And there were some who died with fevers, which at some seasons of the year were very frequent in the land—but not so much so with fevers, because of the excellent qualities of the many plants and roots which God had prepared to remove the cause of diseases, to which men were subject by the nature of the climate–
Alma 46:40

I used to believe that there was no such thing as depression, and by that I mean clinical depression. How could there be a malady that affected your emotional state outside of your own control? It seemed contrary to the doctrine of agency, of free choice.

I wish I hadn’t contributed to the stigma that still surrounds these psychiatric disorders. I wish I hadn’t thought, and even said, that all depression is the product of sin. I was using Moroni 10:22 as my ammunition:

And if ye have no hope ye must needs be in despair; and despair cometh because of iniquity.

See what I did there? I equated depression with despair, of the feeling of hopelessness with having no hope. From there, it’s easy to say, Oh, I’m depressed because I’m sinful.

And that would make sense — depression as a result of sin makes more sense than depression as a result of seratonin levels in your brain chemistry. But the hope Moroni was speaking of is different than the hope we seem to lack when we’re depressed.

The hope Moroni is referring to is specifically hope “to be raised unto life eternal” (Moroni 7:41). The hope we who have felt depression may or may not be related to that at all. In a search for a legitimate reason for our depression, our minds may cling to feelings of unworthiness, of being damned and there being no hope for us, but really any reason will do. We can lose hope of ever having an enjoyable career, a family, a healthy body, or maybe wealth, status, or pride.

I speak from experience. My depression has never been so constricted that it could only be attached to one reason — it was really just random. Whatever concern I had at the time became an insurmountable giant, a dismal failure I could never hope to overcome.

You don’t need to examine the logic of a depressed person’s hopelessness for long before you can see there is no logic. That’s partially why the stigma exists, I think: depressed people are annoyingly illogical! (And most psychiatric disorders impede their victims’ abilities to be logical, it seems.) It takes wisdom and experience to recognize that the feelings one has are not based in reality, and that this is likely another storm of depression that needs to be weathered.

But God has blessed us in these days with a help for depression in the form of modern medicine. Many, many people are still afraid to try it, or maybe they’re like I was: adamant that the solution is in being more righteous.

My darkest time in my life, the time when I was closest to sticking my head in a gas oven and giving up on living, was also when I was at my most measurably righteous. I was a missionary in Argentina, working my hardest at bringing happiness to strangers for twelve hours a day, as well as studying scriptures for hours in the morning.  (And, for the record, I was getting more exercise and sunlight than I’d seen in my youth in Florida. My depression was not the product of ‘not getting out’ or ‘not getting enough exercise’. While sunlight and exercise have certainly shown to reduce depression, I’m not at all convinced they work for all cases.)

My point is this: I thought I would never be happy. I was doing the very most a person can do in living the Gospel, and I was beginning to believe that I was simply doomed to feeling miserable the rest of my life. That kind of emotional pain was so great, I began plotting how I could take my life and end the pain.

Instead, I waded through misery as it occurred on and off for several years, until I finally conceded to the wishes of my family and got on anti-depressants. I’m one of the lucky ones for whom these medications have worked very well. And in the process I’ve become much more attuned to when my feelings are the product of external issues versus internal ones. When my meds fail me, as SSRIs are prone to do on occasion, I’m better at recognizing it.

To diagnose another’s depression as the product of sin is a massive mistake. It smacks of Mosiah 4:17, where the unrighteous person judges that “the man has brought upon himself his misery.” To diagnose your own depression that way is to believe God is punishing you for your sins, and to lack faith that he truly loves you, and wants you to be happy.

A loving God has provided medicine in our day through the inspired minds of doctors and scientists working for our benefit. Note the scripture at the beginning of this post, especially the part about God preparing remedies to remove the cause of diseases. Doesn’t that sound more like the God you know loves you?

Mrs. Dayton,

I suppose it’s too late for you to rescind your sponsorship of HB 70, so I’m reluctant to even bother emailing you, but I’m going to anyway.

When Arizona passed their controversial immigration law last year, I was actually all for it. I couldn’t see the problem – people were here illegally, and the law enabled officers to confirm citizenship status (or legal residency). It sounded great. In retrospect, however, I think I was justifying my own prejudices.

The problem with people being here illegally can’t be solved by hunting them down, asking to “let me see your papers.” It might reduce the number of ethical, upright people whose only offense is coming here illegally, but the ones that are determined to break our laws will just go farther underground.

