Immigration

Fixing the Immigration System for America’s 21st Century Economy

"We are the first nation to be founded for the sake of an idea—the idea that each of us deserves the chance to shape our own destiny. That’s why centuries of pioneers and immigrants have risked everything to come here…The future is ours to win. But to get there, we cannot stand still."

-PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA

Take Action

---

Host a Roundtable

President Obama is calling for a national conversation on immigration reform that builds a bipartisan consensus to fix our broken immigration system so it works for America’s 21st century economy, but he can’t do it alone. Help bring the debate to your community by hosting a roundtable.

President Obama recognizes that our current immigration system is broken and he is deeply committed to building a new 21st century immigration system that meets our nation’s important economic and security needs. In his State of the Union Address, the President laid out his vision for winning the future. To secure prosperity for all Americans, we must out-innovate, out-educate, and out-build the rest of the world, and fixing our immigration system plays an important part in that plan. As we work to rebuild our economy, our ability to thrive depends, in part on restoring responsibility and accountability to the immigration system.

President's Vision for Reform

The President plans to create a 21st century immigration system by: 

• Continuing to fulfill the federal government’s responsibility to securing our borders;


• Demanding accountability for businesses that break the law by undermining American workers and exploiting undocumented workers;


• Strengthening our economic competiveness by creating a legal immigration system that reflects our values and diverse needs; and


• Requiring responsibility from people who are living in the United States illegally.

Building on Progress

During the last two years, the Obama Administration has taken important steps to improve our immigration system within the boundaries of existing laws.  For example, the Administration has:

• Dedicated unprecedented resources to secure the border;


• Made interior and worksite enforcement smarter and more effective; and


• Worked to improve our legal immigration system.

It is acceptable to define true as inspiring +0

Reasons to agree

1. Mat 7:15  ¶ Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18  A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Mt. 12.33


2. If you believe the Book of Mormon is a standard of truth than Moroni 7:17 supports this idea. It says: "But whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do evil, and believe not in Christ, and deny him, and serve not God, then ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of the devil..." With this logic anything that persuadeth someone not to "serve" God is of the devil. This is very black and white logic, but it says that things that are true, can also be of the devil, depending on what they cause to happen in people's lives. This results in problems...
   
   
   
   

Reasons to disagree

1.  Some things are real some things are not. Some things really happened and some things did not. We can't fix our problems if we are not living in the real world.


2. At some point you have to stop believing in Santa, even if a literal belief in Santa might result in "Good". 

Score:

# of reasons to agree: 2

# of reasons to disagree: -2

# of reasons to agree with reasons to agree: 0

# of reasons to agree with reasons to disagree: -0

Total Idea Score: 0

Don't like the score? It is easy to change the score. Just post a reason to agree or disagree with the overall idea, or any of the reasons and the score will change

Images That agree

1.   

Images That disagree

1. 
   
   

Scriptures that agree

1. 
   
   

Scriptures that disagree

1.  

Interest of those who agree

1. 
   
   

Interest of those who disagree

1.  

Common Interest

1. 
   
   

Opposing Interest

1.  

Videos That agree

1.  

Videos That disagree

1.  

Website that agree

1. 
   
   

Websites that disagree

1.  

Related arguments:

1. 
   
   

Saying there are Old Testament scriptures that support something is meaningless, because so many Old Scriptures contradict each other

Reasons to agree

1. Gen.1:27 says that man was created equal, male and female, however Gen.2:18-24 says that woman was created as a companion to the man only after he rejected the animals (Gen.1:27: “God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.”  Gen.2:18-24:  "And the LORD God said, [It is] not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought [them] unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that [was] the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said, This [is] now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.”


2. Gen.1:12, 26 says that Man was created after the plants, however Gen.2:5-9 says that Man was created before the plants. (Gen.1:12, 26: “And the earth brought forth grass, [and] herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed [was] in itself, after his kind: and God saw that [it was] good.¶ And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.” Gen.2:5-9: “Now no shrub of the field was yet in the earth, and no plant of the field had yet sprouted, for the LORD God had not sent rain upon the earth, and there was no man to cultivate the ground. ¶ But a [fn]mist used to rise from the earth and water the whole [fn]surface of the ground. ¶ Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living [fn]being. ¶The LORD God planted a garden toward the east, in Eden; and there He placed the man whom He had formed. ¶ Out of the ground the LORD God caused to grow every tree that is pleasing to the sight and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.”


