The morality of allowing Syrian refugees into the USA

[JaKael02]

Something is fishy here.

Thanks for the detailed post. That was well done. There is a lot being passed around and it’s difficult to take all the information in. It’s late here, so I’m going to watch the youtube video tomorrow. thanks again.

 

[DaveBj]

The Economist For our readers wondering whether the Boston bombers were refugees: the Tsernaev brothers came with their parents to the US on a tourist visa in 2002—and then asked for asylum. They didn’t go through the refugee resettlement process described in the article above. They were not refugees but asylees (though the two terms often get confused).

Thanks for the correction

 

[Peter_Plato]

Yes, we understand each other. You have a good heart. I have wrestled with this for an hour now, it’s a good mental exercise in moral theology. I’m currently leaning to allow the refugees because the immediate suffering outweighs the reasonably certain negative consequence that may later arise from it.

Double-effect is a principal that says it is morally permissible to perform an action that has good outcomes and bad outcomes. Given certain criteria are met.

The crucial element that is required by a moral judgement is that it be properly informed. Too many purportedly “good moral judgements” are effected in folly and haste because we want to judge ourselves “good” and not “bad,” rather than know that the judgement we have made is actually a good judgement.

Are we merely looking for the praise and adulation of those around us or do we truly want to know that what we have done is determinably the best we could do?

I would suggest you do watch the video. It will make you wonder what the governments of western nations are really up to at the moment – for example, if Obama knows as much about Islam as he should, then why would he enter into a nuclear treaty with a political entity whose religious beliefs permit breaking treaties if the good of Islam is at stake? Did he not know this? If not, where were his advisors and the Secretary of State? Oh, right.

 

[AFerri48]

What if we were to lock them all in a maximum security prison? This is not a joke. Until we know for sure that they aren’t associated with terrorism or plotting terrorism, keep them locked up somewhere if we take them in.

 

[St_Francis]

Can we evaluate them properly? No, we can’t. Can we monitor them properly? No, we can’t.

I’d say let in Christians and women and children.

But the other problem is, what is their fate here? Many are unemployed and unemployable, due to lack of languae skills and education. So what will happen to them? They will sit around doing nothing, and of course young men sitting around doing nothing will feel worthless and be ripe for radicalization, if they do not already have something in their backgrounds. Not to mention the high unemployment (also counting discouraged and underemployed) rates we have now.

As refugees, they would prefer to be where they came from, and will hope to be anle to return. But if it is a long time before they can get back home, they or their children will have some sort of lives here. Their children may not be able to transfer their skills there, or have married people not from their countries.

It seems like more of a problem, not only in terms of potential terro, then we have thought through. ISTM that manging refugee areas in a more sustainable way would work better.

 

[Vanny]

Except why is it that Moslem migrants are the ones being permitted to exit from Moslem countries like Turkey, while very few Christian refugees – the very ones who are being targetted by radical Islamists are being left in horrid conditions in refugee camps in Syria, Jordan and Iraq, if they can even make it there?

The Syrian “refugees” are 97.5% Moslem and 2.5% Christians, but Christians made up close to 10% of the population. Through Turkey the numbers are vastly more Moslem than Christian and very few were persecuted in their home countries to the extent that Christians were.

stream.org/us-christian-groups-prioritizing-muslim-over-christian/

The American government has refused to recognize Christians as a persecuted group in the Middle East.
Thank you for posting that article above. a real eye-opener, Christians being denied refugee status.
We have no way of screening or vetting these refugees. It is not unreasonable to think that there will be ISIS terrorists embedded in the refugee population. A nation has the responsibility to protect it’s citizens.
I wish there was a way to accommodate these people, but I think the safety of American citizens comes first.

Something is fishy here. I think every western nation has the responsibility to question and even doubt our “leaders” who are taking us into a very questionable position in terms of national security.

Jesus said, “Be gentle as doves, but wise as serpents.”