The bill even predicts the crimes it will create. From http://le.utah.gov/~2011/bills/hbillint/hb0070.htm:

86 (4) In conjunction with the strike force and subject to available funding, the Office of
87 the Attorney General shall establish a Fraudulent Documents Identification Unit:
88 (a) for the primary purpose of investigating, apprehending, and prosecuting individuals
89 or entities that participate in the sale or distribution of fraudulent documents used for
90 identification purposes; and
91 (b) to specialize in fraudulent identification documents created and prepared for
92 individuals who are unlawfully residing within the state.

So its authors acknowledge that fraudulent documents will become a bigger problem, and that we’ll need a task force to handle enforcement there, too – spending more funding that could have gone to other programs.

The real solution is to grant the immigrants citizenship. The federal government needs to lift immigration caps, and return to the days of Ellis Island. How have we strayed so far from these amazing words?

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!
- from “The New Colossus”, engraved on a plaque inside the Statue of Liberty

Obviously, no state government can grant U.S. citizenship. But we can certainly avoid exacerbating the problem.

Randy Tayler
Orem, UT

There but for the grace of God, go I.

Nobody’s sure who said it, but it’s most often attributed to evangelical preacher John Bradford (who was burned at the stake in 1555.)

What about you? What’s your favorite quote or idiom? You can include translations of phrases from other languages, if you like. There’s no prize here.

But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
-Matthew 18:6

Last month, Colorado resident Phillip Greaves published a book through Amazon.com titled, The Pedophile’s Guide to Love and Pleasure: A Child-Lover’s Code of Conduct. Threats to boycott Amazon eventually led to them yanking the book, though they initially cited the First Amendment as their defense for publishing it in the first place.

This last week, he was arrested for violating Florida’s obscenity laws. He sold the book to some detectives in Polk County, Florida through the mail.

You catch that? Police in a different state, across the country, took it upon themselves to catch this guy. Perhaps he hasn’t been arrested on the heaviest of counts, but it was something. And it may not stick – who knows. I was just glad law enforcement somewhere was taking a visible stand.

Now, perhaps Greaves’ own local authorities are watching him very carefully for any other crimes he may commit, because he’s clearly a pedophile, but the book is a crime in and of itself.

I spent a while googling until I found a contact address for the Polk County Sheriff’s office, and sent this email, with the subject line “Thanks Sheriff Judd!”:

I’m so grateful you and your team have arrested the pedophilia author. Thank you for reaching out across state borders to do what his home state should’ve done.

-Randy Tayler

Today I got the following from Sheriff Judd:

Randy,

My communications staff forwarded me your email. Thank you so much for taking the time out of your busy schedule to forward me your thoughts. I appreciate your support more than you know. Nothing is more precious than our children – keeping them safe is my top priority.

Grady Judd

The man’s a class act. Thanks, Sheriff.

I’d love to hear your answers.

A lady asks a gentleman what party he belongs to. He replies “My grandfather was a Republican, my father was a Republican, and I’m a Republican.” The lady is appalled. “What if your grandfather had been a horse-thief?”

The gentleman replies, “Well, then, I suppose I’d be a Democrat.”

-Told to me by my father when I was a kid. To date, it’s my favorite joke about Democrats… or perhaps it’s about Republicans.

It’s taken me a long time to realize this. I’m pretty embarrassed.

Latter-day Saint Democrats aren’t evil.

No, wait! Hear me out, LDS Republicans! Don’t go!

We’ve been told that you can be a righteous, worthy member of the Church and be a Democrat. Elder Marlin K. Jensen was sent by the First Presidency to address the issue in an interview with the Salt Lake Tribune all the way back in 1998. (See http://bit.ly/ldsdemocrat – if you want to read the article in the Tribune archives, you’ll need to pay and subscribe, but you can find it at http://bit.ly/cdGlwc.) Among other shockers, we get the following:

“One of the things that prompted this discussion in the first place was the regret that’s felt about the decline of the Democratic Party [in Utah] and the notion that may prevail in some areas that you can’t be a good Mormon and a good Democrat at the same time,” Jensen said.

“There have been some awfully good men and women who have been both and are both today. So I think it would be a very healthy thing for the church — particularly the Utah church — if that notion could be obliterated.”

Any time I heard the First Presidency say something like “We don’t endorse any political party or candidate,” I kind of assumed they were winking. My thoughts were something like, “Sure, they have to say that – otherwise the Church would lose its tax-exempt status. But we all know what they really mean.”

