The anti-Christianity of the Racist Right

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Re: The anti-Christianity of the Racist Right

Post by _moksha »

rcrocket wrote: Damn those racist anti-immigrant laws which our own ancestors did not have to face. We have no moral imperative to keep the children of Lehi out of territory Mexico owned rightfully until 1848.

rcrocket


Did you also mention about the good source of cheap labor?
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
_ajax18
_Emeritus
Posts: 6914
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:56 am

Post by _ajax18 »

I don't know much either, but even I can see mass and illegal immigration is a huge drag on the economy. I just don't understand why more Americans aren't deeply troubled by it. I guess it's just hard to track and show them exactly how bad it's hitting them in the pocketbook.

I don't understand why the Church doesn't teach Latin Americans to be more careful with their reproductive habits. I think that is a very underestimated part of the problem.

Coggins while I'd love to think you're exactly right on this whole issue, but it's tough for me to see how the Church is different than any other interest group on this. First we had the Democrats embracing these people for cheap votes just as they've done with every other impoverished person. Just as with any socialistic program, the end result being that nobody gets much of anything at all, equal poverty. Then I get abandoned by my own Republican party because a few of those rich bastards at the top want cheap labor. Now I feel abandoned by my Church because they want cheap baptisms.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I would bet that the majority of America is not in favor of equally dividing up our earnings and taking on their type of lifestyle and values including large families, high disparity of wealth, and basically flushing this country down the toilet like the rest of Latin America etc. It's truly a case in democracy when the few have overpowered the masses by motives of a very narrow special interest.

The Soviet Union tried to show down Uncle Sam in a duel and Uncle Sam prevailed. Yet from what I see Uncle Sam is laying in a hospital bed right now on his economic deathbed sick with a bad case of Latino infection.
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
_rcrocket

Post by _rcrocket »

The Church sends 19-year-olds who are illegal immigrants on missions within the U.S. The Church knows of their status. What does that tell you about how the Church views the offense?

I hear you say that illegal immigration is a huge drain upon the U.S. economy. Certain sectors, that is true. But, in an aggregate sense, immigration contributes to the U.S. general welfare more than individual sectors are affected in the aggregate. Studies have been made about similar immigrants from Italy in the early 20th century. Approximately half were illiterate. Yet, today, their descendants are on parity with other immigrant populations in America.

But, this board is a Mormon-oriented Board. I make the post to point out to you that the Church does not deny a temple recommend for immigrant status, nor does it care about immigration status when it calls missionaries to full-time status. Moreover, the Church's welfare system assists in a huge way the families of illegal aliens. Nowhere do Church authorities in their sermons denounce the law-breaking of illegal immigrants.

Shouldn't this point tell you that that spewing forth from some on this board about illegal immigration is just right-ring rhetoric the Church does not endorse. Shouldn't this also tell you that local authorities who deny economic or spiritual support to illegal aliens, or who tell them to return to their countries of origin, say things the Church does not teach?

I submit to you that essential Christianity requires us to open our arms to the poor and the needy and to impart of our substance irrespective of immigration status. Whether they be the children of Lehi or not (I believe they are, notwithstanding the popular works of the LGT), my position remains the same.


rcrocket
_rcrocket

Post by _rcrocket »

ajax18 wrote:I don't understand why the Church doesn't teach Latin Americans to be more careful with their reproductive habits. I think that is a very underestimated part of the problem.


And look where that is getting Europe with its rising Muslim population.

rcrocket
_Jason Bourne
_Emeritus
Posts: 9207
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:00 pm

Post by _Jason Bourne »

The Church sends 19-year-olds who are illegal immigrants on missions within the U.S. The Church knows of their status. What does that tell you about how the Church views the offense?


That the Church is breaking the law.


But, this board is a Mormon-oriented Board. I make the post to point out to you that the Church does not deny a temple recommend for immigrant status, nor does it care about immigration status when it calls missionaries to full-time status. Moreover, the Church's welfare system assists in a huge way the families of illegal aliens. Nowhere do Church authorities in their sermons denounce the law-breaking of illegal immigrants.



