Feeling Conflicted Over Elder Kearon's Talk About Refugees

Elder Patrick Kearon, of the quorum of the Seventy, gave a moving talk about the Church's call to help refugees during the Sunday afternoon session of the April 2016 General Conference. 

Many Mormons were clearly moved by his talk. However, there were many of Mormons who felt conflicted about his talk. I can see this conflict in debates among members of the Church after General Conference on social media sites.

Before I explain the conflict felt by many members in the Church, I want to make it clear at the beginning that we are all for helping refugees. We fully support the Church's efforts in mobilizing members to gather food, water, clothing, bedding, and bags full of sanitary items so that they can ship it to refugee camps in the Middle East and Europe. 

Elder Kearon's talk certainly pulled at our heartstrings. Elder Kearon raised the valid point that Christ himself, at one point in his life, was a refugee when his parents fled to Egypt when he was a little child. He talked about how Mormons were refugees when they were forced to flee from place to place by angry mobs and ultimately had to leave the United States to find peace beyond the western frontier of the United States by moving into what was then Mexican territory. We know that many in the Church were once refugees. We clearly heard the call to be compassionate and charitable towards refugees that are escaping war, famine, and economic uncertainty in their homelands. 

It was clear that Elder Utchdorf was moved by Elder Kearon's talk afterwards. Elder Uchtdorf talked about being a refugee prior to Elder Kearon's talk in General Conference.

However, many members couldn't help thinking about the ongoing political debate in America and in Europe about letting refugees into their homelands during his talk.  Many of us were thinking about how Europe suffered repeated terrorist attacks because they allowed people to come into their country without asking any questions about who was coming in. 

Elder Kearon didn't mention anything about opening the borders and letting as many refugees in as possible. His talk simply focused on the need for members of the Church to help the refugees. He explicitly stated in this talk that his desire was to focus on refugees themselves and not on immigration policy or the debates over the definition of a refugee. 

Yet, many members were torn between having compassion for these refugees and the desire for security against terrorism by refugees coming from certain parts of the world. Clearly, the hot topics of immigation, terrorism, and other issues came to mind to some people when they heard this talk even when Elder Kearon explicitly stated that he would be avoiding these issues.

Correctly or incorrectly, some people got the impression that we should sacrifice our desire for safety and security in the name of compassion. Many of us have a legitimate concern about sacrificing security for compassion by opening up our borders to people who wish to do us harm. The United States government, through both the FBI and DHS, have admitted that we have no way to verify who is coming into our country. Many members of the Church want to help the refugees, but they have a legitimate concern about their safety not being compromised while helping others.

We fully acknowledge that not every refugee is a terrorist bent on hurting as many as possible. Refugees do flee from all parts of the world to come to places of safety. Not all of refugees come from the Middle East. But some of the terrorists did come into Europe during the large wave of refugees who came from the Middle East last summer. And this fact certainly is still a presence in many people's minds.

Its clear that the recent events in Europe have affected some people's reception of Elder Kearon's talk. Under different circumstances or had the recent terror attacks not occurred, the response to his talk would have been more universally accepted. Instead, many people felt conflicted about his talk. Many debates erupted on social media sites about the issue of compassion versus security.

I don't know how to resolve the conflict between the call for compassion and the legitimate desire for personal safety while helping others. I don't know what the answer to that problem is. I felt this conflict while I listened to his talk. I confess to having participated in these online debates on various social media platforms.

I have been reflecting on this inner conflict and thinking about the points raised by both sides. I decided to write this post to ask the readers for solutions on this conflict. I don't want a debate. I want answers. I want to be Christlike but I also want to protect myself and others at the same time. 

How can members of the Church balance their desire for compassion and safety? Is such a balance possible? 

LDS Church Releases New Statement On Illegal Immigration

The LDS Church has recently released a new statement to the media about its position on illegal immigration: 

Around the world, debate on the immigration question has become intense.  That is especially so in the United States. Most Americans agree that the federal government of the United States should secure its borders and sharply reduce or eliminate the flow of undocumented immigrants. Unchecked and unregulated, such a flow may destabilize society and ultimately become unsustainable.

As a matter of policy, 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.

What to do with the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants now residing in various states within the United States is the biggest challenge in the immigration debate.  The bedrock moral issue for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is how we treat each other as children of God.  

The history of mass expulsion or mistreatment of individuals or families is cause for concern especially where race, culture, or religion are involved.  This should give pause to any policy that contemplates targeting any

As those on all sides of the immigration debate in the United States have noted, this issue is one that must ultimately be resolved by the federal government.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is concerned that any state legislation that only contains enforcement provisions is likely to fall short of the high moral standard of treating each other as children of God. 

The Church supports an approach where undocumented immigrants are allowed to square themselves with the law and continue to work without this necessarily leading to citizenship. 

In furtherance of needed immigration reform in the United States, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints supports a balanced and civil approach to a challenging problem, fully consistent with its tradition of compassion, its reverence for family, and its commitment to law.

