Well, I must say that this issue has made me decide that if I knew someone was an illegal immigrant I would turn them in regardless of religion. This is partly because I don’t believe it is equal to speeding, but more closely related to an invasion and act of war; although not necessarily the same thing. In fact, if I learned someone was an illegal alien I would neither baptise or give a calling to that person. I have never been in that situation that I know of, but my feelings are set! Now, the question would be what consiquences it would have for me to refuse. Does anyone know what has happened to someone who has refused a baptism or ordination? Is there eclesiatical reprimanding or simply passing the responsibility? At any rate, I would turn them in to the authorities as enemies of national security.
Now, I am not against changing the law to make it more streamlined to legally enter the U.S. (although a blanket allowance is NOT an option I will accept). However, until we find a way to make it less uncomprehensible for immigrants to enter legally and protect the already legal citizens at the same time, than I want a moritorium on immigration other than with very strictly enforced visas.
My own opinion about the actions of the Church? Perhaps they should rethink how they do religious business until the laws change. In the past I can see how they could turn a blind eye as everyone else seems to have done the same and made immigration law into no-law. Currently, however, that is not the case and the Church should start following the law. It is true that immigration is a government, and not eclesiastical, issue. However, the Church's involvement in law making has changed that status at least periferally. I am not against the Church trying to influence and change the law. I am, and so are many LDS members, against it breaking the law on an issue that doesn't seem moral enough for civil disobediance justification.
To answer a few questions brought up at another blog.
Would you still be for it if you knew that such enforcement would increase the cost of a head of lettuce to $6.35 (as someone mentioned earlier)?
Yes, it is a small price to pay to protect the United States from the influx of murderers, rapists, and those who have no business getting here without going through proper channels. I would certainly not move to another country without doing whatever was needed legally to live in, say, Canada. It isn't about money. Its about national security and doing the right thing!
what about good Mormon employers (and I wouldn’t be surprised if there are a few here in the Phoenix area that do this) who stop by the open air labor market and pick up a few guys without papers for some casual construction-type labor?
They are breaking the law and acting dishonest. This should cause them to rethink their worthiness to go to the Temple. This goes beyond the "speeding" argument as I have said above, because it is close to an invasion; usually considered an act of War by other nations.
Would you feel compelled to turn Bro. Employer in for labor law violations? He’s violating The Law as well!
Actually, I would follow the gospel ideal first. Go to that person and explain what you find seriously wrong with what they are doing. If they continue to support illegals I would think of raising my hands in objection to callings within the Church. Finally, after deliberation and objection, I would turn them in for violating the law.
I have no qualms about this one bit! Its time to "lay down the law" in order to protect the U.S. against foriegn invaders who can do harm and just slip away into the dark mists of Mexico. The other alternative is that if you are an illegal who breaks the law, then instant death penalty no matter how small the infraction. After all, you aren't really a citizen and could just as easily be a spy or terrorist. Due process of guilt or innocents is, of course, expected. If found innocent they should immediately be sent back to where they came from. Extreme, but it might deter the more sinister elements from deciding its easier to do their damage over the boarder and on U.S. soil. If they want in, they should be documented and easily traced with a declaration of discernable reasons for entering.
Like I said above, I am not against streamlining the immigration laws making it less confusing to get in. What I am against is making it so easy that any can get in, or not doing something about those who are currently getting in and getting away with it against the moral and physical safety of this nation. I know of no nation that is so open, against its own laws, to allowing people from other nations to willy nilly come right in. My guess is that even Canada isn't so open; or at least probably follows its own lenient laws about citizenship.