My view: Trump's Muslim ban looks like Mormon ban

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • texascamp Grand Junction, CO
    Feb. 2, 2017 2:01 p.m.

    Comparing Muslims to Mormons is silly especially for a history professor. Muslim is an over arching term referring to followers of Mohammed. Just like Christian is a term referring to the followers of Christ. Not all Muslims believe the same things, which is why they are fighting in the first place. Which sect of Islam does he want to see dominate the US? Are all the open borders folks ready to take sides when they bring their religious turf battles here? Whose side will you be on, the Sunnis or the Shias? Wahabis? Some sects are more liberal than others. The Women Marchers were marching with the most extreme right of the Muslim women. Who is going to step up and protect the moderate and liberal Muslim women when they start getting bullied by the Sharia Muslims? ( who the left desperately wants to let in) It just doesn't make sense to let the bullies in when the "least of these" are still left over there. We need to protect the Muslims that align with our values not those who are against us or who are actively seeking to infiltrate. I trust the intelligence community to understand the problems of the region more than the author and his sentimentality.

  • freewriterguy2 Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 2, 2017 11:01 a.m.

    The list was formed by Obama's security task force for one. The top five muslim countries arent even on the list. The list was formed for terrorists reasons not religion. Indonesia has the most muslims and isnt on the list for example. I was at a car repair shop waiting in the lobby next to a Muslim man in his temple garments and could feel his hatred for me as an infidel. He didnt want to look at me or respond to me at first when I as a fellow American opened up my heart and conversation to him as a brother of the same God. The I am better than you was all too apparent in his demeaner, when little did he know I was wearing temple garments also. We should see what is being taught in their Mosques cause in the Quran and the Hadith there is some scary verses that threaten us, I know cause I have read some of them.

  • Laura Bilington Maple Valley, WA
    Feb. 2, 2017 7:19 a.m.

    @Peter1 wrote, "Last I heard Muslims do not believe Christ is their Savior. They recognize he lived. But, he is not their savior. "

    Peter, you may not be aware that large numbers of Americans--ordinary, Caucasian, descending from European immigrants in the 1800's--also do not believe that Christ is their Savior. They either do not recognize him as divine or they do not believe that there is anything that they need to be "saved" from.

    Should they all be deported?

  • Laura Bilington Maple Valley, WA
    Feb. 2, 2017 6:50 a.m.

    @Dfan Red wrote, "There have been people of the all religions that take things to far. The refugees from Syria are just trying to survive."

    Very true. Frighteningly, a lot of the commenters here are sending the message that they really don't see the deaths of refugees as a problem.

    Hitler demonstrated that the first step in making genocide acceptable was to demonize the targets as being less human that you were.

  • Laura Bilington Maple Valley, WA
    Feb. 2, 2017 6:44 a.m.

    @patriot wrote, "The deseret news is NOT a place to find fair and balanced reporting anymore. Reader beware!!"

    "not fair and balanced" is what the pro-Trump people call articles which point out the "inaccuracies" or, if you will, alternative facts.

  • Donwilliams sandy, UT
    Feb. 1, 2017 9:19 p.m.

    It is equally absurd to assume that all 'Mormons' who immigrate to Utah intend to break the laws of the United States.
    Because the Mormons were breaking the laws with polygamy, all immigrants which followed their religion would be breaking the law.

  • jsf Centerville, UT
    Feb. 1, 2017 11:55 a.m.

    Is it not just so illiterate of so many Americans, quoting the directive where it says priority to those of a minority religion of a country with a majority of a different religion and calling it a Muslim ban. There are the Sunni, Shia, Ibadi, Sufism, Quranism, Ahamadiyya, Black Muslim movements, Kharijite, Quranists, YazdÂnism, Wahhabi, and Nondenominational.

    With Sunni accounting for about 85% of all Muslims, the rest qualify as minorities and in Syria, Iraq and other countries are often attacked and discriminated against. You can be a Muslim and still qualify as a minority religion.

    Wahabists tend to produce the most violent sect.

  • Sasa78 South Jordan, UT
    Jan. 31, 2017 9:47 p.m.

    Part 4- Joseph would more in common with the people that have died at the hands of terrorists that seek to deny religious freedoms by brokering in the death of christians , Jews, non radicals all over the world while their nations elected officials (endowed with the duty to protect their citizens) sat by derilict in their duties because it wasn't politically expedient. trump is simply putting the priority where it belongs.....American citizens safety. As the refugees are vetted and safe, we welcome them with open arms! Can't wait to show them the blessings and virtues of freedom and safety!! Until then, we must make prudent decisions on a case by case basis to avoid the horror that even one enemy of America can do while posing as the needy that we so love to aid. It's no different than the way we would admit a stranger into our homes.

  • Sasa78 South Jordan, UT
    Jan. 31, 2017 9:44 p.m.

    Part 3-Furthermore, your comparison to the wrongs committed against Joseph in the early days of the LDS church wreak of ignorance and an effort to curry sympathy from the members that hold him sacred. Jospeh smith was a son of America and as a citizen of this country was ENTITLED to rights and protections that under the constitution. He was abused by leaders of other faiths for his beliefs (peaceful beliefs) that infringed on no one else's. He (and other citizens) were robbed of their rightful land and homes, abused, rejected by their government at local, state and presidential levels. He was ordered dead by the very nation he was born to. He was NOT seeking asylum in a FOREIGN nation. He was seeking asylum in his OWN NATION and denied that right, dying at the hands of his own people while our nations leaders sat derilict in its duties to protect and preserve him and the many LDS members that were slain along with him.

  • Sasa78 South Jordan, UT
    Jan. 31, 2017 9:40 p.m.

    Part 2- The sole function of government is to keep its citizens safe and ensure its citizens liberty. That duty does NOT extend to those from foreign nations. That is why we can't just take people blindly. Furthermore, your argument about americas moral responsibility is rediculois. Where prey tell is your article about our moral duty to stop the destruction and genicises in Syria over the last year + under Obama. Your outraged that trump won't let refugees in but nothing is said about the duty of America to engage while hundreds of thousands of people are muedered ans targeted for their Christian faith....please spare your outrage. The blood of those people is in the hands of the nations and leaders that oppressed them and murder don't them. We cannot be responsible for a world on fire that won't accept the freedoms and rights that are the only thing that will save them. We are only responsible to do what we can as we can but the Americans safety comes first.

  • Sasa78 South Jordan, UT
    Jan. 31, 2017 9:38 p.m.

    Part 1- Wow, i can't get over his intellectually dishonest your article is. Your premise is false to say that it is a ban on muslims. You may extrapolate as you wish but his executive order was clear. He is temporarily stopping immigration from only 7 of the 50+ Muslim majority nations while they figure out a system that actually vets our refugees admitted as he current system is inadequate to say the least. He has however, said that anyone coming from those regions (the 7 + more to come) that cannot provide appropriate documentation for the required vetting cannot enter. How exactly is that unreasonable considering that KSM (9/11) said that they radical Islamist terrorists would use our refugee programs and constitution once admitted to get them into our country. There are wolfs in sheeps clothing. Shouldn't we at least make an effort to be thorough in our efforts to identify which are dangerous??? There are so many instances of terrorists in the last 8 years that had social media filled with anti American and pro Islamist views and they got into our country because the current policy viewed the social media of these people as private. What????

