Trump’s great, great plan to spy on mosques — and churches, and synagogues, and ...

To the editor: Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has a great great idea: “We have to check, respectfully, the mosques. And ... other places.” (“What it could look like if Donald Trump’s broader immigration ban were implemented,” June 15)

Great, great idea. And Christians. Millions are streaming across state lines every day to kill abortionists. Millions. We have to go in and check Christian congregations, respectfully. We have to go into Catholic churches too, since billions of priests are molesting people. We have to check if the pope knows what’s going on. He’s a socialist by the way, and I hear he’s a Mexican, but that’s OK.

Everybody has to report on people in their own religion. So as a Jew, I’m reporting that trillions of religiously trained Jewish functionaries are ritualistically slaughtering innocent animals every day. We have to check the synagogues. And Trump’s daughter, a converted Jew, we have to check her too, respectfully.

Some Trump fans might not realize: This letter is called political satire.

Ira Spiro, Los Angeles

..

To the editor: Trump has said we must be “smart” about dealing with terrorism.

However, Trump’s xenophobic rhetoric on Muslims has appeared in jihadist recruitment videos. It can be argued that Trump’s proposal for a Muslim immigration ban is doing more to help create new terrorists.

Is this “smart”? Does throwing gasoline on the fire of hatred against the U.S. while simultaneously alienating Muslims sound like an intelligent strategy?

There are some who believe that simply because Trump employs “tough talk,” he might be a more effective president in acting against terrorism. I would argue the opposite: By stoking the fires of hate against the U.S., Trump’s behavior poses a danger to the United States.

Matthew Singerman, Newbury Park

..

To the editor: Why would anyone, including public officials such as House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), claim to know what is “reflective of our principles”? Is unfettered population growth an American principle? Is more people competing for increasingly scarce jobs a desirable outcome?

Trump’s only mistake in calling for a temporary ban on some refugees and immigrants is that he did not go far enough. There ought to be a moratorium on all immigration to allow time for an open and honest national debate.

The objective would be to achieve consensus on a long-term strategic immigration plan that is in the best interest of the United States and an outcome that accurately reflects the abiding principles that 320 million Americans share.

David Goode, Manhattan Beach

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook