A Square Moral Compass: Baptism Worthiness vs Temple Worthiness vis a vis Immigration

[Guest]

LOL. I've processed the tithing receipts from illegal immigrants. The church is LOSING money because the non-payors/welfare recipients significantly outpace the donations received. If the church was really being business savvy they'd clamp down on illegal immigrant baptisms.

There was supposed to be some sarcasm attached to the part about tithing.

But on somewhat more serious note, the US government is in the same situation. On the surface it looks good, but as you have stated, the numbers don't support it. And if there's anything religios leaders and political leaders don't understand, its math. Take, for example, this whole instant increase in missionary numbers. The church is splitting missions, building more MTC infrastructure, etc. without realizing that in a few years, my guess is 3, the number of missionaries in the field will get back to about where they were a year ago. This will be scewed a little because they lowered the sister missionary age but for the most part I'm guessing the numbers come way down. All the LDS leaders have really done is shift the missionary age down a year.

[Guest]

How is being an illegal alien not a sin? Isn't it being dishonest? Is cheating on taxes a sin? Here is the church's stance on income taxes:



So if you are here illegally than you may not being paying your proper income taxes on the funds you are receiving.

Also how does one get called as a bishop if you are not legal in this country? How would you perform non-temple civil weddings? How do you morally hold and issue temple recommends? Depending on the state how would you get a driver's license and be able to get to the all of the church related functions?

Lastly based on the statute below, would giving a ride to church to an undocumented member (whether bishop or newly baptized) put other members in jeopardy of violating the law? What about rides to work? What about letting an illegal alien in your home to home teach you or giving them things as their home teacher put you at risk? As a bishop if you give funds and food orders to an illegal alien which allows them to stay in the country is that breaking the law? Should we be putting bishops and relief society presidents in the position of potential felony charges in order to fullfill their church callings?

Seems pretty plain to me. Sounds like the church needs to turn the reinforcement of this policy up a notch. Of course, though, this would most definitely not be a good PR move on the church's part.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Also, I'm sure any church leader, just like any business leader, would see new members as an increase in tithing revenue and, therefore, a good thing.

lol.

We should invent a new word for this kind of cynicism.

[Pheidippides]

LOL. I've processed the tithing receipts from illegal immigrants. The church is LOSING money because the non-payors/welfare recipients significantly outpace the donations received. If the church was really being business savvy they'd clamp down on illegal immigrant baptisms.

Dammit, Indy, that's twice in one day! I can levy a lot of criticisms at the church but leaders trying to increase tithing revenue via baptism is not one of them. I would love to see an analysis but I would think that new convert baptisms, as a whole, probably scarcely break even if that, and immigrant labor is hardly on the wealthier end of the spectrum.

Usually I'd look for a real stat head to prove me wrong. Apparently not today.

[BigPiney]

The most important issue that has yet been addressed is, who the hell holds a baptism at 2:15 on a Tuesday?

Excellent question. Provbably the same people that thought it would be a good idea to have it almost 3 hours after the meeting block on Mother's Day. I left home on Sunday at 8:30 and got home at 5:30. Good thing I had already made the cheesecake that morning, along with muffins, and put the dinner in the crockpot. (yeah that is what you are getting when I am gone all day)

[Guest]

It's a known fact that some church leaders in the past, and quite possible the present, have hid pedophiles from the law. So how can they be expected to uphold church policy and government laws pertaining to immigration.

[Indy Coug]

It's a known fact that some church leaders in the past, and quite possible the present, have hid pedophiles from the law. So how can they be expected to uphold church policy and government laws pertaining to immigration.

[Jeff Lebowski]

It's a known fact that some church leaders in the past, and quite possible the present, have hid pedophiles from the law. So how can they be expected to uphold church policy and government laws pertaining to immigration.

lol.

Doubling down. Nice.

[Guest]

lol.

Doubling down. Nice.

It's lunch time and I'm bored. And I may or may not have had enough caffeine this morning.