  • Bluto Sandy, UT
    Jan. 31, 2017 7:40 p.m.

    When you start with a false premise, the rest of your argument falls of it's own weight.
    There is not a Muslum ban.
    Fake assumptions on your art.

  • chilemamita Vancouver, WA
    Jan. 31, 2017 1:10 p.m.

    There is nothing like scary times to find out whether America deserves to called the "home of the brave." There is nothing like scary times to bring out the true colors and convenient memory loss of many in the church. My family has been so appalled by the commentary we have read on social media outlets from fellow church members, we wonder if they would have the gall enough to say them at a pulpit on Sunday. Refugees are the most vetted group of people who come to the US - the process takes roughly 3 years - and vetted thoroughly not only by the US but by the UN. And what lengths would you go through if you lived in a land where the police, government officials, and citizens are bought and murdered by drug lords, and you aren't fortunate enough to have a family member living in US, and you have to wait 10 - 15 years and come up with thousands of dollars - that is American dollars - all while you can't even feed your family? How do you know what you wouldn't do in those circumstances? Ignore history, ignore the gospel, ignore the brethren; the tares are becoming much easier to distinguish from the wheat.

  • cmpattberg Midvale, UT
    Jan. 31, 2017 11:01 a.m.

    It is not a "Muslim" ban, as much as people want to make it out that way.

    The 7 countries were identified (by congress) as be supporters and exporters of terrorists. It is common sense to be very serious about vetting them. Even though these countries likely do not have histories on these people, we still must try.

    Be serious, who would willngly take the chance and open your home to people that you know nothing about. I would not let potential terrorists in my home, I would not be protecting my family appropriately.

  • rebeccadl Fort Collins, CO
    Jan. 31, 2017 10:16 a.m.

    I am so thankful for Church leaders who recognize dangerous behavior by government leaders. I am thankful that Deseret News Opinion staff recognized how similar what happened to Mormans in the past is to what is happening to refugees currently.

    UnAmerican behavior is UnAmerican, whatever year it is. In this country we believe in innocent until proven guilty. We prosecute individuals, not groups, not political groups, not religious groups, only individuals.

    As a Mormon, I try my best not to judge others and rely on Heavenly Father to take care of that part. I pray that others will do the same.

  • Janet Ontario, OR
    Jan. 31, 2017 1:12 a.m.

    Not one terrorist act in the U.S. has been committed by a Muslim refugee. Not one terrorist act has been committed in the U.S. by anyone from the seven countries listed. Trump stated that members of minority religions -- Christianity in particular -- coming from the named Muslim-majority countries would be kept out. That makes it a Muslim ban. Yes, there is always a tiny chance that a Muslim might commit murder in the U.S. Ted Bundy, Charles Manson, Jeffrey Dahmer, the Columbine killers, Jared Loughner, Adam Lanza, Timothy McVeigh, James Holmes -- not Muslims. Someone might climb a university tower, shoot up a workplace, or target a particular person. We can't live in fear. The crime rate among immigrants (legal or not) is lower than natural-born Americans'. Yes, some Muslims are extremists. Remember the Mountain Meadows Massacre? Canada just had a mass shooting of Muslims by a Christian extremist. How the Lord must weep over our lack of charity and good example! BTW, this land was set aside for the restoration of the Gospel, not for the exclusive habitat of believing Christians. Being blessed is not the same thing as being superior.

  • iK8 Vancouver, WA
    Jan. 30, 2017 9:45 p.m.

    To those of you who keep bringing up Obama's action during 2011. It was nothing like Trumps current action. “President Obama never imposed a six-month ban on Iraqi processing. For several months in 2011, there was a lower level of Iraqi resettlement, as the government implemented certain security enhancements. ... there was never a point during that period in which Iraqi resettlement was stopped, or banned.”

  • The Rock Federal Way, WA
    Jan. 30, 2017 9:40 p.m.

    In know what you mean. When the twin towers fell on 911, I thought it was the Amish, it could not have been the religion of peace from the middle east.

  • Peter1 North Salt Lake, UT
    Jan. 30, 2017 9:24 p.m.

    Mormons also believe that this land, America, is dedicated for those that believe in Jesus Christ.
    Last I heard Muslims do not believe Christ is their Savior. They recognize he lived. But, he is not their savior. Some of these Mormons need to visit countries where Sharia Law is in place. Then they will see the need for a ban. They will continue to slaughter Americans. We are infidels. Wake up people..... will you allow your families slaughtered. This is a sacred land and it must be protected. Remember Moroni built walls to protect cities. I bet all the bashers have vivint alarm systems in their houses...

  • Peter1 North Salt Lake, UT
    Jan. 30, 2017 9:08 p.m.

    Give us Barabbas... wow how history repeats itself...
    How Gods covenant people continue to have blood on their hands.

  • Cluas New York, NY
    Jan. 30, 2017 3:36 p.m.

    Saudi Arabia is the birthplace of 'wahabbism' and state sponsored. Don't know what it is? Please research.

    Two terrorists were behind San Bernardino. The man US natural and the woman born in Pakistan raised in Saudi Arabia.

    9/11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt and Lebanon.

    Why weren't these countries included on the ban list?

    Trump and Bannon aren't idiots, especially the latter. Take a peek at his extreme views of the judeo-christian vs islamic world. So what are they really up to?

    Lastly, this is an ideology that is spread via channels that aren't boats, planes or trains. Good luck keeping it out, it's already here.

  • lets be mature Meridian/USA, ID
    Jan. 30, 2017 3:21 p.m.

    Interesting that those claiming "trump is targeting muslims even if it's supposed to look like he's targeting nationality" are the same ones who refuse to call the terror in those areas Islamic.

  • TheProudDuck Newport Beach, CA
    Jan. 30, 2017 3:06 p.m.

    The "Mormon ban" is still on the books. Section 212(a)(10)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

    All Mormons, prior to the 1890s, were obliged as an obligation of their faith to believe in polygamy.

  • NevadaCougar Panaca, NV
    Jan. 30, 2017 2:38 p.m.

    I don't know how many times people need to say this stuff, but I will repeat it again for those that just follow the headlines and don't actually look into facts. This is clearly #fakenews. There is no ban on Muslims. There is a 90-day moratorium on visas from 7 countries, but only one is even in the top 10 for number of Muslim citizens. And that is Iran, who has openly threatened the US since the gulf wars. Democrats have called it a Muslim ban, incorrectly, to fuel their constant protest. They won't stop protesting until the next election. Confirmation bias is getting ridiculous now.

  • jsf Centerville, UT
    Jan. 30, 2017 2:04 p.m.

    omm please let everyone know the birth place of the female gender San Bernardino shooter. Not American born or raised. Your argument falls flat. Also the great honorable President Obama blocked all from a number of Muslim countries at different times starting in 2011 with a six month ban on Iraq. And what about his termination of mid journey Cubans his last week in office.

    This immigration is a false flag liberals are using to push their own agendas.

  • Rumoris Bountiful, UT
    Jan. 30, 2017 1:08 p.m.


    Never did I say your statistics were wrong, just that you were applying them incorrectly.

