LDS Freedom Forum

I'm just wanting a snapshot of people here, do you support amnesty, are you for deportation, or some middle ground.

I am for hardline deportation. Any amnesty will simply encourage more illegal immigrants ie the creation of a de facto open border and I can't see why the US is required of all the nations to have an open border.

The Senate Democrat bill is racist because it presumes deportation will begin again after the amnesty, and if deportation is racist today it will be racist the day after we grant amnesty.

I am for the full dismantling of the welfare/warfare state, thus making immigration a non-issue.

I don't think that solution is on the table.

"Striking at the root" solutions rarely are on the table. tsk tsk.

Your "solution" is nothing more than hacking at the brances and creating more evil by a ramped up police/surveillance state.

is it not odd that the church says to gather to your own lands, and yet they seem to want amnesty for the illegals? All i know is God's house is one of order, and illegals should obey the laws of citizenship requirements for their country of choice. Since the church pushes gathering to your own country, what gives? could it be the 100,000 plus illegals in Utah that give cheap labor to some of Utah's richest corporations? If the church wants amnesty, what are they doing to help the 'mormon illegals become citizens?

They need to all be sent back, and do things correctly (in order)…if i were in their shoes i would not try to come into a country illegally and then try to get benefits from that countries working class paying taxes so i can get free stuff, etc…..

ajax wrote:I am for the full dismantling of the welfare/warfare state, thus making immigration a non-issue.

This times 1,000. The problem isn't all immigration, at least I don't believe it is. The problem is people that immigrate with the goal of taking from others without providing anything in return.

The statement "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints discourages its members from entering any country without legal documentation, and from deliberately overstaying legal travel visas." should be adequate explanation of the Church's position on illegal immigration. ( http://newsroom.lds.org/article/immigra ... -statement" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; )

I firmly believe that illegal immigration and amnesty has been and is still being fomented by latter-day gadiantons to make a shambles of this country by destroying its culture, siphoning off its wealth, and increasing the size of the socialist voting bloc by securing voting rights for immigrants of socialist persuasion.

ajax wrote:"Striking at the root" solutions rarely are on the table. tsk tsk.

Your "solution" is nothing more than hacking at the brances and creating more evil by a ramped up police/surveillance state.

My solution was simply an exercise in brevity, conveying that illegals should go back under the law one way or the other.

How do you reply to the cry that we need to be loving and chartable. My response is that I strongly disagree with those who believe that righteousness and charity include supporting initiatives, programs and legislation that force people to involuntarily contribute to the welfare of others. To contribute of one's own wealth to charity is righteous, but to use other people's wealth for charity is legalized plunder (a.k.a. theft).

lundbaek wrote:How do you reply to the cry that we need to be loving and chartable.

I'd ask them what's charitable about illegals stealing identity and exploiting American citizens! Wouldn't you call that national suicide?

Many members of the Church perceive most illegal immigrants as kind, humble, hardworking people who deserve a chance at a better life. And I cannot deny that. Also, many claim immigrants will have a better chance of learning about and accepting the gospel here than in other countries. Many clain those of us who oppose amnesty and further illegal immigration are racially bigoted. We all have different perspectives on this problem.

lundbaek wrote:Many members of the Church perceive most illegal immigrants as kind, humble, hardworking people who deserve a chance at a better life. And I cannot deny that. Also, many claim immigrants will have a better chance of learning about and accepting the gospel here than in other countries. Many clain those of us who oppose amnesty and further illegal immigration are racially bigoted. We all have different perspectives on this problem.

How many of these illegals are upstanding, honest and good people? How many are in street gangs? How many are in our jails? Does allowing amnesty allow more criminal activity?
How would any one of us be treated if we sneaked across the border into Mexico and later got caught.
Another issue I see is that by our country becoming socialistic, including amnesty, will eventually turn this country into the same state of evil and chaos the illegals are now running from. So what is gained? Has anyone looked at a genocide chart lately?

Here's one way illegal immigrants gets transported and sometimes caught.

Here's a winner for you:

3 year old killed by an illegal immigrant drunk driver. Right out there in Utah, no less.

http://www.ksl.com/?sid=28496541&nid=14 ... featured-1

sevenator wrote:Here's a winner for you:

3 year old killed by an illegal immigrant drunk driver. Right out there in Utah, no less.

http://www.ksl.com/?sid=28496541&nid=14 ... featured-1

Nowhere in the article does it say that the man was an illegal immigrant. Most latinos here are here legally, you can't just see someone with dark skin, a mustache and a Spanish name and call them illegal.