3. Gen 1:3-5 says that God created and separated light and darkness on the first day. However, Gen 1:14-18 says that God created and separated light and darkness on the fourth day. (Gen 1:3-5: “Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. ¶ God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. ¶ God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.” Gen 1:14-18 says: “Then God said, "Let there be [fn]lights in the [fn]expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years; ¶ and let them be for [fn]lights in the [fn]expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth"; and it was so. ¶ God made the two [fn]great lights, the greater [fn]light [fn]to govern the day, and the lesser [fn]light [fn]to govern the night; He made the stars also. ¶ God placed them in the [fn]expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, ¶ and [fn]to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. ¶There was evening and there was morning, a fourth day."


4. Prov 15:3, Jer 16:17,and Jer 23:24 all say that God is everywhere and sees everything. However in Gen.4:9 God asks Cain the whereabouts of his brother, and in Gen 18:20, 21 God goes to see what is happening.


5. Gen 10:5, 20, 31 says there were many languages before the tower at Babel. However, Gen.11:1 says there was only one language before the tower at Babel.


6. 
   
   

Reasons to disagree

1.  

Images That agree

1.   

Images That disagree

1. 
   
   

Scriptures that agree

1. 
   
   

Scriptures that disagree

1.  

Interest of those who agree

1. 
   
   

Interest of those who disagree

1.  

Common Interest

1. 
   
   

Opposing Interest

1.  

Videos That agree

1.  

Videos That disagree

1.  

Website that agree

1. 
   
   

Websites that disagree

1.  

Related arguments:

1. 
   
   

Score:

# of reasons to agree: 5

# of reasons to disagree: -1

# of reasons to agree with reasons to agree: 0

# of reasons to disagree with reasons to agree: 0

Total Idea Score: 0

Don't like the score? It is easy to change the score. Just post a reason to agree or disagree with the overall idea, or any of the reasons and the score will change

Saying the Old Testament "support something" is meaningless, because so many Old Scriptures contradict each other

Reasons to agree

1. Gen.1:27 says that man was created equal, male and female, however Gen.2:18-24 says that woman was created as a companion to the man only after he rejected the animals.

Reasons to disagree

1.  

Images That agree

1.   

Images That disagree

1. 
   
   

Scriptures that agree

1. 
   
   

Scriptures that disagree

1.  

Interest of those who agree

1. 
   
   

Interest of those who disagree

1.  

Common Interest

1. 
   
   

Opposing Interest

1.  

Videos That agree

1.  

Videos That disagree

1.  

Website that agree

1. 
   
   

Websites that disagree

1.  

Related arguments:

1. 
   
   

Score:

# of reasons to agree: 0

# of reasons to disagree: -0

# of reasons to agree with reasons to agree: 0

# of reasons to disagree with reasons to agree: 0

Total Idea Score: 0

Don't like the score? It is easy to change the score. Just post a reason to agree or disagree with the overall idea, or any of the reasons and the score will change

God could have changed the DNA of native Americans to test the faith of Mormons

Belief: "God could have changed the DNA of Native Americans to test the faith of Mormons" (This argument makes arguments pointless because once you say your book isn't wrong, God is just testing your faith, then you can use that same logic to justify anything).

Background:

The Book of Mormon originally claimed to be written for the remnant of the Nephites and Lamanites, describing them as the descendants of the House of Israel, specifically from the time of the prophet Jeremiah (circa 600 BCE). According to the text, Lehi and his family—who were of Middle Eastern descent—migrated to the Americas and became the ancestors of Native American peoples.

For decades, LDS leaders and scholars reaffirmed this belief, teaching that the indigenous peoples of the Americas were the direct descendants of these Israelite migrants. However, modern DNA analysis of Native American populations has found no genetic link between Native Americans and the Middle East. Instead, genetic studies overwhelmingly show that the ancestors of Native Americans migrated from Siberia and Northeast Asia, contradicting the claims of the Book of Mormon and previous LDS doctrinal interpretations.

This scientific evidence has led some Mormon apologists to propose alternative explanations, including the claim that "God could have changed the DNA of Native Americans to test the faith of Mormons." This argument suggests that God may have altered the genetic markers to obscure the Israelite ancestry, requiring believers to rely on faith rather than empirical evidence.

---

Reasons to agree (but ultimately refuted):

1. Divine Omnipotence and Testing Faith

   • Claim: God has the power to alter physical evidence, including DNA, as a test of faith.

   • Flaw: This line of reasoning could be used to justify any contradiction between religious claims and empirical evidence, or even between different empirical claims. If accepted, it removes any requirement for evidence-based belief and allows for infinite ad hoc explanations, and worse of all makes any discussion pointless, because people will just believe whatever they want, without any claim to consistency, that any criticisms of your claim are invalid. After all, God is just testing you).