    How is it that Sweden two years ago isn't the rape capital of Europe, they let in a bunch of refugees, and then become the rape capital? Did the natives get restless, and start mass raping their own? I don't think so.

    Germany's Merkel is pro immigration, dumps 3 million migrants on her people, and two years later stars conducting mads deportations? Why?

    Well it probably has something to do with the Cologne mass rape, which was committed by Syrian refugees, and the Truck of Peace barrelling through a market place.

    Not to mention the spike in crime from Murder, rape, child sexual abuse, all the way down to stealing. The German public bathhouses have had to bar Islamic men from entering due to the mountain of complaints about sexual harassment from the women.

    You can't sit their and tell me the migrants aren't causing this. Nobody since the late 1800's has ever mass imported another group into their country, and the U.S. did it with the Irish, a people's who culture is very similar to ours.

  • Kent C. DeForrest Provo, UT
    Jan. 30, 2017 11:53 a.m.

    For the record, our vetting is already extreme, and a large majority of active LDS voted for Trump, which is hard to comprehend. Commenters who are trying to defend the chaos he is introducing into world and national affairs need to take off the rose-colored glasses and see this man for the danger he is, on all fronts. I'm sure there will be more to come, primarily because of his insatiable need to dominate the news.

  • Dpcarlsen Meridian, ID
    Jan. 30, 2017 11:39 a.m.

    your title is wrong. It is not a Muslim ban. There are over 40 Islamic countries that are not on the list.

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    Jan. 30, 2017 11:36 a.m.

    @JackBuckeye - Marysville, OH
    Jan. 29, 2017 5:11 a.m.

    In plain English, it's not a ban on Muslims. It's a 90 day ban on persons coming from certain countries that are known terrorist havens. Period.


    In plain English --
    Then what about Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kuwait, United Arabs Emirates, India, Malaysia, Croatia, Russia, and Ireland?
    [perhaps - it's because Donald Trump owns properties in some of those countries, but I digress....]

    BTW -- The LAST 3 terrorist attacks in this country were all committed by AMERICANS born right here.

    If it not about religion, and only about countries with known terrorists, then America with it's American should be on our own ban list as well.

  • Dpcarlsen Meridian, ID
    Jan. 30, 2017 11:35 a.m.

    But all terriorists have radical islam ties. We do have a right to protect ourselves and at the same time be compassionate towards others.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Jan. 30, 2017 11:22 a.m.

    I think calling it a "Muslim Ban" is drama.

    How is it a "Muslim Ban" if there's no mention of Muslim in it, or any check of your religion in the policy being enacted?

    Other predominately Muslim countries were not included in the Executive Order. That proves he's not banning all Muslims.

    The countries he did temporarily restrict were identified by the previous Congress and previous President as sponsors of terrorism. So giving them more scrutiny on immigration would be prudent.

    I know Trump said "Muslim Ban" one time, but he has backed off that. That's a good thing (that he no longer wants a Muslim Ban). That is progress. Even small progress is progress.

    IMO this is not totally about religion (so weird... atheists and Leftists protesting in defense of religion all of a sudden). But it is partially about religion. As long as these 7 countries sponsor terrorism, and this religion teaches Jihad... they are going to get extra attention when immigrating to the USA.

    Terrorist groups in these nations have stated they want to get people into America, and attack Americans...
    Extra precautions are justified in this case.

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    Jan. 30, 2017 10:58 a.m.

    The trouble is -- NONE of the terrorists in America were foreign or refugees!

    Orlando Florida and San Bernardino shooters, and Boston bombers were ALL born and raised n the U.S. of A.!
    The 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia!

    So please tell me again -- why are women and children from Syria, Yemen, Iran, Iraq, and Somalia being banned?

    A ban is a ban is ban.
    Donald Trump is wrong! - and those supporting him, and emboldening share are just as wrong and share the blame for this!

  • Jayson Meline Chubbuck, ID
    Jan. 30, 2017 10:49 a.m.


    I asked you to provide statistics and analysis regarding the European experience to substantiate your claims. You have not done so. Therefore, you provide no merit for argument irregardless of our degree of agreement or disagreement.

    You call me "wrong," which I am not. But you refuse to even provide underlying merit to arguments similar to our current president.

    I stated the European Socialist model is a root cause to enable greater segregation and less assimilation of the 2nd generation of Muslim immigrants who are the primary source of terrorist threats in Europe to date.

    I agree the Europeans have not managed their immigration policy carefully. But you cannot simply attribute it to Muslims which leads eventually to the erosion of religious freedom and greater religious persecution.

    You stated there are cultures that are incompatible with other cultures. I don't necessarily disagree. Sharia Law violates numerous tenets of the US Constitution and is not compatible. But positive assimilation allows for healthy integration of cultures where they are reconciled into common values and principles. The US is historically an example of this.

  • MarioMiguel Pompano Beach, FL
    Jan. 30, 2017 10:20 a.m.

    This article is a joke. Mormons posed no physical threat to anybody, meanwhile Islamic Terrorism is responsible for countless deaths in just the past two years. Until people from these countries can be vetted adequately, there is not reason why we should not impose a temporary halt on immigration. Enough with the references to "Christian terrorism." Stop making excuses. Of the all the people in the Middle East, Christians and Jews face the highest levels of intolerance.

  • Herbert Gravy Salinas, CA
    Jan. 30, 2017 9:39 a.m.

    No, we don't "all know better". If there were no terrorists there would be no issue (unless of course Sharia law were promoted and lived here).

    This is a terrorism issue, not a religion issue. Thank you President Trump for at least trying to protect our children and grandchildren.

  • Rumoris Bountiful, UT
    Jan. 30, 2017 8:59 a.m.


    Clearly you don't realize that Islamic terrorism is the only real terrorism the world faces right now.

    No not all Muslim's blow up buildings, but their ideology is the only one outside of Antifa communists that do so, and they do so at a much higher rate than the communists do.

    If you weren't starw manning people's arguments so badly we might take you seriously, but you've grossly misrepresented people's arguments, and even thrown in a huge helping of identity politics to boot.

    Terrorism is not the only concern people have about Islamic immigration, just look at the huge rise in crime in Europe. Women in Germany being stoned on the street for not dressing properly, not to mention the huge threat of rape which has been proven accurate from the Syrian, and North African refugees.

    The GOP doesn't need to paint the refugees as bad people, they are aptly doing that themselves, and not to mention the terrorism that comes into play, and the Islamic ideologists are realistically the only people committing mass acts of terror these days.

  • MoreMan San Diego, CA
    Jan. 30, 2017 8:50 a.m.

    I issue my strongest possible condemnation that my comment comparing this to the other Sept 11th attack (1857) is not being approved. To blame an entire group for the actions of a few in unconscionable. The vitriol expressed by many of the approved comments helps bolster my hypothesis.

  • george of the jungle goshen, UT
    Jan. 30, 2017 7:32 a.m.

    Was 911 an inside job? did deplited uranium stroud all across their countries. maybe the wall around us isn't a bad idea.

  • eastcoastcoug Danbury, CT
    Jan. 30, 2017 7:01 a.m.

