-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Do You Support Obama's Plan For More Syrian Refugees.
- Thread starter esmith
- Start date
Augustus
…
I support it because it is the moral thing to do seeing as America is one of the major causes of their plight so they should take some moral responsibility and act accordingly. They'll probably only take about 10 anyway then act like it is some enormous humanitarian gesture.
As a bonus, it really annoys lots of right-wing Americans too
win-win.
As a bonus, it really annoys lots of right-wing Americans too
win-win.
Absolutely not. The US has no moral obligation or responsibility to take in these Syrians, especially since there is no data base to vet them with. The US is the most generous nation in the world, too generous. Its high time some of these Arab/Muslim nations like Saudi Arabia step up for a change and take in some of these refugees since most of them are their fellow Muslims.
Extremists are always going to be an issue. Some may hide among refugees but there is just as great of a chance of them flying over on a plane as a national from another nation. Or, worse, they are already citizens here and we are none the wiser. To turn away from such a large group of displaced people because we are afraid/selfish/whatever, would be a big mistake.
Underhill
Well-Known Member
I think it is a form of cowardice to turn them away. There is no question that the vast majority of them are our allies and are largely in this situation as a indirect result of many of our foreign policy decisions. Turning away people who have lost so much out of fear... what else can you call it?
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
I don't actually support the mass immigration of refugees from the area. I do support the idea of funneling our billions of dollars into UN run camps in nearby countries. The idea is that, though inconvenient, these camps would exist until things settle down in Syria. Once the current festivities are over these poor folks could then return to their homeland and try to rebuild their nation. We have pretty well guaranteed that Syria will be a basket case for many years to come.
Deathbydefault
Apistevist Asexual Atheist
The US mentality is that we're supposed to always be the good guys, no matter the situation.
As it turns out, we are quite often the bad guys and our military has killed many innocents on their superiors orders.
We owe them this much, at least this much.
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
Heaven forbid we help them get back to the place they loved and lived prior to Obama's confused meddling.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I have mixed feelings.
On one side, there is a real concern over infiltration of Syrian cells into the nation with intent to do grevious harm. The Goverment has the obligation to protect its citizenry first and foremost. No exceptions.
On the other hand, there are a number of Syrians that are harmless and need to seek refuge in a country away from danger. I'd likely go for emulating Canada's policy and exclude all fighting capable males from a particular age range from participating in any type of refugee program, and focus primarily on taking in sponsored women and children after a strict screening process to determine health and threat levels as it applies to public safety and security.
On one side, there is a real concern over infiltration of Syrian cells into the nation with intent to do grevious harm. The Goverment has the obligation to protect its citizenry first and foremost. No exceptions.
On the other hand, there are a number of Syrians that are harmless and need to seek refuge in a country away from danger. I'd likely go for emulating Canada's policy and exclude all fighting capable males from a particular age range from participating in any type of refugee program, and focus primarily on taking in sponsored women and children after a strict screening process to determine health and threat levels as it applies to public safety and security.
Deathbydefault
Apistevist Asexual Atheist
That's another option, but it's more beneficial for us to induct them than to rebuild their homes and stabilize their areas of origin.
Tumah
Veteran Member
I'm a firm believer in the maxim, "charity begins at home". Its true that opening the doors for refugees is the good humanitarian thing to do. However, America and indeed any country's first responsibility is towards its own citizens. I believe its bad governing to put another nation before your own. In this case, there is a real threat demonstrably present in other countries that have accepted refugees. Although I don't think its fair to them, that isn't America's fault and American citizens should not be put in danger because of it. I think an alternate plan should be found off-shore.
Buttercup
Veteran Member
Do you have any articles that support your statement that the FBI cannot vet the incoming refugees? I'd appreciate the info.
This information is how I thought the screening process works. It's quite an extensive and time intensive screening.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/11/20/infographic-screening-process-refugee-entry-united-states
Last edited:
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
I'm sure the Syrian government is being most helpful in helping vet these folks. This so-called "vetting process" is based on very little that can be actually verified due to limited resources on the ground in Syria.
Buttercup
Veteran Member
We've had very, very few problems with refugees in the US.
I still have faith the gov knows what they're doing in this regard. *ducks from incoming rotten tomatoes*
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
That's partly because you have accepted so few compared with Europe.
You can almost picture the interview.
Interviewer: Are you or are any members of your family affiliated with terrorists?
Refugee: No
Interviewer: Good. Do you know any terrorists or the kind of music they like?
Refugee: No
Interviewer: Very good. Well, that about covers it.
But don't trust anything that comes from this woman. She is a refugee terrorist from Canada.
Deathbydefault
Apistevist Asexual Atheist
Well the educated terrorists will certainly be picked out in greater numbers, as they have more of a background.
The less educated are less likely to be found, but vastly more likely to botch a terrorist attack.
The less educated are less likely to be found, but vastly more likely to botch a terrorist attack.
Buttercup
Veteran Member
@esmith First off, the article in the second link misspelled Michael Steinbach's last name. That's always a bad sign. And the rest of the article quotes Republican politicians so I'm not surprised on their refugee stance. I'm assuming that's a conservative website.
I've spent 20 minutes researching for an unbiased source to substantiate the quote linked to Michael Stenbach. I haven't found one yet. I'll keep looking and get back when I have time.
I've spent 20 minutes researching for an unbiased source to substantiate the quote linked to Michael Stenbach. I haven't found one yet. I'll keep looking and get back when I have time.
Midnight Rain
Well-Known Member
We can't set someone's house on fire and then lock them inside.