Morgan, thanks for your guest post. Several people have asked: Why do we do this, if I’m not going to change your mind and you’re not going to change my mind? But I think arguing with people online actually can accomplish some useful things. For one, it demonstrates that faithful church members can’t be simply classified as Republicans vs. Democrats. More importantly, arguing lets us figure out precisely where we agree or disagree and, ideally, distill the point of disagreement down to its essence.

And we do agree on some things. For example, I shouldn’t try to pressure the Church to take action to support my political views right now. That was actually one of my main points, as a few people pointed out to you. Even if I were right about everything, the best move for the Church in today’s political context is decided by people multiple levels above me, and they have far more data than I do. I restated that point a half dozen times, so I’m not sure how you missed it, but we really do agree on that. Your example about how the Church had to respond to the invasion of Ukraine while protecting its ability to minister to members in Russia is exactly correct – I was considering using it myself.

Several times you object to “hyperbole,” “heated rhetoric,” “exaggerations” or “hysteria.” But I think your objection on the basis of rhetoric evades substantive issues. One phrase you objected to, for example, is “surveillance by a corrupt, vindictive, unchecked personalist autocracy.” But which word is inaccurate? Each one accurately applies to the direction of the Trump administration. The problem we are facing right now is not bloggers using intemperate language, but a corrupt, vindictive, unchecked personalist autocracy.

You also object to my use of “starving children” and “torture.” Last year, the U.S. government suddenly ended a food aid program for starving children who depended on it, and stopped providing medicine for sick children who needed it, and they died. Our government sent planeloads of immigrants to El Salvador so that they could be tortured, and when they returned they described how they had been tortured. This is not hysteric speculation or ventilating. This is fact, and we have to deal directly with the awful truth. Now if you had said that many foreign aid programs are wasteful, several people with experience in that sector would agree, and conservative think-tanks were ready to present plans for targeted cuts. But that isn’t what the Trump administration did. Instead, it turned unqualified people with no relevant experience loose on the budget with no regard for the law or the consequences. Those consequences included children starving to death.

There are multiple valid positions on many issues, but not on every issue. Our elected representatives had approved spending that money to keep those children alive, but the Trump administration canceled the aid precipitously before a replacement could be found. There is likewise no valid reason to grant presidential pardons to violent criminals or wealthy scammers who donate enough. We need to hold on to our ability to recognize wickedness for what it is.

Another phrase you objected to is “delighting in bloodshed.” To clarify, I am not using this phrase for a general leftist critique of the military –  when it comes to my progressive credentials, the esteemed bloggers at BCC have awarded me the grade of F(U). What I mean by “delighting in bloodshed” is that when we deliberately kill people who have not been arrested or tried, for a crime that does not warrant capital punishment, and who are not combatants of a nation with which we are at war, it is not an exaggeration to call it murder. When the U.S. government then proudly uses video of those murders in its propaganda, the correct Book of Mormon term is “delighting in bloodshed.” Perhaps you disagree, but a critique of language usage does not make the substantive problem of unlawfully killing people disappear.

I agree with you about the importance of national defense and a strong foreign policy. And that is why I am begging you to see what is happening to this country, most dramatically in its foreign policy. Abandoning Ukraine is not strong foreign policy. Insulting and threatening our democratic allies is not strong foreign policy. When our nation was attacked, Denmark and Canada and many other allies came to our aid. They fought alongside us – around the time you were in the Marine Corps, I would guess – and many of them gave their lives in our defense. To now demand the surrender of territory is the crappiest way imaginable to reward their sacrifice. As a military analyst, you should understand the horrendous consequences Trump’s attempt to claim Greenland will have on our relationships with our allies, our place in the world, and our long-term safety. As a former Marine, you should understand the moral repugnance of betraying one’s allies in wartime.

I have to correct you in two points. First, tariffs are taxes. They are import taxes paid by Americans.

Second, you claim that your sense of calm is not a luxury based on your race. But the Supreme Court has decided otherwise. One in three Nevadans is Hispanic, and a masked government agent (or someone pretending to be one) might detain your neighbors at any time if they can’t produce a passport instantly, or search their car or invade their home without a warrant, because of their accent or the color of their skin. Talk to your ward members, and you may hear about people who can’t risk traveling to visit their families abroad or who feel unsafe leaving the house for groceries, even with legal immigration status, possibly even with U.S. citizenship.

You say your life is fine under this government, but you need to be aware of the dangers ahead. Half of the Las Vegas economy depends on tourism, but Trump’s foreign policy blundering and immigration crackdown have soured many international visitors on visiting the U.S. The city of Las Vegas is able to exist at its present size because of a large number of intricate, carefully maintained systems; look out your window, and you’ll see it’s not the agricultural fertility that keeps the area going. If we treat those systems recklessly long enough, they will fail. There are complicated and delicate systems underpinning many facets of our society, built up by our forebears over centuries, that have now been turned over to cranks and vandals.

You recommend that I “consume less political media,” but I’d guess we consume about the same amount, and for much the same reason: It is our Distant Early Warning system by which we hope to detect signs of trouble coming our way so that we can act in time to protect our families. It worked to an extent with Covid-19. First the pandemic hit foreign countries, then coastal metropolises, then inland cities, then the town down the interstate, then here. By that time we were as prepared as we could be. Now the plague of our time is Donald Trump, a wicked man of vulgar impulses and failing impulse control who has surrounded himself with scoundrels, and the effects are beginning to appear locally.

I’ve tried to cultivate trustworthy sources and winnow out the reality deniers, and the result of that process is an information environment that tells me that the world is in the most perilous state I have seen in my lifetime, all as the result of one wicked man and an electorate that failed to recognize the consequences of their choices. I’m sure you have your own set of trusted sources. But I think my sources paint a more accurate picture of the oncoming threats, and that we’re a long way from making things better by touching grass. I would very much like to be wrong. You say the Church has no need to panic; I don’t know if that will remain true.