    @DougSegesman and the rest of you stereotypers,

    So the ALL the Muslims blow up buildings?? All Muslims practice Sharia Law? How many Muslims do you actually know? Do we persecute and stereotype all Christians because some have fought wars in the name of Christianity and burned Jews and other heretics at the stake? Many Atheists hold that against Christians still - is that right, too?

    Some of you people have no idea what you are talking about and love to put everyone in some kind of convenient box of prejudice. And then you have the temerity to declare that the DNews is 'Fake News'.

  • eastcoastcoug Danbury, CT
    Jan. 30, 2017 6:53 a.m.

    Many of you say this is not a Muslim ban. We all know better. The right wing of the GOP has been saying for years that Islam itself is responsible for terrorism and that the religion has no place in America. Trump appealed to that thinking over and over.

    We are all frustrated when someone blows up people in the name of religion. But we know the overwhelming number of religious people are peaceful and that religion is only co-opted to promote hate - the ultimate but sad irony. It's sad too that some of us buy into that thinking.

    This ban also assumes that current vetting processes, which are already quite long and substantial, are inadequate. Trump's ploy all along has been to convince us that everything we've been doing has been a 'Disaster' (his favorite 2016 word) and that he alone possessed the solution.

    His statements about Islam and allowing 'only Christians' are enough for me. It is puzzling that for the rest of you, the Truth is 'fake news'.

  • src8 Newark Valley, NY
    Jan. 29, 2017 11:35 p.m.

    Compassion with no thinking involved is asking to be robbed blind of everything. There must be order in the process. Bishops in the church would be in big trouble if they did not use tithing resources wisely. The USA far exceeds in compassion and numbers of legal immigrants but there needs to be effective order and protections in the process.

  • Multi Bountiful, UT
    Jan. 29, 2017 11:10 p.m.


    Really? You are going to tell me that the huge rise in crime in both Germany, and Sweden isn't caused by the recent influx of refugees?

    So these relatively safe places had a huge uptick in crime from a second generation somehow? It didn't have anything to do with the mass importation of the migrants? Ya Cologne was done by the second gen of the migrants.

    Your application of statistics is off.

  • Jayson Meline Chubbuck, ID
    Jan. 29, 2017 9:57 p.m.


    What evidence supports crime rates that can be attributed to immigrants in Europe or certain cultures are proven to be adverse to assimilation with our culture?

    FBI and census data shows an increase in criminality from the immigrant generation to the subsequent generation at 25%

    A Pew Center analysis indicates offspring of immigrants are assimilated into the same societal risk factors as the native population.

    Europe's social welfare approach foments entitlement and dependency. Similar to the unintended consequences of our Great Society programs and education system which undermines traditional values of self-sufficiency or positive family cohesion and values of immigrant parents.

    This creates conflicts within immigrant families. Same generational conflict we see in the population.

    I'd have to verify with Rand Corp, but if memory serves it is the subsequent generations of immigrants that have been the source of delinquency and terrorism in Europe, not the immigrant/refugee generation.

    The source of incompatibility you argue may actually come from our current cultural flaws, not exclusively from the culture of immigrants.

  • Multi Bountiful, UT
    Jan. 29, 2017 6:33 p.m.


    Why don't you stop straw manning terrorism with the incompatibility of cultures.

    Germany allowed a horde of migrants in, and they got Cologne, not to mention a truck of peace driven by somebody who believes in Islamic tenets.

    Sweden is the rape capital of Europe, how did this happen? Oh they let in hundreds of thousands of immigrants from the Islamic nations.

    How about that terrorism in France, Amsterdam?

    The terrorism is not what frightens us, it is the incompatibility of their culture with ours.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Jan. 29, 2017 4:52 p.m.

    PhxBlue: "There's a reason I lock my doors at night in my home. Does this make me mean or unreasonable?"

    Unfortunately, for many on the left your actions are completely unreasonable. If you lock your doors even if you think you live in a safe neighborhood, then it must be because you hate everyone who could possibly come through uninvited. You must think that everyone outside is a rapist and a murderer even though they are a tiny minority. Your fears are completely unfounded even though everyone knows that there really are rapists and murderers out there.

    It also doesn't matter if your neighbor was victimized just last week by a home invader, you are still unreasonable to lock your doors somehow.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Jan. 29, 2017 4:45 p.m.

    Kralon: "We can only hope that America's system of checks and balances can mitigate the damage Trump will do and people will wise up enough so he doesn't get another term."

    It didn't work when Obama was elected so why should you hope that it would work under Trump?

  • LOU Montana Pueblo, CO
    Jan. 29, 2017 4:25 p.m.

    It is an overreaction but wait! There will be more.

  • Jayson Meline Chubbuck, ID
    Jan. 29, 2017 4:08 p.m.

    A premise has been put forward by the current president; and many who share his ideology; that immigrants, particularly, Mexican immigrants commit a disproportionate amount of crime than the native born population.

    It is true that from 1990 to 2013, the amount of undocumented immigrants tripled which is a valid premise of the need to properly enforce current immigration law while evaluating the need to reform a system clearly broken.

    However, extrapolated data from the FBI and the last three decennial census indicate the incarceration rates of the native-born were anywhere from two to five times higher than that of immigrants.

    In 2010, less-educated native-born men age 18-39 had an incarceration rate of 10.7 percent—more than triple the 2.8 percent rate among foreign-born Mexican men, and five times greater than the 1.7 percent rate among foreign-born Salvadoran and Guatemalan men.

    We need lawful and orderly immigration by means of sound policy that is based on the facts, not perception and fear that only compound the issue of immigration as opposed to driving a sound solution.

  • iK8 Vancouver, WA
    Jan. 29, 2017 3:50 p.m.

    #1 There is a strong vetting process already in place for refugees. On average, officials say it's 18 to 24 months before a refugee is approved for admission to the U.S.
    #2 The immigration ban can hurt businesses. In a quarterly filing this week, Microsoft said changes to U.S. immigration policy that restrict the flow of people “may inhibit our ability to adequately staff our research and development efforts.”
    #3 No person accepted to the United States as a refugee, Syrian or otherwise, has been implicated in a terrorist attack since the Refugee Act of 1980 set up systematic procedures for accepting refugees into the United States, according to an analysis of terrorism immigration risks by the Cato Institute.
    #4 When Trump initially proposed his Muslim ban in December 2015, Sen. Pat Leahy (D-Vt.) introduced a resolution expressing “the sense of the Senate that the United States must not bar individuals from entering into the United States based on their religion, as such action would be contrary to the fundamental principles on which this nation was founded.” It passed 96-4. (this was a republican majority senate)

  • Jayson Meline Chubbuck, ID
    Jan. 29, 2017 3:35 p.m.

    I would like to present something unique to the president: facts, and not “alternative facts” based upon ideology, prejudice, or fear.

    The Cato institute presents longitudinal data based on issued visa categories of admitted immigrants over the last 41 years to formulate an analysis. The data was further extrapolated for the 154 foreign-born terrorists who entered the US by visa categories from 1975 to 2015. The data sources are the US State Department, FBI coupled with the RAND Database of global terrorist incidents.

    Statistically, a US citizen stands a 1 in 3.64 billion chance annually of being murdered in a terrorist attack by a refugee.

    Furthermore, the greatest propensity for terrorists to be admitted to the US comes from the issuance of Legal Permanent Residency and Tourist Visas; not from the granting of refugee status or a form of asylum.

