If you have a specific problem with the content of the show, please use your elevated wisdom and understanding of the doctrine to prove your point.

Name calling, while using poor grammar, do nothing for your cause.

No one is claiming to speak for anyone but themselves. It is called LDS Liberty, because the hosts are LDS and try to make their case based on their understanding of the scriptures.

I am still flushing out my understanding of the subject and appreciate this podcast very much.

“Verily, verily, I say unto you, thus hath the Father commanded me—that I should give unto this people this land for their inheritance.”

This is Christ, quoting Father. might be important. Hows that for who has title to this land.

First, I enjoy the podcasts and the opportunity to invite people into discussions about principles of liberty and I appreciate the passion and involvement from those involved.

Rights are a gift from God to all men, but the Constitution is not a compact between our representatives and all men it is “FOR US AND OUR POSTERITY” not us and everyone in the world. :The people or the “US” ratified the constitution and they had no power to force it on others. Additionally, those who were not part of the agreement can not force those who are to include them.

We do not deny anyone opportunity to go to the celestial kingdom, however mere desire is not the standard for getting there. There are requirements, standards and ” A LAW” created in heaven that must be obeyed. Additionally mere desire to enter the temple isn’t sufficient to enter. There are requirements to enter.

Second, the states are not sovereign. The definition from 1828 dictionary (http://1828.sorabji.com/1828/words/s/sovereign.html) and current definition also indicate if the states are not entirely supreme in all decisions and are subject to the Federal government on some issues they can not also be sovereign (see Article 1 section 10 for three important powers the states are clearly subject to the federal government on)

The Constitution allows the Federal Government to tax and that is money we as posterity spend for defense. If those who are not under the contract are encouraged to receive the benefits of that they are encouraged to plunder and to theft of services from the representatives “our posterity” has hired and payed for. It is like you hiring a builder and me having him work on my house during time you have payed for. I of course am not referring to the fact that there are unjust taxes and socialism etc. Those are separate issues. I agree there are plenty of resources for all good people,b but those resources are unjustly controlled and manipulated and as long as they are and we invite others to partake we are not forcing them to accept socialism, but encouraging them to and with our current system it is dividing the pie and promoting the growth of socialism and illegitimate government. If we are going to have an open border policy with no standards for entrance (which the temple and the Celestial Kingdom will never have) then we should at least end socialism before doing so or the consequences of socialism are magnified and accelerated. BTW a complete open border policy in not Gods standard as mentioned above even with stewardships, but it is the agenda of the U.N. which I am in complete opposition to.

That isn’t to say that current laws are just either and standards for entrance could be minimal and include an oath to the constitution and maybe a few other things such as renouncing socialism. Then I say let all that agree to such in as they would strengthen us and be of more benefit than many natural born that are already here.

Third, there is an issue of property rights. Do we believe in property rights? Individually? Collectively? If stewards don’t control the property and can’t have say over it, is that stewardship?

Keep up the discussions and feel free to disagree :-)

My agreement with you on this point may be seen in this statement:

“Laws of nations are laws of man that reflect a people’s values. Often the people’s values coincide with natural law or Laws of God, sometimes they do not.”

and this one:

“God’s kingdom has begun to be established, but as of yet the laws of the United States are not the laws of a Celestial Kingdom. And perhaps they never will be. God will make an end of all Nations, before this earth becomes a celestial kingdom.”

I know my thoughts were presented with little organization. Sorry for the confusion. And thanks for the thought provoking podcast.

SCOTT B

I agree with the free exchange principle, illustrated in the Alma reference. And like Ben, I had the same thoughts when I read the passage, even before hearing this.

But I am opposed to free exchange contrary to law. Even if the law is repulsive to our sense of justice, it is the law.

I declare the virtue of rights, recognizing their source.

A man is not free simply because he declares himself so. Cain declared himself free, but this was folly. Only God can make a man free. And God cannot make a man free, who is disobedient to law.

Those who have not been given a law are not under the law. Those who are ignorant of a law are also not punished by that law. At least this is the case with laws of God. This is not often the case with laws of man.

The Constitution was established for the protection of all flesh, but currently its jurisdiction, and thus its ability to protect rights of all mankind, is limited.

Nevada and Utah and all other states in the Union, have entered into a contract, namely the Constitution, allowing free movement of citizens between the States. Sonora has not yet been admitted to this union. Thus its citizens do not enjoy the same blessings and freedoms as do the Citizens of Utah or Nevada.