This is a surprising statement in light of the LDS Church's agreement with the Utah Compact and with the  Church's previous statement stating that they had no official position on illegal immigration:

Kim Farah, a spokeswoman for the LDS headquarters in Salt Lake City, said in an e-mail that elected officials who are Mormons do not represent the position of the church. She said the church has also not taken a position on immigration, which is "clearly the province of government."

"However, Church leaders have urged compassion and careful reflection when addressing immigration issues affecting millions of people," she said in the e-mail.

Perhaps the biggest reason behind the Church's change on its position of illegal immigration is the fact that an LDS Bishop in Utah was arrested for illegal immigration: 

A branch president for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was arrested and jailed for suspicion of illegal immigration.

Felix Joaquin Callejas-Hernandez and his family were arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents on April 19 in Draper.  President Callejas-Hernandez and his family was booked into the Utah County Jail.  His wife and two teenage children were released April 22.  Felix remains in jail as the deportation process continues.

However, this arrest didn't come out of the blue. It came after they had refused a judge's order for them to be deported a few years ago:

Haley said Callejas’ wife had been ordered deported by a federal immigration judge in 2008. The rest of the family had been ordered deported in 2009.

Haley said all had filed appeals with the Board of Immigration Appeals, which dismissed their cases earlier this month.

The arrest highlighted the Church's "don't ask, don't tell" policy in which it turns a blind eye to members who enter the country illegally and many cases, like this bishop, who defy a judge's order to leave the country.  Not only do they turn a blind eye to it, but they allow members to hold leadership positions, serve missions and enter the temple. 

The LDS Church wants to keep this policy going as long as possible. They are trying to have it both ways in which they demand members of the Church to obey the laws of the land yet insist that members and non-members should have compassion on illegals for choosing to break the law.  An organization cannot simultaneously ask members to obey the law but permit some members to break the law and be in good standing with the that organization. Period. 

But then again, some LDS leaders don't view illegal immigration as a criminal activity:  One general authority said that there was nothing inherently wrong about illegal immigration and compared it to a civil trespass: 

"The church's view of someone in undocumented status is akin, in a way, to a civil trespass," said Elder Marlin K. Jensen of the Seventy, relating it to coming onto someone's property uninvited. "There is nothing inherent or wrong about that status."

Illegal Immigration is not the same as a civil trespass. Illegal immigration, by definition, is a crime. Regardless if its on the books or not, illegal immigration is inherently a criminal activity because its not private property that a person is crossing but an international border and they're entering the country without the government's permission.  

This new statement is a big improvement from its prior official position on illegal immigration. However, until the Church has an coherent and consistent policy on illegal immigration, LDS Church will face more embarrassing arrests. It will also continue to divide the Church among its members and leadership. It will continue to hold contradictory teachings and practices. 

LDS Church Under Fire From Opponents Of AZ SB 1070

Once it was discovered that, Sen. Russell Pearce, was the legislator behind Arizona's immigration law was a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, the Church has come under fire from the Hispanic community: 

Many Latinos who view the new law as unjust and discriminatory blame not only Pearce but the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. That is making it hard for Mormons to proselytize to the state's 1.8 million Latinos, whom the church views as key to future growth.

When the LDS Church was contacted by the press about the Senator Pearce's endorsement of Arizona SB 1070, it gave a very surprising response:

Kim Farah, a spokeswoman for the LDS headquarters in Salt Lake City, said in an e-mail that elected officials who are Mormons do not represent the position of the church. She said the church has also not taken a position on immigration, which is "clearly the province of government."

"However, Church leaders have urged compassion and careful reflection when addressing immigration issues affecting millions of people," she said in the e-mail.

It is odd that the Church has no official position on whether or not people ought to be allowed to have citizenship papers with them. Yet the Church does have an official position on illegal immigration.

Maybe Kim Farrah, the LDS spokeswoman, should read D&C 88: 3, 5-7, D&C 98:4-8, D&C 101:77 and the Twelfth Article of Faith if she is having trouble in figuring out what the official position of the LDS Church is on illegal immigration.

The fact that the Church doesn't have an "official" position on illegal immigration despite the fact that scriptures and modern Prophets have clearly stated that obedience to the laws of the land is necessary in being a good member of the Church is odd.

Furthermore, its strange that the LDS Church requires worthy members to carry and present their temple recommend as a requirement to enter into the Temple yet they have no official position with regards to state law that requires people to carry and present their legal papers as a condition to entering the United States?

I guess the Church really doesn't have a coherent or consistent official position on illegal immigration since the religion expects people to be obedient to the commandments as given in the House of The Lord yet many illegal immigrants are given temple recommends despite the fact that sneaking into America is a form of disobedience.

How the can the Church expect people to obey the commandments of God yet have no stance towards those who break the law of the land? This doesn't line up with D&C 58:21:

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.

One of the temple recommend questions is "Are you honest in your dealings with your fellowmen?" How can the Church expect people to be honest if they're handing out Temple recommends to Church members who violate the law by entering the country illegally?

Sneaking into America is not only a form of disobedience but a form of dishonesty.

Hopefully, the Church will figure out what its official position is on civil obedience is.