His point is very telling – he frames his answer first in terms of the civil illegality of people obtaining more than one state-issued marriage license.
Namely, �[Illegal aliens] are not members of this Church
�The Church, of course, has no jurisdiction whatever in this matter,� he says – to wipe his hands of the matter.
Yet – as if realizing the loophole he might have just opened up for members in nations that do not outlaw plural marriages, as well as any who might try to skip state-authorization for a plural union [thus rendering the additional spouse fully legal] – he makes sure to add:
�Not only are those so involved in direct violation of the civil law, they are in violation of the law of this Church.�
Oh, the �revelation� in which it states: To Whom It May Concern: Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages, which laws have been pronounced constitutional by the court of last resort, I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws, and to use my influence with the members of the Church over which I preside to have them do likewise. What circular reasoning we have here. Wilford says that since its against the laws of the state, then it would be best if the saints stop doing it. Then Gordon says that since Wilford said we shouldn’t, then it doesn’t matter if it’s against the laws of the state or not.
Can we say the same thing about illegal aliens that Hinckley said about polygamists? .. [Illegal aliens] are in violation of the civil law. [Illegal aliens] know they are in violation of the law. [Illegal aliens] are subject to its penalties. Read more