    I agree with the president that all vetting processes stand for improvement, however; the current administration is statistically focused on the wrong group of immigrants to prevent the further admittance of potential terrorists.

    That is factual; not anecdotal or based on a form of bias or unfounded perception.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 29, 2017 3:30 p.m.

    Statement today by Senators McCain and Graham:

    "Our most important allies in the fight against ISIL are the vast majority of Muslims who reject its apocalyptic ideology of hatred. This executive order sends a signal, intended or not, that America does not want Muslims coming into our country. That is why we fear this executive order may do more to help terrorist recruitment than improve our security."

    And how!

  • Demosthenes Rexburg, ID
    Jan. 29, 2017 1:13 p.m.

    As has been pointed out, it's not a permanent ban and it's not against Muslims. It's a temporary pause in immigration from countries with terrorist problems. When adequate security "vetting" measures are in place, immigration will resume. It's a long-overdue overhaul that will make our country safer. Using the phrase "Muslim ban" shows bias and discredits your position.

  • Anti Bush-Obama Chihuahua, 00
    Jan. 29, 2017 12:40 p.m.

    Only a 90 day ban. Trump isn't the first President to do this. To say that this was a lifetime ban is irresponsible and totally baseless. Trump only wanted a temporary ban to befin with so they can set up a vetting process he said that from day one in that initial campaign speech but fake news deliberately twisted this into something it never was.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Jan. 29, 2017 11:21 a.m.

    Karl Rove was "Bush's Brain."

    Now Steve Bannon is "The Donald's Brain."

    Bannon is far more dangerous that Rove ever was.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 29, 2017 11:16 a.m.

    @patriot "There is no muslim ban. Read the presidents directive -- it NEVER mentions the word Muslim. ..Trump's ban is for ALL people regardless of religious affiliation from TERRORIST countries until we have proper vetting in place. America first!! "

    But, I read the directive:

    "Secretary of Homeland Security, is further directed to make changes, to the extent permitted by law, to prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual’s country of nationality."

    This is designed to discriminate against Muslims. Many Muslims have helped the United States, and this backhands them. This is a BIG MISTAKE.

  • NeilT Clearfield, UT
    Jan. 29, 2017 10:39 a.m.

    The point the author is making is that Mormons were once a hated and persecuted people and of all people Mormons should be sympathetic to the plight of refugees who are fleeing violence and persecution. I like what Governor Herbert said, "Refugees are not terrorist they are fleeing terrorism". If the goal of terrorism is to spread fear, hate and discord then terrorists are winning the war.

  • Gildas LOGAN, UT
    Jan. 29, 2017 10:04 a.m.

    Hardly any persecuted Christian makes it to the USA for some reason; we seem to be importing, not the persecuted but, the persecutors. These persecutors hate Christians and Jews.

    I like President Trump's statement that we should give a preference to persecuted Christians. I would like to know how and when he aims to do it for it may be much needed.

  • Kevin J. Kirkham Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 29, 2017 9:53 a.m.

    The logic used in the article reminds me of those who criticize another of president Trump's Executive Orders regarding immigration - building the southern border wall. I've heard critics compare it to the Berlin Wall. The flaw in that logic is that the Berlin Wall was built to keep people IN rather than keeping outsiders out. President Obama's new home in Chicago likewise has a wall around it (not just a white picket fence) to keep people out. Why is his wall fine while Trump's wall isn't?

    We have the right to decide who we let into this country. Should we let in those who will be more likely to cause crime and take our money (and send a lot of it out of the country to their relatives back home...thereby hurting our economy)..or should we let in those who want to become Americans and adopt our culture and views regarding individual liberty and freedom and make America a better place?

    President Trump is doing exactly what he should to protect America, protect the jobs of Americans and protect our way of life.

  • Kevin J. Kirkham Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 29, 2017 9:34 a.m.

    The logic used in the piece is greatly flawed. This is no Muslim ban since Muslims from Morocco and Indonesia and other Muslim majority countries can still enter. Even Christians and Yazidis from those listed countries, who are greatly persecuted in those countries, are banned entrance. I read yesterday of Christians from Syria who were turned away at the last minute from entering.

    Germany and Sweden have had massive crime waves due to letting in uneducated (unemployable) people who have nothing on their hands but time and distain. Our refugee program should be aimed at those who are most likely to be harmed by staying in their countries. Germany and Sweden chose to let in those LEAST likely to be harmed - young Muslim men. We should focus on letting in Christians, Jews and Yazidis who are more likely to assimilate and be productive citizens.

    Europe allowed them to create Muslim enclaves which breed crime and deter assimilation. Any Muslim refugees here should be scattered so that they would have to assimilate and learn English and be too few in number to form gangs and enclaves as they do in Europe. We should bring in Middleeast Christians, Yazidis and Jews first though.

  • What in Tucket? Provo, UT
    Jan. 29, 2017 9:24 a.m.

    Pro Muslims tell us that twice as many people have died from domestic terrorists than from Islamic terrorists. Hmmmm. Thought there were about 3 million Muslims in the nation around 1% of the population thus one might say Islamic terrorists are likely to occur 50 times more likely than domestic. What does that suggest. Maybe good to restrict potential terrorists.

  • Atsmith Norwalk, CT
    Jan. 29, 2017 9:17 a.m.

    It's clear that the small differences in this (worthwhile) comparison is allowing so many commenters to ignore the larger message. Of all people, Mormons should be highly sensitive to this issue ... and the first group to stand up for the rights of the "least of these" who are seeking shelter and solace. If you consider yourself a Christian, you should be putting Christianity over partisanship and patriotism.

    The policy to screen for prospective terrorists is always a worthy effort, but a blanket ban on every individual from any country is completely short-sighted, unAmerican and unChristian.

    Fellow LDS friends, please review Elder Patrick Kearon's general conference talk "Refuge from the Storm" and use this as a guiding factor in how to respond to this topic and ban.

    God bless us all.

  • What in Tucket? Provo, UT
    Jan. 29, 2017 9:14 a.m.

    There is a new electronic system for vetting that can 10 persons with one operator within 10 minutes and is 90%+ accurate. The problem is that Muslims from any country can eventually become radicalized and all the sweet and nice Muslims that have gone to Europe as has been mentioned do not have such a great record. Yes I am paranoid.

  • knied Layton, UT
    Jan. 29, 2017 8:59 a.m.

    Why is it that almost every time a read a story about Muslims or Islam the writer fails to differentiate between Islamist, a political movement, and Islam the religion. Both consider themselves Muslim. The two are not the same and to write of one and not consider the other is either intellectually naive or dishonest. The reality is they are inseparable connected and until Islam the religion reforms itself and separates from Islamist and the political movement they will continue to suffer. Love really has nothing to do with it.

  • utahcoyote Saint George, UT
    Jan. 29, 2017 8:33 a.m.

    interesting to me that whenever these issues get discussed and actions like trump's executive order are created, somehow saudi arabia always gets away free. its generally acknowledged by most that saudi arabia funds a large chunk of militant islamic terrorism globally, and its a fact that almost all of the 9/11 bombers were saudis.

    right after 9/11 the bush team made sure that prominent saudis were able to leave america quickly~~when no one else was flying. now, for some reason that i don't understand, trump choose to not include saudi arabia in his executive order. it is the saudi money or something else that makes them the exception?