I’m pretty sure what they really meant was what they actually said. I was reading between the lines because I didn’t like what the lines were saying. My imagined interpretation was far more palatable.

Back in 1998, they also made it clear that what matters is the candidate. They didn’t exactly say “party, schmarty,” but they emphasized the person, not their party:

…members are counseled to study the candidates carefully and vote for those individuals they believe will act with integrity and in ways conducive to good communities and good government.
“News of the Church,” Ensign, Apr. 1998, p.77

But somehow that just never stuck. All I could think was, “Sure, Latter-day Saints can be Democrats. We’re not all on the same spiritual level; they’ll come around as they mature.”

Yeah. Really. I thought that.

Well, I’ve matured a bit. I’m not a registered anything anymore, but I can at least imagine registering for a different party now. In Jensen’s interview, he also said,

“Everyone who is a good Latter-day Saint is going to have to pick and choose a little bit regardless of the party that they’re in and that may be required a lot more in the future than it has been in the past. But I think there’s room for that and the gospel leaves us lots of latitude.”

I’m glad to have finally learned this lesson, albeit a dozen years after it was taught.

P.S. Can I add something about Elder Marlin K. Jensen? I was roommates with his son Ryan back in 1998, and was invited to Ryan’s reception when he got married. Elder Jensen spoke at the dinner. It was like no other wedding reception I’d ever attended — or have attended since. I felt the Spirit when Elder Jensen spoke. I remember thinking, “I want my wedding to be like this. This has been holy.”

As we left the building (the Joseph Smith Memorial Building, if I recall correctly), we passed another reception in progress. There was music, and dancing, and a typical wedding celebration. People inside were happy. But it paled in comparison to what I felt. I’d felt a peaceful happiness that ran much deeper than I was accustomed to.

I have zero recollection of what Elder Jensen said as he presided over his son’s reception, but I remember what I saw. He was incredibly humble and happy. He exemplified the kind of man I wanted to be. I’m grateful I had the chance to see an example like him away from the pulpit.

He’s a Democrat. I’m glad I didn’t know that at the time. I might’ve missed the whole thing.

[catch-phrase] –noun 1. a phrase that attracts or is meant to attract attention.

[prop-uh-gan-duh] -noun 1. information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc.

It’s election time again, which means a surfeit of signs that say nothing but a name, an elected office, and maybe a catchy slogan. That’s democracy in action: make your name a brand, and hope folks buy solely because of brand-name recognition.

No wait, that’s capitalism.

Oh, no, wait. I was right the first time. Democracy.

It bothers me no end. In the information age, there’s no excuse for not pointing people to a source of more information. Instead of saying “DONALD DUCK FOR MAYOR,” or maybe “Donald’s a Do-er!”, the sign should give an address to a website, like “whydonaldduck.com” and a call to action.

I'm proud of the patriotic little hat

So why don’t politicians do this? Don’t they want an informed electorate?

Um, perhaps not.

Of the people who go to a site to learn more about a candidate, how many are going to agree with every stance the candidate has? Such a site could cost a politician votes. Maybe folks would’ve voted for them because their party affiliations match, but now they’re dissuaded by something as awful as issues.

So, instead of trying to educate, most politicians content themselves with signs. Why? Maybe because it works. People tend to vote with the herd — if we see more signs for Donald than for Daffy, we trust our neighbors’ opinions and go with the flow. Don’t we? Some of us, at any rate?

I think that’s part of why we form political parties. Candidate A is my guy! No matter that his integrity is questionable, or that his views don’t quite align with what I thought this party stood for… he’s MY guy! Root, root, root for the home team! Us vs. Them!

Sports fanaticism is a lot like political fanaticism. People stick to their party rather than considering individual candidates. Last night, Elder Uchtdorf said:

I’ve always loved participating in and attending sporting events, but I confess there are times when the lack of civility in sports is embarrassing. How is it that normally kind and compassionate human beings can be so intolerant and filled with hatred toward an opposing team and its fans. I have watched sports fans villify and demonize their rivals. They look for any flaw and magnify it. They justify their hatred with broad generalizations and apply them to everyone associated with the other team. When ill-fortune afflicts their rival, they rejoice.

My dear brethren, unfortunately, we see today, too often, the same kind of attitude and behavior spill over into the public discourse of politics, ethnicity, and religion.

