law" if we passed reasonable laws. Our immigration laws are horribly broken and ineffective.

  • suzyk#1 Mount Pleasant, UT
    April 18, 2014 10:17 a.m.

    To: Richard B - what you said was absolutely right...thank you

  • Downtownz Salt Lake City, UT
    April 19, 2014 7:52 p.m.

    @Chris B & Richard B

    I imagine the laws of heaven will be just. Our immigration laws are not always so. Heaven would not deport you for having checked a box, saying you are a citizen, on an application for employment, when in fact your parents never told you that you weren't a citizen, and you had no reason to suspect that you weren't: you grew up here, speak only English, went to school with all your friends, played on the high school sports team, and then tried to get a job after you graduated from high school. YES, this happens all the time. There are many intricacies of immigration law that are cold and harsh and completely inhumane. If you disagree, just do a little research into the ACTUAL LAW.

  • anti-liar Salt Lake City, UT
    April 20, 2014 9:48 p.m.

    Downtownz

    If what you are saying is true then that is all the more reason to draw the line at the law. If people who grew up having no idea they were here illegally were required to return -- with the parents who brought them here (remember them?) -- to their lawful countries of residence, then word would spread and other parents would think twice about illegally trafficking their children across international lines.

    On the other hand, if we allow such children to stay and also say, "we must not deport the parents either since this would break up the family," then guess what happens? Countless parents then take advantage of this "exception" by -- you guessed it -- illegally trafficking their children into this country, who then effectively function as back-door tickets to the USA for these families.

    But it is far more likely that most of these children ARE brought up to know that they are here illegally and are briefed in how to live "in the shadows" so as to not draw attention to their families' illegal residency status.

    Immigration law enforcement does not "break up families." People break up their own families by willfully choosing to flout the law.

  • gottscheer Ogden, UT
    Nov. 22, 2014 10:46 p.m.

    I think the LDS Church is totally wrong about this subject. These illegal immigrants are using the system and there children are putting tremendous pressure on all our institutions. They should be deported and have to come to the U.S. by legal means. Illegal immigrants are stealing from our children and tax dollars. They get free education, free health care, and no doubt many of them getting welfare resources. It is time for American's to stand up against this invasion.