  • believe the MSM? Lol! Boise, ID
    Jan. 29, 2017 7:54 a.m.

    Respectfully I have to disagree with this article. Obama banned Iraq refugees for 6 months in 2011. I don't remember anyone protesting then. I don't even recall the media reporting about it. It's amazing to me how easy it is for some people to fall in line with the media & react to their reporting just the way they planned for the public to react. What Pres.Obama did then and what Pres.Trump is doing now is no different.
    I find nothing wrong with President Trump's ban for 3 months or President Obama's ban for 6 months.
    Until the President can assure the American people are safe in their own country I see the ban as essential to our safety. Isn't it the job of the President to keep the American citizens safe? And to compare this ban to U.S. Secretary of State William Evarts' effort to prevent Mormons from immigrating to the United States is ridiculous.
    These matters have NOTHING to do with religious bigotry and intolerance towards a man’s religious sentiments. It's about keeping the ones who want to kill us out. And until they figure out a way to vet them properly this is how it has to be.

  • george of the jungle goshen, UT
    Jan. 29, 2017 7:35 a.m.

    You might look at Shania law. Big difference.

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    Jan. 29, 2017 7:21 a.m.

    Having lived in a Christian dominant and cooperative community where the people considered Mormons non-Christian and the feelings from that time, I know what it is like. Someone broke into our chapel and poured gas all around and lit a fire to burn the chapel. That happened in the northwest and not just in the south. No investigation was done and justice was not completed. This was not in Nauvou or Farr West nor in Independence. We need to remember that we live in a world God created and all people are created by Him. We are to love God and all people.

  • Palmetto Bug Columbia, SC
    Jan. 29, 2017 7:06 a.m.

    We already have extreme vetting of immigrants, particularly refugees. It can take years for a Syrian refugee to pass through all the bureaucracy, paperwork, and interviews before coming to the US, all while avoiding being killed in an ugly war.

    Trumps order is directly targeted at Muslims even if it pretends to focus on nationality.
    "prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual's country of nationality."
    His order singles out seven majority Muslim nations, thus he is specifically targeting Muslims.

    Should we do more to help these people in their own countries? Sure. Should we also do more to take in refugees? Absolutely. Refugees could once look to America as a nation of hope. Trump's policy makes us look like a nation of fear.

  • Brent Garner Idaho Falls, ID
    Jan. 29, 2017 6:42 a.m.

    The author's comparison between Mormon immigration, which was legal at the time despite claims to the opposite, and the refugee problem today is disingenuous at best. First, look at the problems these Muslim immigrants in Europe are causing. Despite propaganda and false claims to the contrary, Mormon immigrants did none of these. This ban is aimed at preventing what is happening in Europe form happening here. It is legal. It is constitutional. The judge is wrong and is playing to left wing politics. He should be removed from the bench.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Jan. 29, 2017 5:59 a.m.

    "When did the Mormons fly airplanes in to buildings?"

    Excellent point. But then does't that bring up this next point?

    Those who "fly airplanes in to buildings" were almost exclusively from from Saudi Arabia. If this "ban" is aimed at terrorism, shouldn't that country be on the list?

  • JackBuckeye Marysville, OH
    Jan. 29, 2017 5:11 a.m.

    In plain English, it's not a ban on Muslims. It's a 90 day ban on persons coming from certain countries that are known terrorist havens. Period.

  • UtahBlueDevil Lehi Ut & Durham, NC
    Jan. 29, 2017 4:56 a.m.

    Bottom line - deciding immigration law is not within Trump's authority. He must work with congress to pass laws with regard to who is and is not allowed in this country. He may be justified in his frustration over congress' lack of action - but that does not give him the ability to establish immigration quotas or restrictions on people. This is one executive order that went well beyond Trump's authority.

    There is no excuse for Trump to not be working with congress here. He has both house and senate in his camp. I get Trump is used to being able to just dictate his will - but this job doesn't afford that right to his current job.

    Trump has the right to manage the process - to give directives on how laws are enforced and priorities - but he can't create his own immigration laws, bans nor quotas. He must work with congress.

    Jan. 29, 2017 1:14 a.m.

    Here's a quote attributed to Pastor Martin Niemoller, reflecting on his experiences in Nazi Germany.
    "First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out-
    Because I was not a Socialist.
    Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out-
    Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
    Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-
    Because I was not a Jew.
    Then they came for me-and there was no one left to speak for me"

    I would hope that all freedom loving people would speak out against Trump's vitriolic actions.

  • byugraduate Las Vegas, NV
    Jan. 29, 2017 1:06 a.m.

    The constant comparison to early Mormon times is getting really old. they have nothing to do with each other. A nation has the right to protect itself from terrorists. Have we forgotten 9/11 already. Saudi Arabia should be added to list since many terrorists have come from there. If we let all 7 billion people in the world immigrate to the US, would it solve all the problems. Of course not. We have limited resources. There must be balanced immigration an all immigrates must assimilate.

    Jan. 29, 2017 12:43 a.m.

    Trump has said that religious minorities from these Muslim nations may enter. So it kinda is a Muslim ban. Here's the thing. San Bernardino, Fort Hood, Boston, etc involved Muslims who were radicalized long after they came to this country. So banning entry will do nothing to make us safer. It just panders to paranoia, while harming thousands of decent, desperate people. So much for the "home of the brave".

  • worf McAllen, TX
    Jan. 29, 2017 12:43 a.m.

    People can be helped without bringing them into our living rooms. Mideast culture and history is filled with wars and contention and would eventually clash with ours.

  • Shaun Sandy, UT
    Jan. 29, 2017 12:09 a.m.

    @patriot. Weren't you and others upset that Obama didn't call a terrorist radical Islamist?

    However you are defending trump because his order did not specifically say to ban Muslims. Call a spade a spade this is a temporary ban of Muslims.

    Also didn't see Saudia Arabia on the list I wonder why that is.

  • Gerald Rampton Mapleton, UT
    Jan. 28, 2017 11:32 p.m.

    I disagree.
    The Mormon ban/Governor Boggs, etc., had nothing to do with renegade Mormons randomly going around and blowing people up in suicide vests. But in totality was regarding anti-Mormon sentiment.
    President Trumps ban, is not only temporary, until around 90 days, till we can regulate the true terrorists from coming into our country better, but also is based on keeping the terrorists OUT of our country from blowing people up. Those terrorists are monks or catholic priests, but are Muslim extremists.
    Stop focusing on religion so much. Rather, the focus needs to be on those who cause the terror! Sure they are primarily from Islamic countries. That's not my problem nor yours, but Islamic countries' problems until at least they assist us better and we can regulate the terrorist from such countries from infiltrating our own country.
    Trump is very smart! And I applaud him for such a bold move...

  • DfanRed Mesa, AZ
    Jan. 28, 2017 11:26 p.m.

    I read all the above comments and it is amazing how uninformed people are. The largest terrorist attack on US soil was complete 19 Saudis and one Egyptian on 9/11. Neither of those countries are having immigration stopped. We have a vetting system and so far it has worked. Most if not all other attacks have been committed by US citizens. Not refugees. Please do a little research. The Islamic faith is not normally violent, but there are always people who go to far. There have been people of the all religions that take things to far. The refugees from Syria are just trying to survive.