A land stolen by foreigners who, by a so called Manifest Destiny, thought it right to butcher the indigenous peoples and exploit the natural resources, is ironically declared the land of the free and home of the brave, while pushing off the native men, women and children, whose right it is to possess the land.

"Send them back to where they came from," the masses ignorantly cry. "They have no legal right to be here!"

Their only reply as the natives stand their ground, "We never left!"

Something to think about.

ajax wrote:I am for the full dismantling of the welfare/warfare state, thus making immigration a non-issue.

yes, the poll needed an option like that.

coachmarc wrote:A land stolen by foreigners who, by a so called Manifest Destiny, thought it right to butcher the indigenous peoples and exploit the natural resources, is ironically declared the land of the free and home of the brave, while pushing off the native men, women and children, whose right it is to possess the land.

"Send them back to where they came from," the masses ignorantly cry. "They have no legal right to be here!"

Their only reply as the natives stand their ground, "We never left!"

Something to think about.

Coachmarc....I understand your feelings. However, the B of M prophesies that this land of promise would be the home of many people who would establish a country that was condusive for the restoration of the gospel. In saying that...I understand your feelings and it doesn't make right the things that were done wrong. On the other hand, that too was prophesied to happen...and it is through the gentiles that the Lamanites would find the gospel again.

coachmarc wrote:A land stolen by foreigners who, by a so called Manifest Destiny, thought it right to butcher the indigenous peoples and exploit the natural resources, is ironically declared the land of the free and home of the brave, while pushing off the native men, women and children, whose right it is to possess the land.

"Send them back to where they came from," the masses ignorantly cry. "They have no legal right to be here!"

Their only reply as the natives stand their ground, "We never left!"

Something to think about.

Whose right is it to possess the land? I have always found this to be a shallow argument. The majority of lands in the world are possessed by those who butchered their predecessors. The Canaanites could use this argument against Israel. At what point do a dispossessed people lose the right to their land? When they lose the power to retain it.

You end up with God being the only person who gives the "right" to possess a land and the power to retain it.

Using that argument today is even more shallow due to the fact that there are many "native" Americans today. How many are blood relatives to both groups at the same time that are US Citizens? How many of these "natives" have never had ancestors who fought and bled on both sides for the piece of land? Never left? Most never were here!

Anyhow, I get the underlying sentiment, but it's pretty much false emotional blackmail with no meaning other than being racist. Most Americans can claim the majority of the world by that argument. The same is true for many other peoples of the world. I know with my roots I can claim everything except maybe(and I stress MAYBE) parts of Asia. My forebears were killing each other continually over the "right" to possess a land.

God gives the right and no one else.

IMO, at no point do dispossessed people lose their right to their land as only God gives that right, which is my entire point.

coachmarc wrote:IMO, at no point do dispossessed people lose their right to their land as only God gives that right, which is my entire point.

Probably a better way of wording it in my opinion is, "The only truly dispossessed people are those God has dispossessed".

Regardless, agree with your statement, disagree with the parable used earlier.

RaVaN wrote:

coachmarc wrote:IMO, at no point do dispossessed people lose their right to their land as only God gives that right, which is my entire point.

Probably a better way of wording it in my opinion is, "The only truly dispossessed people are those God has dispossessed".

Agreed

RaVaN wrote:Regardless, agree with your statement, disagree with the parable used earlier.

Wasn't a parable. It's historically accurate, but arguably too complex to fit neatly into my short narrative.

I'm Hispanic but I'm also an American citizen from birth. Now I believe that laws should be obeyed and even though I'm Hispanic, I don't like the Immigration Bill which is being debated at the moment nor do I support it. As much as I love my people, I don't want an amnesty. Now as far as God is concerned, I do believe that the God wants us all to gather in our own lands. Or at least that He has assigned a gathering place for each nation and people.