2. Purpose of Faith Beyond Empirical Evidence

   • Claim: Faith requires belief without direct empirical proof, and scientific discrepancies can strengthen religious conviction.

   • Flaw: If God intentionally deceives people by altering DNA evidence, it undermines the principle of divine honesty and trustworthiness. Faith should be about choosing to believe, not about being misled by manipulated evidence. It's one thing to say that you have faith. It is another thing to claim that God manipulates DNA to make faith harder. 

3. Historical Precedents of Divine Testing

   • Claim: Scripture recounts instances, where God tested individuals' faith, so altering DNA, could be a modern example.

   • Flaw: Previous divine tests involved moral and spiritual challenges, not scientific deception. There is no precedent for God falsifying physical evidence to mislead believers.

4. Encouraging Deeper Spiritual Reflection

   • Claim: Confronting contradictions forces believers to engage in deeper spiritual introspection.

   • Flaw: Genuine spiritual growth should be based on seeking truth, not rationalizing contradictions through speculative supernatural intervention.

---

Reasons to disagree (Valid Counterarguments):

1. Science and Faith Should Not Be at Odds

   • If God created a logical, orderly universe, then scientific findings should align with truth rather than be intentionally deceptive.

   • Accepting the argument that "God changed DNA to test faith" removes all accountability for truth claims.

2. Theological Integrity Requires Honest Evidence

   • If religious claims are true, they should not require speculative justifications that contradict observable reality.

   • Rational faith should be based on principles that encourage honest inquiry rather than dismissal of evidence.

3. The Dangers of Justifying Anything

   • If one accepts that "God changed DNA to test faith," then any contradiction between religious texts and evidence can be dismissed with the same argument.

   • This reasoning could be used to reject any scientific discovery, historical fact, or contradictory claim without accountability.

4. Consistency in Apologetics

   • The argument that "God alters evidence to test faith" is rarely applied to other religious claims. If this logic is valid, it would allow competing religions to justify any discrepancy in their own historical records.

   • Faith should be strong enough to reconcile evidence with belief rather than requiring the dismissal of inconvenient facts.

---

Interest/Motivation of those who agree:

✔️ Mormons and other believers seeking to reconcile scientific challenges with their faith.
✔️ Apologists defending religious claims against empirical contradictions.
✔️ Those who view faith as independent of or superior to scientific evidence.

Interest/Motivation of those who disagree:

✔️ Advocates for the compatibility of faith and reason.
✔️ Scientists and historians prioritize evidence-based conclusions.
✔️ Religious thinkers who believe faith should not rely on speculative supernatural interventions.

---

Best Solutions to Related Problems:

✔️ Encouraging honest theological inquiry—examining religious claims in light of evidence rather than defending contradictions with unverifiable speculation.
✔️ Accepting that scripture may contain metaphorical or allegorical elements—allowing for reinterpretation rather than rigid literalism.
✔️ Separating faith from empirical science—acknowledging that religious belief does not require rejecting scientific discoveries.
✔️ Emphasizing moral and spiritual truths over historical details—focusing on ethical teachings rather than attempting to defend problematic historical claims.

---

Unstated Assumptions of Those Who Agree:

❗ That God would deliberately deceptively alter physical evidence.
❗ That faith requires resisting rather than embracing the truth.
❗ That discrepancies between scripture and science must be explained rather than reconsidered.
❗ That human interpretation of religious texts is infallible.

---

Evidence Scores:

📌 DNA studies showing Native Americans' genetic origins trace to Asia, not the Middle East.
📌 Historical research on migration patterns contradicting the Book of Mormon's claims.
📌 Theological analysis questioning whether God would alter evidence to mislead believers.

---

Most Likely Benefits of Rejecting This Argument:

✔️ A stronger, evidence-based faith that embraces truth rather than rejecting it.
✔️ Greater intellectual honesty in religious discourse.
✔️ A more credible and defensible religious belief system.
✔️ Improved dialogue between religious and scientific communities.

---

Books that agree (refuting the argument):

📖 Faith and Reason – Richard Swinburne (on reconciling faith with evidence)
📖 Losing a Lost Tribe – Simon Southerton (on DNA and the Book of Mormon)
📖 The Demon-Haunted World – Carl Sagan (on avoiding pseudoscience in religious beliefs)

Books that disagree (defending the argument):

📖 Shaken Faith Syndrome – Michael R. Ash (on why evidence challenges faith and how to respond)
📖 Echoes and Evidence of the Book of Mormon – Donald W. Parry (attempts to defend faith-based claims against the evidence)

---

Conclusion:

✔️ The claim that "God could have changed the DNA of Native Americans to test the faith of Mormons" is an invalid argument that relies on speculative reasoning.
✔️ If accepted, this logic can be used to justify any contradiction between religious beliefs and evidence.
✔️ A stronger approach is to engage with evidence honestly and develop a faith that does not rely on rejecting scientific findings.
✔️ Encouraging intellectual humility and theological adaptation allows faith to coexist with reason rather than being at odds with it.

