In Theory: What is our obligation to Syrian refugees?

As war wages on in Syria, hundreds of thousands have fled their homes to escape the death and violence. Stories and images of these desperate escapes have been widespread. In September, President Obama directed his administration to prepare to accept 10,000 Syrian refugees into the U.S. in the next fiscal year.

While this was already a point of argument between politicians, the terror attacks in Paris only strengthened some stances. The fear is that terrorists have infiltrated the refugee ranks and would pose a national security threat to the U.S. if allowed into the country.

Many on the political right oppose Obama’s plan, with some calling for a pause on the admittance of any Syrian refugees. Presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson likened refugees to “rabid dogs” and, after a recent trip to a refugee camp in Jordan, said: “Until it is safe for them to return home, Jordan is a safe place for them to wait,” he said. “Bringing 25,000 refugees to the United States does nothing to solve this crisis.”

Sen. Ted Cruz has called for the acceptance of only Christian Syrians. Half of the United States’ governors have said they refuse to admit any Syrian refugees into their states.

Speaking from a summit in the Philippines, Obama said fear was driving some reactions.

“We are not well served when, in response to a terrorist attack, we descend into fear and panic,” he said. “We don’t make good decisions if it’s based on hysteria or an exaggeration of risks.”

Q: Does the U.S. have a moral obligation to accept Syrian refugees? What should our policy be concerning Syrian refugees?

--

Absolutely this country has a moral obligation to take in Syrian refugees. Yes, there may be a risk to doing so, but how can a country built on immigrants from many countries say no?

What does the Statue of Liberty say on it? “Send me your tired, your poor, your teeming masses yearning to breathe free.” (If those aren’t the exact words of Emma Lazarus, they’re pretty close.)

It is un-American to turn refugees away, and it is certainly un-Christian to do so.

I understand the fear; I also remember what we did to anybody who looked “Japanese” during WWII when we sent those we feared off to our own concentration camps. (We humans do some pretty scary things when we are afraid.) Those Americans who claim we’re a “Christian” nation need to read again the words of Jesus in Matthew 25: 35: “...for I was hungry and you gave me food … I was a stranger and you welcomed me...”

Oh, and how about this: Jesus himself was a refugee as a little baby when he and Mary and Joseph fled into Egypt. Remember the first Christmas? He was a refugee born in a manger.

Let’s go, you “Christian” Americans. Man up, act like Jesus in this Christmas season, and support the idea of Syrian refugees in our midst. Really, it’s the “Christian” thing to do.

Merry Christmas,

Rev. Skip Lindeman
La Cañada Congregational Church
La Cañada Flintridge

--

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free…” (Emma Lazarus, “The New Colossus”).

The heartfelt feelings of a nation are in those words. We see ourselves as being the haven for the victims of persecution wherever it occurs. Yet there are those of us who would close the gates of America to those in the greatest need out of fear of terrorism. Many today already living in the United States are tired of terrorism, and are poor due to the expense of waging a war that seems to expand to other nations bent on our destruction and huddle together in fear of another 9/11- or Paris- or London-type massacre. So, how do we reconcile the two camps?

Immediately, I would bring in children ages 6 to 12, alone. And send them to communities where there are co-culturalists. I would establish ESL programs for them that teach not only language but values. The faith communities are the place to start.

Let us remember, during the heyday of immigration to the U.S., 1881 to 1924, many children were sent by their families alone because their families wanted them to have a chance at a better life. While splitting up families is not the best idea, it has been proven successful with the Kinder transport of pre-WWII in Europe.

Still I am conflicted with which adults should come. My Tanakh often gives me guidance. In this case, Deuteronomy 10-13 gave me a solution or at least a starting point for discussion.

“When thou goest forth to battle ... And seest among the captives a woman … then thou shalt bring her home to thy house; and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails; and she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thy house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month.”

Isolating the women for one month in an American home center for medical reasons — “hair” and “nails”; for emotional reasons —mourning their families and their past allegiances; and spiritual reasons — introducing them to American life, values, new families, etc. — seems a reasonable amount of time. Then we would begin the integration into American society.

During this process of Americanization, let us remember two things: “Love the strangers, as you were strangers in a strange land” (Deut. 10:19) and “Your sons born in Egypt (trouble) will be numbered as mine” (Genesis 48:5).

If we love them and bring them the love of freedom that is America, they will be ours, and our numbers will grow as our enemies’ numbers decline.

Rabbi Mark Sobel
Temple Beth Emet
Burbank

--

“If only we had a seasonally appropriate story about Middle Eastern people seeking refuge being turned away by the heartless.” — @owills (Oliver Willis, research fellow at MediaMatters.org), quoted in The Nation, Dec. 1, 2015

Yes, if only, because the United States must be responsible for humanitarian assistance and the settling into our country of refugees fleeing the chaos in the Middle East the U.S. has played a major role in creating.

Our responsibility is moral, strategic and practical. One would think that the moral basis for our responsibility would be obvious, but apparently not. Devout Christians share a key experience with Muslims. Both religions harbor a few who violate their religions’ peaceful core beliefs

Strategically, the racist rantings of GOP governors and presidential candidates and their followers is, as President Obama says, doing the work of ISISfor them.

A practical consideration is that these refugees are not the “huddled masses.” More likely those who are fleeing have the most resources of money and education, plus an abundance of personal initiative and courage.

Refugees coming here go through thorough U.N. and U.S. screening, as is appropriate, and I don’t see Syrians as posing any special security risk. After all, the native-born are doing a bang-up job of exploiting loopholes in the inadequate gun control the NRA has allowed us. A few of our many mass killers have an ideological motivation, most do not.

I was going to close with quotes from Matthew 25:34-46, but on second thought, no. About 70 percent of the U.S. population call themselves Christians. Do I need to be the one to urge that we follow their Lord’s admonition to welcome strangers?

Roberta Medford
Atheist
Montrose

--

The LDS church has urged compassion and provided aid for refugees in the Middle East for more than a decade. More recently, the church as an institution and individual members have assisted refugees arriving in Europe by providing millions of dollars in food, clothing, blankets, volunteer support and medical help.

The church’s efforts in the Middle East and Europe are inspired by Jesus’ teachings to feed and “take in” the hungry, the thirsty and the stranger. A letter from the church’s First Presidency, read from pulpits in October and November, invited members around the world to contribute to the church’s humanitarian relief fund and to participate in local volunteer efforts. I believe that church members will respond to Syrians who come to the U.S. with the same generosity and tolerance.

In light of recent events in Paris and San Bernardino, I can understand why people are concerned about plans to take in people from a region that is home to terrorist groups encouraging violent attacks in the West. It is not unreasonable to expect a rigorous screening program to prevent entry of people seeking to harm Americans.

That said, much of the political rhetoric has been unwarranted and unrealistic. Any demands that the U.S. accept only Christian refugees is constitutionally indefensible, and state governors in reality have little control over refugee placement. But apart from the rhetoric of politicians, many are simply asking how we can implement the safeguards that will enable us to be generous and careful at the same time.

In my personal view, the refugee problem ultimately must be resolved in the regions of conflict themselves. More could be done to help those who remain in the Middle East and Africa. But now, with millions displaced or on the move and war still raging in their homelands, it is difficult to accept the argument that we can simply watch from afar, our doors closed to those who are suffering.

Michael White
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
La Crescenta