But I hear much talk here about obeying the law. Now the supreme law of the land is the Constitution. But we don't abide by the Constitution anymore. We have ignored the Constitution for more than 100 years. For more than 100 years, laws have been passed that are completely contrary to the Constitution, in the language of the Founding Fathers. Welfare at any level, even to citizens, is unconstitutional and wrong. Subsidized student loans are unconstitutional. Pell grants are unconstitutional. Minimum wage laws is a clear example. Laws to supposedly protect the employee are unconstitutional as well. The mandating of certain employment benefits is unconstitutional. The income tax is unconstitutional. Now the reason why I mention the income tax is because there are laws, that encourage an employer to offer health insurance to an employee since it is tax exempt. All these laws are unconstitutional. Illegal immigration is not the problem. It is only a symptom. A symptom of the real problem.

The real problem is that for many years we have all, together, stopped abiding the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND. If we did, then immigration would not be a problem. There wouldn't be no such thing as illegals coming for "cheap labor". The term "cheap labor" exists only because we have, in an unconstitutional manner, made labor really expensive. Instead of fighting "cheap labor", fight "unconstitution labor". Everyone would have to compete at the same level. American citizens have all sold themselves as the people of Akish did. Now we're all suffering the consequences of it. Take all these bad laws down and you'll see that "illegal Immigration" will cease. It would not be a problem.

Ask yourselves why it wasn't the problem more than 100 years ago. Ask yourselves why immigration, more than 100 years ago, always helped the country.

I heard this once and I thought it was really true: when the European settlers came they felt that it was their right to take the land because they felt God had given it to them. And indeed, the Book of Mormon says God did. The people that had been living here before the European settlers came felt that it was their right to keep the land. And indeed, the Book of Mormon says God had given it to them too. Both were angry at each other though. And when you think about it, the land did not belong to either of them. Who does this land belong to? Why does it belong to us? It doesn't, it belongs to God! It's His! He made it! When God placed Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, He made them (and at the same time each and everyone of us too) stewards of His land. To cultivate it, to take of it, to provide for ourselves and have joy therein. That is it! We're all just stewards only! Nothing more! Now I'm a strong believer of National sovereignty and of the Constitution, I don't want there to be a North American Union. But think about the Book of Mormon, at their more righteous moments, the nephites and the lamanites had free commerce with each other and people could go from one land to the other freely. They had borders still, but they understood true freedom. They may not have had a Constitution, but they did have the same principles.

The problem is not illegal immigration. The solution is neither amnesty nor deportation. The solution is to abide by the Constitution, in the language of the Founding Fathers. The solution is to obey the commandments of God to not add or take away from it. Once we're doing that, there will be no such thing as illegal immigration nor illegals coming for "cheap labor".

ajax wrote:I am for the full dismantling of the welfare/warfare state, thus making immigration a non-issue.

THIS!!!!!! :ymapplause: :ymapplause:

In fact, I will go as far as to say that during this unconstitutional system of ours, we need "cheap labor". It would completely devastate our economy if we deport or grant amnesty. Here's why.

Let's say that you round up all illegals and you kick them out. This will cause one of at least two outcomes or more.

1st outcome

Those "cheap labor" jobs are offered to American Citizens. Right off the bat, these employers will have to account for more expenses (from all the unconstitutional benefits and protections that we American citizens enjoy) and will either have to close, raise costs or not hire that many people. This will not help unemployment and will definitely put heavier burdens on our wallets.

2nd outcome

These companies outsource. This will not help overcome unemployment.

Now lets say we grant amnesty.

Now these people working in "cheap labor" positions will now have to, by law, receive all the unconstitutional benefits and protections we American citizens enjoy and will ultimately make unemployment and prices skyrocket.

We have to understand how the economy functions. Neither deportation nor amnesty is the answer.

Lets not be hypocritical, get rid of all these unconstitutional laws, benefits and protections and it will end illegal immigration. There would be no such thing as illegal immigration nor "cheap labor".

Link to the story I provided was furnished by a man claiming to be the uncle of the 3 year-old in a post on another (non-religion based) forum that I frequent. I do not know if he is the mother or father's sibling.

From his post:

Our family needs prayers during this difficult time. His older brother was sitting right next to him during the accident and his last memory of his little brother will be of him dying at the scene. The driver was an uninsured illegal from mexico...The driver tried to walk away but was luckily detained by the good folks that stopped to help.

Exercise your own judgement, but you don't really think anyone in the media would report that the man was illegal, do you?