-October 2, 2010 Priesthood Session of General Conference

Couldn’t have said it better. Which is why I quoted it.

If more educating signage isn’t available, should you not show your support? Nah, showing your support is fine. If you truly want your candidate to win, you’ll want votes from the herd, too. Why let the opposing candidate nab the lots cast by the herd-voters?

However! Wouldn’t you like to educate folks as well? Wouldn’t you like to raise some herd-voters, some party-line voters, up to the level of educated, informed electors?

I say, if you’re going to do a sign, do a blog post as well. Not web-savvy? Don’t have a blog? Fine, go create a one-post blog at blogger.com. You could add a link to your post to that sign in your front yard.

(Oh, need a nice, short link folks can remember? Go to bit.ly, where you can plug in the link for your post, and create a more succinct link. They let you customize your link, too. Like this post, for example. Bit.ly assigned me the link bit.ly/d5ZoOV, but I created a customized link of bit.ly/electionsigns. The latter is just short enough folks might remember it. Took me 10 seconds.)

In all things, I think we should avoid mob mentality. And we should remember that God isn’t registered to either political party.

In fighting illegal immigrants, I’ve found there are three main arguments people make.

Argument 1: Illegal aliens cost the rest of us taxpaying citizens money.

It costs us money to educate their kids, to provide welfare and health care for those who can’t work, etc. We shouldn’t have to pay for anybody who is here illegally.

What this argument does is puts a price on freedom. Any arguments that involve the cost of illegal immigrants need to take into account the value of the immigrants’ liberty.

Maybe we feel that they were already free, that coming here doesn’t grant them any more freedom than they had. Let’s examine that. Take Mexico. You know Mexico, right? Crime-ridden, poverty-stricken Mexico? “Don’t-drink-the-water” Mexico? No? Let me give you some headlines from the last four days:

• 25 die in Mexican state on single day. And nearly 30,000 people have been killed in drug violence since the government’s bloody war on organized crime began in 2006.
• Mexican mayor gunned down inside own office. And at least seven mayors in various Mexican states have been assassinated in 2010.
• Juarez children learn survival skills. Schoolkids are learning what to do if shooting erupts. Nice.
• 85 inmates escape from prison in Mexico. How? Well, perhaps it has something to do with this: “Two prison guards are missing, and 44 were detained under suspicion of corruption.”

Violence is escalating in Mexico, but cartels and corruption have been ruling there for some time. Does that sound like freedom? Vote for who you want, but then have the drug lords kill them? Have those in charge of law enforcement guilty of corruption, of possible collusion with the criminals themselves?

I don’t think it’s just the poverty that motivates Mexicans to seek a better life inside our borders. It’s a better, safer life for themselves and their kids. I would want that, too. And I wouldn’t want to wait, either.

Now consider: we Americans pride ourselves in fighting for others’ freedom. We fought for Europe’s freedom in World War II, paying for it with our people’s lives. In the 1990s we fought to free Kuwait from a hostile invasion from Iraq. “Fighting for freedom” is often cited as the reason we go to war. Whatever your feelings towards the various wars of the last century, it’s clear that Americans believe in fighting for freedom, for anyone, anywhere.

But for some reason people don’t want to pay for the freedom illegal immigrants are enjoying here in the States. What is their freedom from tyranny worth?

What if illegal immigrants didn’t cost us anything? I mean true cost – if our kids could get the same education, our workforce could get the same pay – would we be bothered by their presence? Because if that’s the issue, then where’s the limit? At what price point will we say, sorry, go home, we don’t care what you were escaping, you cost too much.

When you cite what illegal immigrants cost us, you’re putting a price on freedom. Which is pretty silly, seeing as how we’ll give our whole lives to be free. Freedom is priceless.

In the Book of Mormon we read about the price people paid to let the people of Ammon come to their country. Remember that the Nephites even offered to protect these immigrants, rather than saying they would have to defend themselves:

And now behold, this will we do unto our brethren, that they may inherit the land Jershon; and we will guard them from their enemies with our armies, on condition that they will give us a portion of their substance to assist us that we may maintain our armies.

The Nephites were willing to pay the price of battle for the Anti-Nephi-Lehites’ freedom. Note that they asked for a portion of their substance in return. Do we get any recompense from our illegal population?

People who claim that illegal immigrants don’t pay taxes are, of course, exaggerating. Illegal immigrants still pay sales tax. They still pay property tax. But without being fully documented workers or citizens, they can’t really pay income tax.