And it is time to educate ourselves (and wise up) into what is happening around us and who, really, is looking out for the common good in modern western “liberal” societies.

youtu.be/ASUnosseuEI

 

[Vanny]

Except why is it that Moslem migrants are the ones being permitted to exit from Moslem countries like Turkey, while very few Christian refugees – the very ones who are being targetted by radical Islamists are being left in horrid conditions in refugee camps in Syria, Jordan and Iraq, if they can even make it there?

The Syrian “refugees” are 97.5% Moslem and 2.5% Christians, but Christians made up close to 10% of the population. Through Turkey the numbers are vastly more Moslem than Christian and very few were persecuted in their home countries to the extent that Christians were.

stream.org/us-christian-groups-prioritizing-muslim-over-christian/

The American government has refused to recognize Christians as a persecuted group in the Middle East.

Something is fishy here. I think every western nation has the responsibility to question and even doubt our “leaders” who are taking us into a very questionable position in terms of national security.

Jesus said, “Be gentle as doves, but wise as serpents.”

And it is time to educate ourselves (and wise up) into what is happening around us and who, really, is looking out for the common good in modern western “liberal” societies.

youtu.be/ASUnosseuEI

Thanks for posting this article. a real eye opener. Yes we should have compassion but the first responsibility of a nation is to protect it’s citizens. We already know that an ISIS terrorist was embedded among the refugees in France, probably more. They have said they want to attack American cities. We should take them at their word. Please take off your rose colored glasses, people!

 

[Joie_de_Vivre]

It is a dark and stormy night. You are home alone with your two children. You hear a knock on the door. You look thru the peephole, and you see a man standing outside. You ask him what he wants. He says his car has broken down and asks if he can come in to use the phone.

What would you do?

The obvious answer is use a MAC-10 to terminate him in the 1/5000 chance he is a rapist or murderer, a MAC-10 because you don’t want to disturb the neighbours.

This is a very timely thread for me in several ways. I have volunteered with Catholic Social Services in the Refugee Resettlement Program from about 2010 to 2012. It was a rewarding experience! I have recently thought about “reupping” as a volunteer in this program, but recent events have caused me to rethink this program. I am very concerned about the real possibility of terrorists exploiting this program and our security officials on both sides of the aisles have not provided sufficient reassurances that this won’t happen. I havent decided what to do.

The cases in France were largely home grown people.

100% against any refugees coming here.

It’s too risky and humanitarian aid for refugees has never been to ship them all over the world…they have border countries like Turkey, Iraq, Jordan and Israel to help them out.

Maybe it’s because my husband and I are both in the military and our lives would be directly at risk because of the missions we are involved with against Syria.

I’m seriously all set with terrorists coming in with the crowd and figuring out where hubby, me and the girls live and coming after us in retaliation.

Newsflash…there is, literally, no definitive way to do background checks on these people.

It’s not like doing screening on people from countries like Italy, France, Greece or whatever.

So were just going to let people pass if we can’t get a clear picture on the past of the majority of these refugees?

Besides…where are we going to house them? For how long? With what resources?

No, I’m totally all set with this.

Turkey, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon and Egypt have nearly all of the Syrian refugees.

Would this be a bad time to point out that the Tsarnaev brothers were “refugees”?

They weren’t.

What about a third choice?

Refuse to allow potential rapists, terrorists, thieves, murderers and people who see us a evil westerners who deserve to be executed into our homes and our country.
Refuse to allow our children to exposed to these people.

We have absolutely every right to say no…enough is enough…our citizens deserve to not be in harm’s way.

So…is it fine that hundreds of people are brutally slaughtered and millions are terrorized?

That’s God’s will right?

We shouldn’t be afraid or do anything to prevent this from happening?

Since they are “potential rapists, terrorists, thieves, murderers and people who see us a evil westerners who deserve to be executed into our homes and our country” how about we just butcher every last person in Syria?

 

[MarcoPolo]

Screening at a minimum. Sirach 11:29 Do not bring every man into your home, for many are the wiles of the crafty.