  • Frozen Fractals Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 28, 2017 11:22 p.m.

    Yes, it's a ban on anyone from those countries... but there's one little detail... Trump thinks Christian refugees in that area have been ignored by Obama. He's interested in getting more of them out. So just wait, they're working on a way to make exceptions that allow Christians to come out.

  • OneWifeOnly San Diego, CA
    Jan. 28, 2017 11:18 p.m.

    Uncle Rico, the 9/11 terrorists were from countries not on the list. Countries where the Trump Organization has business ties. I see glaring conflicts of interest. In fact, none of the terrorists acts since 9/11 were committed by people from these countries. This will not make us safer. And we better hope none of the Iran necular inspectors are US citizens, because I think we are going to be banned from that country.

  • 112358 Alpine, UT
    Jan. 28, 2017 11:13 p.m.

    The analogy in this article doesn’t hold. The allegations against Mormons were specious. It is naive, however, to imagine that migration from Muslim-majority nations is risk-free. Germany learned this the hard way when it allowed mass immigration. On just one night in 2015, over 1,200 German women were sexually abused or raped by immigrants. German authorities attempted to hide these assaults, as did the German and US press.

    In addition, the status of women in Muslim nations is a far cry from what the status of women has ever been in the US. Numerous reputable surveys have found that large majorities of Muslims blame women wearing revealing clothing for inviting sexual assaults.

    Moreover, we must never forget the lack of vigilance that enabled the terrorist attacks of 9/11.

    We must be compassionate, and not completely close the door to immigration, but we owe it to our children to be wise also. We should not use false analogies to imagine that all cultures are equivalent to our own, and that there is no risk to immigration. If we do this, we risk subjecting our daughters to the sexual assaults seen in Germany, and our society to terrorism seen throughout the Middle East.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Jan. 28, 2017 10:59 p.m.

    Fake news once again.

    1. There is no muslim ban. Read the presidents directive -- it NEVER mentions the word Muslim. This is a lie by the media and the writer of this article should know better and apoligize . Trump's ban is for ALL people regardless of religious affiliation from TERRORIST countries until we have proper vetting in place. America first!!
    2. The Mormons were expelled and issued an extermination order by governor Boggs. This has NOTHING to do with Trumps order. There WAS a religious test in this case with Gov Boggs.

    this article is FAKE news and a bogus comparison and people better start wising up and not accepting opinion unless facts are given and checked. That didn't happen with this article sadly. The deseret news is NOT a place to find fair and balanced reporting anymore. Reader beware!!

  • Impartial7 DRAPER, UT
    Jan. 28, 2017 10:57 p.m.

    @DNews subscriber:
    "Too many attacks have already taken place because we have not screened thoroughly enough. No more!"

    No attacks in the US from people from the 7 countries that Trump banned. Please do some homework.

  • Bigger Bubba Herriman, UT
    Jan. 28, 2017 10:50 p.m.

    Well, people are not cutting off heads, driving car bombs into crowds, burning captives, and blowing up world historical sites in the name of Mormonism, so I don't think a Muslim ban looks like a Mormon ban.

  • milojthatch Los Angeles, CA
    Jan. 28, 2017 10:45 p.m.

    It's a little more complicated than just substituting "Muslim" for "Mormon" and then shouting "kumbaya!" There are some serious differences and even more serious things at stake here, like the existence of the free world. Instead of demonizing people who bring up the reality of Radical Islam, we should be supporting and backing the efforts of those in the Muslim community that are trying to combat it. I'm talking about Muslims like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Tawfiq Hamid, Khurram Dara, Zuhdi Jasser or Asra Nomani. Instead so-appointed PC police attack or repel the efforts of these brave would be reformers. If we are serious about peace and ending the violence, we must deal with this issue head on instead of just calling everyone trying to deal with the problem a bigot while more and more Islamic youth fall prey to radicalization.

  • Multi Bountiful, UT
    Jan. 28, 2017 10:30 p.m.

    So we should do what the new rape capital of Europe did then? (Sweden) Just let our country be over run with people who's culture, is so very opposite of ours, and isn't inclusive of all.

    Sweden is absolutely regretting letting in the amount of refugees that they did. So is Germany, a huge part of Brexit was the inability of Britain to control who came into their country. Do you think France is happy with the Islamic problem they are currently dealing with?

    The Islamic culture isn't anywhere near ready to deal with the progressive culture of the western nations. The most progressive Islamic nations fall terribly short of what we would consider moral. Not a single Islamic nation passes the Human Rights test.

    Women in Saudi Arabia must wear the Hijab, or Naqib, it isn't a choice for them. Turkish men can marry girls as young as 12, Jordan has a cultural problem with honor killings, which is why they allow men to not face jail time if they marry their rape victim. Qatar still allows slavery, homosexuality is illegal in every Islamic country mostly under the pain of death if found out.

    They are not ready to deal with our nations in a productive manner.

  • Uncle Rico Provo, UT
    Jan. 28, 2017 10:06 p.m.

    When did the Mormons fly airplanes in to buildings?

  • CA transplant Pleasant Grove, UT
    Jan. 28, 2017 9:52 p.m.

    Mormon comparisons are a waste of time. It's 2017, we vet immigrants to enter the US, and if we can't, then they can't enter, period. If those countries can't provide info we need to vet them, then we close it down until they can. We err on the side of caution, not rolling the dice.

    Jan. 28, 2017 9:52 p.m.

    Not sure what this article is attempting to do, is it to convince the LDS who supported Trump that they are wrong? I doubt that will work, in spite of the obvious comparison.

    But, it is scary the direction the country is heading in with Trump as president. We can only hope that America's system of checks and balances can mitigate the damage Trump will do and people will wise up enough so he doesn't get another term.

    At least one judge has the integrity to fight this by declaring all those with valid visas legally permitted to stay.

  • lets be mature Meridian/USA, ID
    Jan. 28, 2017 9:43 p.m.

    I'm just rolling my eyes reading this. Trump isn't banning muslims. He's limiting immigration from countries with high extremist Muslim population, and the mainstream media, which unfortunately the DN has become a part of, is reporting that he is discriminating Muslims. At least try to be honest

  • prelax Murray, UT
    Jan. 28, 2017 9:41 p.m.

    I did not know that Mormons had a 90 day temporary ban. This is for non citizens here on visas (that are not green cards --permanent residents) , Mormons were citizens.

    Jan. 28, 2017 9:31 p.m.

    If it banned all Muslims, I might agree, but it only names seven nations. Just like Carter did to Iran. It's within the Presidents right.

  • toosmartforyou Kaysville, UT
    Jan. 28, 2017 9:23 p.m.

    I'm glad that "My View" can be made of fake news and political satire. This whole article is based upon emotions and not looking at the facts at all. First of all, the headline should say "Historical Ban of Mormons", not Mormon Ban. It makes it look like Mormons want to ban people the way Mr. Trump wants to ban them. Then intermixing every other line between two different centuries seems a strange way to make a point. I'm certain there are phrases in the Old Testament that could apply just as well if you want to take things out of context. Why not evaluate the issues Mr. Trump is trying to resolve, such as "illegal immigration" and propose a solution that is better than his, along with an explanation of why it is better. Journalism is moving backwards with this type of analysis.