DNA analysis proves that Native Americans are not descendants of Israel

Reasons to Agree:

List of Reasons

1. Genetic Markers Indicate Asian Ancestry: Scientists have analyzed the genetic markers of all living Native Americans, and none carry markers consistent with people from the Middle East. Instead, Native American genetic markers align with those from the Altay Mountains region of Central Asia.

2. Scientific Consensus on Genetic Testing: DNA analysis is a reliable method for tracing ancestry, and no peer-reviewed genetic research supports a Middle Eastern origin for Native Americans.

3. Theological Implications of DNA Alteration: If God altered DNA to hide evidence of a sacred book, it contradicts the idea of a God of Truth. A deity who deceives is not worthy of worship and would cease to be God.

Reasons to disagree: -

Faith-Based Argument:

1. God could have changed the DNA of native Americans to test the faith of Mormons.

Score Analysis:

Scoring Criteria

• # of Reasons to Agree: 3

• # of Reasons to Disagree: 1

• # of Reasons to Agree with Reasons to Agree: 0

• # of Reasons to Disagree with Reasons to Agree: 0

• Total Idea Score: Pending evaluation of individual argument scores.

Books that agree:

1. Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church Simon G. Southerton

Interest of those who agree: +

1. Promoting their book (Simon G. Southerton)


2. Promoting the truth

Interest of those who disagree: -

1. Promoting their career (Apologist)


2. Promoting the truth

Common Interest

1. Promoting the truth

Opposing Interest

1.  Promoting the truth


2. Promoting the Church


3. Promoting gospel narratives that don't seem to contradict scientific based world views

Website that agree

1. http://simonsoutherton.blogspot.com/


2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetics_and_the_Book_of_Mormon

Websites that disagree

1. Jeff Lindsay


2. http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/display/topical.php?cat_id=488

Don't like the score? It is easy to change the score. Just post a reason to agree or disagree with the overall idea, or any of the reasons and the score will change

Native American Indians are not descendants of Israel

Reasons to Agree:

List of Reasons

1. DNA analysis proves that Native Americans are not descendants of Israel.

Reasons to Disagree:

List of Reasons

1. Faith-Based Argument: Some believe that God could have changed the DNA of Native Americans to test the faith of Mormons.

---

Score Analysis:

Scoring Criteria

• # of Reasons to Agree: 3

• # of Reasons to Disagree: 1

• # of Reasons to Agree with Reasons to Agree: 0

• # of Reasons to Disagree with Reasons to Agree: 0

• Total Idea Score: Pending evaluation of individual argument scores.

---

Supporting Evidence:

Evidence Scores

• Books That Agree:

  • Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church – Simon G. Southerton (More Books)

• Scriptures That Agree: None identified.

• Scriptures That Disagree: None identified.

• Legal References That Agree:
  Local, Federal, and International Laws

---

Interests and Motivations:

Interest Analysis

• Interest of Those Who Agree:

  • Promoting their book (Simon G. Southerton)

  • Promoting scientific accuracy and truth

• Interest of Those Who Disagree:

  • Promoting their careers as religious apologists

  • Defending religious beliefs and faith-based narratives

• Common Interests:

  • Seeking and promoting the truth

• Opposing Interests:

  • Defending institutional religious narratives

  • Reconciling religious faith with scientific evidence

---

Media That Supports the Idea:

Media Analysis

• Websites That Agree:

  • Simon Southerton's Blog

  • Wikipedia - Genetics and the Book of Mormon

• Websites That Disagree:

  • Jeff Lindsay’s Analysis

  • Maxwell Institute’s Perspective

---

Multimedia Analysis:

• Images That Support the Idea:
  Supporting Images

• Videos That Support the Idea:
  Supporting Videos

• Songs That Support the Idea:
  Supporting Songs

---

Potential Benefits of Accepting This Idea:

List of Benefits

• Increased acceptance of scientific evidence in religious discussions.

• Improved understanding of Native American ancestry and history.

• Encouragement of open dialogue between science and religion.

---

Conclusion:

If you disagree with the score or analysis, you can contribute by posting additional reasons to agree or disagree. Each contribution will affect the total idea score, ensuring a dynamic and community-driven evaluation process.