 

[Peter_Plato]

The cases in France were largely home grown people.

That isn’t known. Only three of the seven dead have been identified, as far as I’ve read. Two of those three were from Syria and Egypt. One was a resident of France, but that hardly makes him “homegrown.” The eighth individual, the one still alive was from Belgium, but hardly “homegrown,” whatever we take that to mean.

That makes two out of four that were “refugees” with four yet unidentified.

 

[JCats1]

Saying that all Muslims are terrorists or that Muslims are potential terrorists is like saying that All Blacks are thugs, all Chinese people are Communists, and all Mexicans are rapists. Just saying.

 

[JCats1]

Man, why can’t we just well, not be afraid? I don’t know where y’all get your news from, but if it’s CNN or any American brodcasting system, keep in mind that they are not telling the entire story of the situation. Look at the Jews during the Holocaust. There were many people who wanted to immigrate to the U.S to get away from Hitler but they were turned back or were not granted permission into our nation-keep in mind that American was Anti-Semitic at the time, just like how Conservative America is Islamophobic. They ended up getting killed later. It’s sad really.

Stereotype threat is a dangerous thing. ISIS wants us to shun Muslims from society and to look down on them. It would leave them at a dilemma, having only two choices: leave the faith or radicalize. Helping these refugees assimilate into society will counter ISIS. Many of Westerners state that Muslims seem to only assimilate within themselves- it’s because Middle Eastern culture is collectivist. It’s a cultural psychology term which means that the community is like a family, everyone looks after the community and they help each other out. It’s not that they aren’t willing to “integrate”. Look at Malala Yousafzai. She is a Muslim who won the Nobel Peace Prize and is an advocate for peace. She seeked asylum and is living in the UK. I would never ever consider her a terrorist.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Not of it means putting our lives and our children’s lives at risk with terrorist attacks.

These terrorists want us dead. They can stay home or head over to one of the border countries instead.

Martyrdom should be a choice we make ourselves…not something that is forced upon us by someone else.

This has already happened.

The Tsarnaev brothers were refugees from the Chechen conflict.
They thanked us for our hospitality by bombing the Boston marathon and killing/injuring scores or people.

You want this to happen again? It is not an if…it’s a when.

I agree with you. Don’t take them in. There may be only one or two bad apples in the barrel, but all it takes is one or two bad apples to spoil the entire barrel.

 

[Rence]

I’m curious to what your opinions are on this as of right now. On one hand, we have reason to believe that any of these Syrians could cause a terrorist attack, while on the other… they are refugees.

How do you feel about this?

I feel our government has an obligation to protect our citizens first and there is no way to screen these refugees. They need shelter and aid there, not here.

If you had a bag of skittles, and you knew one of them was poisoned and would kill you, would you be confident enough to eat out of the bag? I would not.

I think the current administration is trying to actively destroy our country and I pray God will protect us and help us get through this. I pray that our country survives to see another President who will pull us through this mess.

 

[bitterhope]

Man, why can’t we just well, not be afraid? I don’t know where y’all get your news from, but if it’s CNN or any American brodcasting system, keep in mind that they are not telling the entire story of the situation. Look at the Jews during the Holocaust. There were many people who wanted to immigrate to the U.S to get away from Hitler but they were turned back or were not granted permission into our nation-keep in mind that American was Anti-Semitic at the time, just like how Conservative America is Islamophobic. They ended up getting killed later. It’s sad really.

Stereotype threat is a dangerous thing. ISIS wants us to shun Muslims from society and to look down on them. It would leave them at a dilemma, having only two choices: leave the faith or radicalize. Helping these refugees assimilate into society will counter ISIS. Many of Westerners state that Muslims seem to only assimilate within themselves- it’s because Middle Eastern culture is collectivist. It’s a cultural psychology term which means that the community is like a family, everyone looks after the community and they help each other out. It’s not that they aren’t willing to “integrate”. Look at Malala Yousafzai. She is a Muslim who won the Nobel Peace Prize and is an advocate for peace. She seeked asylum and is living in the UK. I would never ever consider her a terrorist.