  • The Meliorist Grande Cache, 00
    Jan. 28, 2017 9:05 p.m.

    I don't know Trump as a person and won't judge him personally. However his actions towards people different than himself suggest that Americans need to speak up and let him know that they expect much more.

    Where is Trump on specific groups?

    Women? Not doing too well so far.

    Mexicans? Well their President doesn't think too highly.

    Mormons? Some lip service so far but his attack on whether Mitt Romney was actually Mormon is scary.

    Journalists? He is showing some real discriminatory tones there.

    Muslims? He seems to be pandering to the racists on that one.

    Chinese? Japanese? Intolerance again.

    Russia? Okay ironically he seems to have great things to say there. Hmmm?

    Time for people to start writing their Congressmen and Senators. Because Trump isn't supposed to be in charge. The people are.

  • Utah Girl Chronicles Eagle Mountain, UT
    Jan. 28, 2017 8:59 p.m.

    One significant difference in 1879 was there was no right-wing radio or blogosphere excoriating Mormons constantly. If there was, they might not have survived. The propaganda runs thick these days

  • Sanefan Wellsville, UT
    Jan. 28, 2017 8:57 p.m.

    Intersting spin on a topic that has no bearing on todays society. Let's see, peaceful, almost pacifist Mormons coming to America in 1870's vs folks from terrorist ridden countries who want to kill us. Geez, let's get real here.

  • Say No to BO Mapleton, UT
    Jan. 28, 2017 8:53 p.m.

    Surely the perfesser can see two important differences:
    1) Mormons were coming INTO the USA. Why would we ban Muslims from going to Syria?
    2) There is the small matter of a history of violence associated with Muslims. How many Mormons set off bombs in crowds?

    Let's compare apples to apples here.

  • PhxBlue Henderson, NV
    Jan. 28, 2017 8:51 p.m.

    Since when is this a "Muslim Ban?" As I understand it, it's a restriction of open immigration from certain countries known to encourage emigration of nuts to the US for the purpose of killing non-Muslims (ask Germany, Sweden and the UK how that's going) until we can ensure that they're not radicalized and intent on killing us.

    Sounds reasonable to me.

    There's a reason I lock my doors at night in my home. Does this make me mean or unreasonable?

  • HSTucker Holladay, UT
    Jan. 28, 2017 8:46 p.m.

    In Elder Robert S. Wood's April 2006 general conference talk, Elder Wood (a Harvard PhD in Political Science) relates an experience relevant to this article.

    "I recall that as a graduate student I wrote a critique of an important political philosopher. It was clear that I disagreed with him. My professor told me that my paper was good, but not good enough. Before you launch into your criticism, she said, you must first present the strongest case for the position you are opposing, one that the philosopher himself could accept. I redid the paper. I still had important differences with the philosopher, but I understood him better, and I saw the strengths and virtues, as well as limitations, of his belief."

    Had Dr. Reeve followed Elder Wood's example, he might not have mischaracterized President Trump's vetting of immigrants with the misleading and needlessly inflammatory term "Muslim ban."

  • HSTucker Holladay, UT
    Jan. 28, 2017 8:17 p.m.

    I am curious what the 19th century Mormon parallels were to 9/11, Osama Bin Laden, the Boston Marathon Bombing, San Bernardino, just to name a few. What is the Mormon equivalent of violent jihad? Of ISIL?

    Dr. Reeve, for all of his fancy academic credentials, has completely missed the point, starting with the very headline calling vetting a "Muslim ban," which it clearly is not.

    Deseret News readers deserve better.

  • DougSegesman Bountiful, UT
    Jan. 28, 2017 8:10 p.m.

    "Muslim ban looks like Mormon ban"

    I was thinking exactly the same. Those pesky Mormons should be banned. They sing their praises as they blow up buildings. They behead those of different faiths. They terrorize non-believers. And, they refuse to assimilate and kill others who refuse to believe.

    Oh wait..... That's not the Mormons........

  • shark Buena Vista, VA
    Jan. 28, 2017 8:10 p.m.

    "In 1841, the Nauvoo City Council drafted a provision on religious liberty which included “Mohammedans” among those granted “free toleration and equal privileges” in the Mormon city." True. And, religious discrimination is a bad thing.
    But, there are two sides to the story. Back in Joseph Smith's day, "Mohammedans" were not in the practice of bombings, shootings, and driving trucks into crowds of innocent people. Nor are most Mohammedans (Muslims) in that practice today. But while most Muslims are not terrorists, almost all terrorism that might affect Americans or other Westerners today is committed by Muslims. We need to balance tolerance of others' faith, with keeping our citizens safe. I don't claim to know where that balance is, or how to do it. But we must acknowledge the problem before we can solve it.

  • Rubydo Provo, UT
    Jan. 28, 2017 8:00 p.m.

    Mormons don't or never did practice the belief in honor killings, the death penalty for apostates and adulterers, or the amputation of the limbs of thieves much like it is in many Islamic dominated countries which doesn't make these long held religious beliefs acceptable in our modern society. Mormons had to give up their fundamental practice of polygamy in order to become part of the United States.

  • Mary Lash Rigby, ID
    Jan. 28, 2017 7:56 p.m.

    Thank you!
    With all that the church has stated and counseled us concerning immigrants and refugees, we, of all people, should be taking a stand against this! Everyone of us should be contacting our congress members and urging them to fight this. Especially in Utah, which as a state, so often represents the church whether intentionally or not.

  • DN Subscriber Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Jan. 28, 2017 7:48 p.m.

    This is not a "Muslim ban" but rather a ban on people whose backgrounds cannot be adequately checked. Most happen to be from predominantly Muslim countries. But, terrorist attacking the west, including the U.S. also are mostly from Muslim countries.

    If a thousand men are walking down the street, freshly released from prison, rational people would not invite them all into their homes to spend the night with their family. You might consider doing so for thieves or non-violent criminals but choose not to invite in the rapists and murderers. Of course, you have to check backgrounds to do that.

    Lack of enforcement of our borders to keep out economic intruders is bad enough, but failure to prudently screen against those who wish to kill us is totally unacceptable.

    There is no delicate way to do this without offending someone, so let's get on with screening those we can to admit those we wish to have among us, and to reject anyone we cannot adequately clear.

    Too many attacks have already taken place because we have not screened thoroughly enough. No more!

  • iamgroot Provo, UT
    Jan. 28, 2017 7:43 p.m.

    Oh, stop it. What a blatant, yet inapplicable, appeal.

    Times are different and it's a much more global, dangerous world out there. I hope Trump is simply buying time to set up a real vetting process for immigrants to ensure the safety of our own fellow citizens throughout the country.

    It is our right to live in safety. And, it's our obligation to maintain it for ourselves and others around us.

  • Impartial7 DRAPER, UT
    Jan. 28, 2017 7:37 p.m.

    Major disconnect here. The backlash against mormons was that ALL mormons believed in, and practiced polygamy. The muslim ban is based on the mistaken belief that ALL muslims are terrorists. Not a close comparison.