Do you think they would if they could? Or do you think they’re enjoying a free ride? I hope you don’t believe the latter. Illegal immigrants take work at wages below minimum wage, because employers know they can get away with it. Contract laborers take reduced wages. They work harder than almost anyone I know, enduring hard work in harsh conditions.

They don’t pay income tax, but they pay a hefty price.  They are definitely contributors in our country, not freeloaders.

Argument 2: Illegal immigrants are breaking the law.

“Enough said! Get them out!” We Latter-day Saints pride ourselves on being law-abiding citizens. In the words of Joseph Smith,

We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.
-12th Article of Faith

And how can you obey, honor, and sustain the law while allowing illegal immigration?

As a missionary in Argentina (the Buenos Aires South mission – the best mission in the world, and don’t challenge me, or we’ll have to fight), I started with the belief that obedience was the most important part of the Gospel. Being obedient to the law, to commandments and counsel of Church leaders, and in my case, to the mission rules.

Frankly, I was wrong.

Obedience is not the first principle of the Gospel. It’s a principle, but there are other principles that trump it, and we learn this from the scriptures and our own Church history.

The first principle of the Gospel is faith, not obedience. (Why would you obey a commandment if you didn’t have faith first that it was a commandment from God?) And yet there’s something even greater than faith — charity. And Christ taught that charity trumps obedience.

No, really.

Consider when Christ and his disciples were accused of violating the Sabbath by plucking ears of corn and eating. He related how David and others had entered the temple, hungry, and ate the shewbread, “which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests.” Why was this permissible?

It relates to another teaching of the Savior’s. When asked which is the greatest commandment, he answered that the first was to love God, and that the second was to love thy neighbor. “On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”

In light of this, obedience to all other commandments and laws has to be examined as to its compliance with the first and most important laws.

My adherence to my mistaken notion, that I should put obedience above charity, caused a lot of contention and unhappiness. “No, sorry, we can’t teach you the discussions after 9:30 PM, because we have to be home before then.” I said that once, in essence. I wouldn’t share the Gospel with someone who wanted to hear it, but who had a full schedule, because of mission rules.

Thankfully, a wise companion set me straight, and I began to understand how charity trumps obedience. Sadly, it still took me a while to learn.

Perhaps I’m wrong? Maybe being obedient to the law is of greater import than I give it here? Well, let’s look, then, at two recent violations of the law in Utah.

The first is the violation of immigration law. Illegal immigrants. They’re here, and just by being here, they’re breaking the law. (One which I’ve discussed is uncharitable, and needs to be changed. But no matter.)

The second happened this last summer. In July 2010, government workers broke state and federal laws to compile a list of people — including addresses, birthdates, medical conditions, and some social security numbers — who were here illegally. (They released private records, a misdemeanor that could earn you 6 months in jail. If it’s discovered that they actually stole the records — and I’m not sure what constitutes “theft” versus “release” in their case — then it’s a felony that could lead to up to 5 years of prison time.)

The result? Fear amongst Latinos, for one thing. Whether or not they’re citizens, they feel singled-out, hated.

“My concern is not immigration. I am a citizen,” Utahn Jackie Martinez said. “My concern is certain individuals who have this hatred towards me, and who are willing to do anything to get Hispanics out of this state or this country. My fear is for myself and my children.”
-KSL.com, July 16, 2010

My thoughts? Surely this was the action of a few misguided individuals. Right? But the poll results on the same site (halfway down the page) seem to indicate that the sentiment is shared. No, it’s not a scientific poll. But I didn’t like what it said about my state.

Many, many in this state are Latter-day Saints. As such, we believe that “charity never faileth.” But I don’t think you can be charitable and condemnatory at the same time.

Which do you feel is the greater crime? That of the immigrants, or that of the vigilantes?

There’s a third, unspoken reason to fight the presence of illegal immigrants.

Argument 3: Racism.

Now, not everyone who is fighting illegal immigrants is racist. Not by a long shot. We’re quick to call people racist in this country, and I can’t stand it. But I think we would all do well to examine our hearts, our intentions, and see if it’s not racism that is sparking our disdain for those who have come to share our freedoms.

Once again it comes back to charity. I’d invite you to examine your own heart. Do you feel love for these neighbors we’ve been discussing? Or is there something about them that repulses you? Their culture, their language, their looks?

I think most of us feel some degree of distrust towards those whom we consider foreign. And maybe it’s not even all without cause — one month after moving to Orem, I woke up to flashing lights outside, and saw three kids in handcuffs in my driveway. My Latino next-door neighbors’ teenage son was arrested for some sort of gang-related crime. I had a lot of negative thoughts towards Latinos at that point.

But it’s wrong to let feelings like that take root. I should’ve done better at loving my neighbors, at reaching out to them. I’ve tried to do better since we’ve lived here. I’ve tried to clothe myself with the bond of charity. I’m still trying.

I wish that more Latter-day Saints would show tolerance towards those who have come to the United States illegally. What examples of Christlike charity we could be to those who have trespassed – in this case, literally – against us. What potential converts are living among us already, but who have only seen suspicion and judgment rather than love?

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!

- from “The New Colossus”, engraved on a plaque inside the Statue of Liberty

I love living in the United States.

I believe that the Americas truly are choice above all other lands (1 Ne. 2:20, 13:30; 2 Ne. 1:5, 10:19; Jacob 5:43; Ether 2:7,10,15, 9:20, 13:2), and that the United States Constitution was ordained of God (D&C 101:80). I believe the New Jerusalem will be built here (D&C 84:1-4), and I really like our food.

(That last one is worth mentioning, since we’re on the topic of immigration. Foods whose origins are Italian, Mexican, Thai, Chinese, Japanese, Indian, and Polynesian are all easy to find here. And while you might be able to get better Mexican food in Mexico, can you get decent sushi there? And how is the pizza in New Delhi? I honestly wonder if there is any place on Earth that has absorbed a greater variety of cultures.)

Most Americans* tend to agree. We love our country. Land of the free! Home of the brave!

Sadly, in the same breath, many selfishly want to keep others from enjoying what we’ve got. They’ll sing, “This land is your land, this land is my land,” but only that second phrase seems to reflect their feelings.

Our immigration laws are part of the problem — we cap how many people can become citizens each year. You have to get in line if you want to live here legally, and that line can take years to get through. Capping immigration is tragic to me. Why would we limit how many people can come here and enjoy the same freedoms as us?

Or said differently, what right do I have to exclude people from freedoms that I myself didn’t earn? I can’t even claim the childish excuse of “I was here first!”

Perhaps it’s because we don’t believe there’s enough to go around. Enough jobs, enough land, enough money. But we, as Latter-day Saints, shouldn’t be taken in by this false notion. We have it on good authority that there is plenty, so we shouldn’t hesitate to share:

For the earth is full, and there is enough and to spare; yea, I prepared all things, and have given unto the children of men to be agents unto themselves.
Therefore, if any man shall take of the abundance which I have made, and impart not his portion, according to the law of my gospel, unto the poor and the needy, he shall, with the wicked, lift up his eyes in hell, being in torment.

-Doctrine & Covenants 104:17-18

If you believe, as I do, that we have it better than a lot of other countries, then the laws that cap immigration become transparent: they are products of and for our selfishness, and they are not Christlike.

So how did the Nephites handle immigration? In the case of the Anti-Nephi-Lehites, they behaved like true followers of Christ.

Imagine receiving the news that came out from Zarahemla. The Chief Judge is calling for a vote. There is a group of thousands of Lamanites who want to join themselves to your country — what should be done?

Before you decide, remember it was only very recently, and without warning, that Lamanites attacked the city of Ammonihah, killing every man, woman and child who lived there.

And recall that a century before, the situation was reversed: King Laman had let Nephites come in to possess the Lamanite land of Lehi-Nephi, only with the intention of enslaving them later. How many people died in the decades that followed before they were delivered?

So the Lamanites have a history of being dishonest. They have a history of hating you, the Nephites, and of killing your people. It’s with good cause that the leader of these converts says, “Behold, the Nephites will destroy us, because of the many murders and sins we have committed against them.”

Fortunately, the Anti-Nephi-Lehites were dealing with a righteous generation of Nephites. Because rather than reject them, the Nephites voted to give them land.

And it came to pass that the voice of the people came, saying: Behold, we will give up the land of Jershon, which is on the east by the sea, which joins the land Bountiful, which is on the south of the land Bountiful; and this land Jershon is the land which we will give unto our brethren for an inheritance.

-Alma 27:22

That is how you expect Christians to behave. They didn’t ask how many there were, or, perhaps, if they could afford to buy the land. They simply shared the blessings they had received.