I agree that none of the news outlets are telling the whole story–not just the American news outlets. I agree not all Muslims are terrorists. That doesn’t mean we should just close our eyes to the realities of the world today. There are people on a hit list from ISIS that deserve to be protected as well as possible. The communities these people live in deserve to be protected. We all know the way ISIS attacks. They enjoy spectacular displays of aggression that take out as many people as possible. That’s why they are called terrorists. Their goal is to terrorize on a global scale. Allowing largely unknown persons access to our nation and our people is not a wise idea at this point in time. Jesus asks us to live out the Beatitudes even in difficult situations. Jesus does not ask us to willingly put ourselves, our families or our nation in a dangerous situation. We are told not to tempt The Lord and continuing to accept unknown persons seems a lot like tempting The Lord to me. Refugees here already should be shown the love of Christ and accepted as a part of society. We do not need to keep our doors open for more. Many immigrants refuse to assimilate into our society because they look down on us (we are infidels) and they don’t want to accept kindness or anything else from us. It isn’t always a matter of people not accepting them. But of course many immigrants from the Middle East are good people that do join our communities and are very good citizens. The problem is there is no way of knowing in advance which group each person will fall into until they are actually here that makes deciding what to do so difficult.

Women and children are not necessarily safer refugees than the men. Many US soldiers have been injured and killed by women and children. Female suicide bombers are favored at times because they know they aren’t looked at as suspiciously as the men are. Kids are also used as suicide bombers or given guns to fight. These are not people from a society or culture like ours.

My heart breaks for the people of the Middle East. I wish there was more we could do for them. Maybe there will be a process set up that makes it possible to thoroughly check everyone out, but even if that somehow happens, I don’t think it will be enough. Many people are recruited from really good families that had no ties to terrorist groups or radical ideals. I don’t see how we can really weed out people that may one day in the future decide to join up with terror groups.

 

[Peter_Plato]

My heart breaks for the people of the Middle East. I wish there was more we could do for them. Maybe there will be a process set up that makes it possible to thoroughly check everyone out, but even if that somehow happens, I don’t think it will be enough. Many people are recruited from really good families that had no ties to terrorist groups or radical ideals. I don’t see how we can really weed out people that may one day in the future decide to join up with terror groups.

I think this is an important point. If it is relatively easy for ISIS to recruit thousands of “radicalized” Islamists from western countries, why would we think that recruiting radicals from cultures which are traditionally Islamic wouldn’t be much easier?

This point made earlier about “home grown” terrorists is a bit confused, I think, because if “home-grown” individuals can do this to their own people in those “home” lands, why a presumption that millions migrating into foreign and alien, to them, countries wouldn’t be more likely to commit terrorist acts?

For every “home grown” terrorist, shouldn’t we expect a number of foreign born ones? And if we have a problem preventing those who are born and raised in a western culture from becoming radicalized, why expect those who come in from a radicalized culture to NOT be?

 

[Lily_Bernans]

I feel our government has an obligation to protect our citizens first and there is no way to screen these refugees. They need shelter and aid there, not here.

If you had a bag of skittles, and you knew one of them was poisoned and would kill you, would you be confident enough to eat out of the bag? I would not.

I think the current administration is trying to actively destroy our country and I pray God will protect us and help us get through this. I pray that our country survives to see another President who will pull us through this mess.

Obama keeps saying they will be properly vetted with full background checks, but how does anyone “properly vet” someone coming from Syria? Another thing he said was that he didn’t understand how people could turn their backs on widows and children. I don’t think anyone wants to turn his or her back on Middle Eastern widows and children, but I think we should concentrate on making their homeland safe for them, not bring them here.