[wuapinmon]

The most important issue that has yet been addressed is, who the hell holds a baptism at 2:15 on a Tuesday?

Well, as a result of being an undocumented worker, she has no rights with her employers. She could only get time off from both of her jobs (picking strawberries & busing tables at a "Mexican" joint--FMCoug, note my Cafe Rio quote marks) to do it then. She hasn't been to church twice, but screw the rules and Preach My Gospel, it is absolutely essential that we get someone baptized the very first possible moment we can so that .........what was the reason again?

I took 7 months to get baptized; I attended church for five months straight before taking the plunge. I think a longer introduction can be beneficial. I'm not convinced that we're helping people by rushing them to baptism.

[wuapinmon]

On a related note, what is it with professors and the phrase "via-a-vis"? I don't think I have ever heard this phrase used by anyone other than a college professor.

What the saint said. And, I don't remember your last typo, but 2013 is no longer perfect.

[Indy Coug]

I took 7 months to get baptized; I attended church for five months straight before taking the plunge. I think a longer introduction can be beneficial. I'm not convinced that we're helping people by rushing them to baptism.

We aren't. Period.

[Omaha 680]

I know the Church doesn't withhold temple recommends from illegals, but will they call illegals to serve full-time missions in the US?

My son's current companion is of Mexican descent, but he himself was born in the US - which lead to a discussion with my wife. The rest of our son's comp's family - including younger siblings - are undocumented, living in LA. If a Mexican national residing in Mexico is called to serve a mission in the US, they get a visa for him/her to serve. So what do they do for illegals in the US who want to serve? Send them to Mexico, or keep them (illegally) in the US?

It is my understanding that illegal immigrants in the US who want to serve are called to missions in the US to avoid legal trouble. I don't know if this is official church policy but my cousin knew several such missionaries while serving in Long Beach.

[statman]

There was supposed to be some sarcasm attached to the part about tithing.

But on somewhat more serious note, the US government is in the same situation. On the surface it looks good, but as you have stated, the numbers don't support it. And if there's anything religios leaders and political leaders don't understand, its math. Take, for example, this whole instant increase in missionary numbers. The church is splitting missions, building more MTC infrastructure, etc. without realizing that in a few years, my guess is 3, the number of missionaries in the field will get back to about where they were a year ago. This will be scewed a little because they lowered the sister missionary age but for the most part I'm guessing the numbers come way down. All the LDS leaders have really done is shift the missionary age down a year.

I don't think LDS leaders think the numbers will go down to where they were before. There are a whole lot of 19 year old sisters going and if you talk to the teenagers down through the YM ranks, the decision making process looks something like this:

Graduate from HS & go to college for 1 year After 1 year of college there are two key questions - Am I dating someone who I would consider marrying in the near future? Do I know what I want to major in/what career I want to have?

N/N = mission
N/Y = you've got some prayin' to do
Y/N = you've got some prayin' to do
Y/Y = no mission

And you're also ignoring the fact that they are seeing an increase in the number of men who are going. Much of that will be a one-shot deal. But some of it will be those who would have gone right out of high school above and beyond those who would go a year or so later. A certain percentage will be lost in that intervening time, and that percentage is a permanent increase, not just a shift in the class of 2013 vs 2014.

[Portland Ute]

There was supposed to be some sarcasm attached to the part about tithing.

But on somewhat more serious note, the US government is in the same situation. On the surface it looks good, but as you have stated, the numbers don't support it. And if there's anything religios leaders and political leaders don't understand, its math. Take, for example, this whole instant increase in missionary numbers. The church is splitting missions, building more MTC infrastructure, etc. without realizing that in a few years, my guess is 3, the number of missionaries in the field will get back to about where they were a year ago. This will be scewed a little because they lowered the sister missionary age but for the most part I'm guessing the numbers come way down. All the LDS leaders have really done is shift the missionary age down a year.

Unless the "bar" is lowered back to where it was pre "raising the bar."