A citizen of Sonora is no less worthy to become a citizen of God’s Kingdom than a citizen of Utah. We are all humans and are all God’s children.

Perhaps this is apocryphal, but I have read that Joseph Smith’s presidential platform included an invitation for Mexico and Canada, to unite with the United States under the Constitution, were they willing.

The just extent of recourse a religious society has in enforcing its laws is the right to remove a member from the society. A government on the other hand has authority to deprive a citizen or a subject, of liberty, property or even life, but of course only after due process.

You have to show a temple recommend to enter the temple. The angels that stand as sentinels allow you to pass into the Celestial Kingdom only upon the presentment of proof of citizenship in that kingdom.

You cannot enjoy the blessings of a kingdom if you don’t abide the law which governs it. A soul quickened only by a Telestial glory cannot inherit a terrestrial kingdom.

Understanding the boundaries of a kingdom is co-requisite to understanding its laws.

Laws are boundaries, and boundaries are laws. Laws preserve us perfect us and bring us freedom. Boundaries do the same. Disregard for boundaries leads to destruction and disorder.

A nation is defined by its borders. The lord confounded the languages of man. He made the nations from one blood and set the bounds of their habitation. The bounds of habitation and communication are less impenetrable than they once were, but they still exist.

God’s kingdom has begun to be established, but as of yet the laws of the United States are not the laws of a Celestial Kingdom. And perhaps they never will be. God will make an end of all Nations, before this earth becomes a celestial kingdom.

We ought to desire for all to come to Zion, put on her beautiful garments, or her strength, or her priesthood which she has a right to. But Zion should be established by law, and with order.

The number of people coming into Zion at one time was definitely an issue, which led to the revoking of blessings, and the delay of its establishment.

Immigration to any country, contrary to its laws is a crime. Thus any immigration law is about crime enforcement.

Also many crime enforcement laws include provision for dealing with citizens of other governments. Arizona’s recent crime enforcement law is an example. California’s penal code also has some provisions regarding treatment of persons who are not citizens of their State, as well as requirements of compliance with federal immigration laws, including “let me see your papers” provisions. But less people are outraged about California’s laws, perhaps because they are not enforced.

Laws of nations are laws of man that reflect a people’s values. Often the people’s values coincide with natural law or Laws of God, sometimes they do not. Immigration laws in the United States could just as easily be changed to allow all people to enter or leave temporarily, or to reside permanently.

If one’s ideas of good government dissuade him from supporting foreign intervention, it seems more consistent for him to believe, that if a change to a nations immigration laws is warranted, such a change should come from the people within, rather than from the people without. If one welcomes the influence of the people without, to be consistent one should also have less issue with foreign involvement, whether the issue is immigration, or nation building and regime change.

The issues of immigration and national security, as well as national stability are inter-related.

That a person was brought to this land by the hand of the Lord is not sufficient to establish that such person is a friend to this nation or its laws. A friend and a foe, a pilgrim and a jihadist, may be brought by the hand of the Lord to this Land, or to any land. God uses the wicked to punish the wicked. God commands in the armies of men and grants power to all governments, and all people, to carry out their own wills, so that in the end, all will acknowledge that the Judgments he pours out upon the wicked are just.

The city of New Jerusalem has a wall, described in great detail in the scriptures. Also a parable included in the same section revealing the Lord’s opinions on the Constitution, lament the destruction of a vineyard resulting from the failure of the servants in the vineyard to build a wall, and place watchmen on the tower.

It is clear to me that one lesson to be learned from that parable is we are most safe when we obey the prophets. To my knowledge no Church authority has interpreted this parable as being a commandment to build a wall between the United States and Mexico, but there may yet be some other principle of law regarding the establishment and safety of Zion in it.

Church statements urging citizens to engage in the political process, while maintaining political neutrality remind us that gospel principle may be found in all political parties. Statements regarding immigration remind us that the issue is complex and should be considered with much care and sensitivity.

The Church prays that Nations will open their doors to missionaries. But it also waits until it is invited to send missionaries. For, example, the Church does not baptize or proselyte in China, because it is against the law to proselyte there.

Also the Church removes missionaries from Nations whose governments require us to do so, and also from Nations where the political climate is unstable to the point that continued missionary presence is unsafe.

The gathering of scattered Israel is no less a gathering if it is to her stakes throughout the world, rather than to Zion proper.

Manasseh is not Ephraim’s enemy. Nor is Judah for that matter. Though envy may exist for a season it will be healed.