Someone else has already said it: what kind of a life do they face here? It’s not a good one. Sure, it’s better than Syria now, but it’s still not good. Who’s to say the children who are so sweet now won’t be radicalized in a few years? Even the widows? Radicalization can be attractive to someone who feels marginalized and disenfranchised. I don’t know a lot of Muslims, but the ones I do know are good, kind people. Still, as I said a few posts ago, it only takes one or two bad apples to spoil a whole barrel.

When Obama was elected, he was a fresh face, not thoroughly inculcated in the world of politics. I thought maybe this was the change the country needed. I don’t think he’s been the worst president, but I do think he’s been one of the worst. I think our country will survive until we have another president with a different vision. I only hope it survives with minimal damage.

I do not favor turning our backs on anyone who needs help. Their plight is a heartbreaking one. But I agree with you: the Syrians need help in Syria, or at least in the Middle East, not in the US.

 

[graciew]

Obama keeps saying they will be properly vetted with full background checks, but how does anyone “properly vet” someone coming from Syria? Another thing he said was that he didn’t understand how people could turn their backs on widows and children. I don’t think anyone wants to turn his or her back on Middle Eastern widows and children, but I think we should concentrate on making their homeland safe for them, not bring them here.

Someone else has already said it: what kind of a life do they face here? It’s not a good one. Sure, it’s better than Syria now, but it’s still not good. Who’s to say the children who are so sweet now won’t be radicalized in a few years? Even the widows? Radicalization can be attractive to someone who feels marginalized and disenfranchised. I don’t know a lot of Muslims, but the ones I do know are good, kind people. Still, as I said a few posts ago, it only takes one or two bad apples to spoil a whole barrel.

When Obama was elected, he was a fresh face, not thoroughly inculcated in the world of politics. I thought maybe this was the change the country needed. I don’t think he’s been the worst president, but I do think he’s been one of the worst. I think our country will survive until we have another president with a different vision. I only hope it survives with minimal damage.

I do not favor turning our backs on anyone who needs help. Their plight is a heartbreaking one. But I agree with you: the Syrians need help in Syria, or at least in the Middle East, not in the US.

Could there not be a plan of integration and education and taking a reasonable amount of families one could accommodate temporaririly? They are fleeing for a reason. The photos are terrible and accounts worse.
Or do you believe that it is because US makes it an interesting target for them in particular which could reasonably be?
With all precautions ,which frankly do not.seem to be much.
I’m asking because it is a struggle when one writes,not be one the rotten apple who can lead others astray. I mean it honestly. What do you think?

 

[JCats1]

Personally, If this many Syrians have to flee their country, I personally think the United Nations and NATO really need to figure something out with the country. It’s war torn by ISIS and a civil war. The government is clearly not that strong. Global leaders, should form a plan to fix the country up. It may have to involve several nations entering into war, but if it fixes the situation up, then I think it’s a good thing.

I’ve looked into the vetting process as TIME magazine described. The Justice department seem to be going very deep into it and I think if done properly, the terrorists can be weeded out. Also, statistics show that only 50% of candidates vetted are successful.

 

[Lily_Bernans]

Could there not be a plan of integration and education and taking a reasonable amount of families one could accommodate temporaririly? They are fleeing for a reason. The photos are terrible and accounts worse.
Or do you believe that it is because US makes it an interesting target for them in particular which could reasonably be?
With all precautions ,which frankly do not.seem to be much.
I’m asking because it is a struggle when one writes,not be one the rotten apple who can lead others astray. I mean it honestly. What do you think?

The US never accommodates refugees temporarily. We either take them in and let them live here or refuse them entrance.

ISIS has made it very plain that they want to commit acts of terror in the US. The only reason they haven’t done so since 9/11, with the exception of the Boston Marathon bombers, is because US security is so good. It is not, however, perfect. Young people, often no more than children, are radicalized in a matter of weeks, and even their families are totally unaware of what is happening. The Internet has made it easy for them. Once here and radicalized, they could go into hiding just as they did in France and Belgium.

I hate to say it, but I am against taking them in, and I do live in one of the 27 (so far) states whose governor says he wants no more Syrian refugees in his state.