So Coggins point has validity. Why can he not stop paying his taxes and still get a recemmend? If your theory is correct then this reflects a double standard for the Church.

Shouldn't this point tell you that that spewing forth from some on this board about illegal immigration is just right-ring rhetoric the Church does not endorse. Shouldn't this also tell you that local authorities who deny economic or spiritual support to illegal aliens, or who tell them to return to their countries of origin, say things the Church does not teach?


Assistance is typicalyleft up to the local leadership and in some cases some are way to liberel and in other cases they are way to stingy. I think it says nothing about Church policy per say.


I submit to you that essential Christianity requires us to open our arms to the poor and the needy and to impart of our substance irrespective of immigration status. Whether they be the children of Lehi or not (I believe they are, notwithstanding the popular works of the LGT), my position remains the same.



I agree that Christianity requires us to assist the poor and needy. I do not agree it requires a national policy of unbridled immigration.
_rcrocket

Post by _rcrocket »

Jason Bourne wrote:
The Church sends 19-year-olds who are illegal immigrants on missions within the U.S. The Church knows of their status. What does that tell you about how the Church views the offense?


That the Church is breaking the law.



Well, I've done some immigration work. What law?

rcrocket
_silentkid
_Emeritus
Posts: 1606
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 5:50 pm

Post by _silentkid »

rcrocket wrote:The Church sends 19-year-olds who are illegal immigrants on missions within the U.S. The Church knows of their status. What does that tell you about how the Church views the offense?


This happened in my mission. I was serving in El Paso and my companion admitted to me that he was an illegal immigrant who entered the country and used false documentation to get a driver's license. His stake president knew about it when he interviewed for his mission. Our mission president knew about it as well. I was told to keep it a secret for fear of local ward members finding out, many of whom worked for the border patrol.
_Jason Bourne
_Emeritus
Posts: 9207
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:00 pm

Post by _Jason Bourne »

rcrocket wrote:
Jason Bourne wrote:
The Church sends 19-year-olds who are illegal immigrants on missions within the U.S. The Church knows of their status. What does that tell you about how the Church views the offense?


That the Church is breaking the law.



Well, I've done some immigration work. What law?

rcrocket



I am not an expert but I assume that it is illegal to come to the US illeglally. Maybe the Church per say is not breaking the law. But if it says one must obey the law to get a TR or be baptized then it is turning a blind eye to this law but not others.

OTOH I assume the Church would not deny a TR for speeding or some other minor infraction. So, you tell me...what law is do illigal immigrants break and what level is it consdiered? Felony, misdeamenor????
_Rollo Tomasi
_Emeritus
Posts: 4085
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:27 pm

Post by _Rollo Tomasi »

Jason Bourne wrote:I am not an expert but I assume that it is illegal to come to the US illeglally. Maybe the Church per say is not breaking the law. But if it says one must obey the law to get a TR or be baptized then it is turning a blind eye to this law but not others.

OTOH I assume the Church would not deny a TR for speeding or some other minor infraction. So, you tell me...what law is do illigal immigrants break and what level is it consdiered? Felony, misdeamenor????

Current Church policy disqualifies a prospective missionary for "serious violation of civil law." I guess for the Church one's immigration status, even if technically illegal, is not considered a "serious" violation of civil law, while not paying taxes is. Just my $.02.
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."

-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
_ajax18
_Emeritus
Posts: 6914
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:56 am

Post by _ajax18 »

rcrocket wrote:
ajax18 wrote:I don't understand why the Church doesn't teach Latin Americans to be more careful with their reproductive habits. I think that is a very underestimated part of the problem.


And look where that is getting Europe with its rising Muslim population.

rcrocket


Can you be more specific? I wasn't aware that Europe was telling the Moslems to stop overpopulating?
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
Post Reply