Now picture it from the other side. Imagine yourself waiting in the borders between Nephite and Lamanite territories, having already lost your home, and likely some loved ones as well; you wait while Ammon makes the trek to Zarahemla; you wait while word goes out to the Nephite cities and votes are cast; you wait for Ammon’s return with the news. How many weeks have passed? How much hope do you have left that your people’s countless aggressions towards the Nephites can be forgiven? And if the Nephites say no, what next? Where can you go?

And the word comes that the Nephites aren’t going to let you in as slaves, or as indentured servants, but as full citizens. That they’re not going to make you buy land, you who have been subsisting on what you carried from your home weeks before, but they will give you land to call your own.

And yet, that wasn’t even all the Nephites promised.

And behold, we will set our armies between the land Jershon and the land Nephi, that we may protect our brethren in the land Jershon; and this we do for our brethren, on account of their fear to take up arms against their brethren lest they should commit sin; and this their great fear came because of their sore repentance which they had, on account of their many murders and their awful wickedness.

-Alma 27:23

So. That’s how a righteous people handles immigration. They opened their doors and shared their country. That’s what I believe we should do in the United States.

Next time I’ll explain my feelings for illegal immigrants. But I wanted to conclude with this verse from the song Book of Mormon Stories:

Lamanites met others who were seeking liberty,
And the land soon welcomed all who wanted to be free.
Book of Mormon stories say that we must brothers be,
Giv’n this land if we live righteously.

*I use that term here to mean “citizens of the United States”, even though Canadians, Chileans, and everyone in between are “Americans”. But we don’t have a decent word for ourselves, and “Yankees”, as some call us, makes us think of a New York baseball team.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…

-Amendment I, United States Constitution

Earlier in 2010, we learned that imam Feisal Abdul Rauf had proposed a Muslim community center two blocks from the World Trade Center. Within it, among many other facilities, would be a mosque. Its name is Park51, though it has been called the “Ground Zero Mosque”, primarily by its opponents.

It has raised the question, “Should Muslims be allowed to build a mosque near Ground Zero?”

I don’t care much for that question. It supposes a power that the majority has over the minority, despite protections in the Constitution. Is the question asking “Should we repeal the 1st Amendment?” Because unless you do that, what legal action can a city take against a religion?

And as a Latter-day Saint, I can’t help but take the imam’s side on this issue. How many of our proposals for temples have been fought by protestors? We sincerely believe we are out to save the world, one soul at a time, yet the misinformed and the malicious gather to fight our efforts. (If you are against the mosque, have you informed yourself? Have you read what Park51 is about? Here, I’ll link to it again.)

It’s difficult to discuss this topic without it degrading into an argument about the merits and problems with Islam. Suffice it to say, as Latter-day Saints, we don’t believe that Islam has all the truth.

But that doesn’t matter. Our 11th Article of Faith reads, “We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.”(italics added)

Can our stance be made any more clear than that? Though we may disagree, we will defend your freedom. We will fight by your side against the tyrants who would deprive both you and I of our liberty.

And we have in the past. In the premortal existence, when Lucifer plotted to take away man’s agency, we sided with our Savior. We fought for our freedom to choose, even though that meant some souls would not return to our Father in Heaven. That’s the value we placed on freedom.

Some have accepted that Muslims have every right to build a mosque near Ground Zero, but still don’t think they should do it. After all, people who lost loved ones on 9/11 may take offense at an Islamic place of worship so close to that site. That was my initial reaction, too: hey, it’s a free country, but, um, are you trying to pick a fight?

But now that I’ve taken a closer look at the Park51 website, specifically the FAQ, I’m in favor of their chosen location. That’s where there’s more room for discussion. But as for the question of allowing Muslims to build a mosque… well, there should be no question.

If you disagree, I have to ask: Do you love Muslims?

Say you learn that somebody you’re about to meet is Muslim. Do you feel like you dislike them already? That you might like them, but they’ll have to work a little harder to earn your friendship?

If so, is that charity? I don’t think so.

We’ve been commanded to love our neighbors. Love them as ourselves. And even if you consider Muslims to be your enemy, please remember, you’ve been commanded to love your enemies, too.

Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you. Matthew 5:44

Of course, now that I think about it, that commandment goes beyond just loving perceived enemies – it includes those who are training at this moment to carry out terrorist attacks. And I realize I haven’t prayed for them, that their hearts might be softened, that they might see the error of their ways.

Time to live my beliefs a little better.