https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/05/24/the-group-least-likely-to-think-the-u-s-has-a-responsibility-to-accept-refugees-evangelicals/

Mormons aren't off the hook either:
https://zelphontheshelf.com/politically-conservative-mormons-experiencing-cognitive-dissonance-re-churchs-call-to-help-refugees/


"For I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me."

Matthew 25:35-45

Hungry - food

Thirsty - drink

Stranger - took in

Naked - clothed

Sick - visited

Prison - you came to me


Absolutely.

Re refugees - of course, to be effective help there has to be a coherent policy, guidelines, order, reason, creativity, reasoned compassion. Even in Canada where most welcome people in urgent need we balk at thousands crossing illegally from NY to Quebec. Gotta give thought to all those waiting in line the way the system requires them to do.

But. Then there are the desperate, the starving, the sick, the truly desperately desperate. At least in our hearts, if not in practice, I hope that most of us feel for them and would help if we could.

There but for the grace of God go I. I would hope someone would reach out if I was displaced and in need. (Although I've never understood the grace thing that gives me a good life but not all those others - how does that work; why, etc).

But having a policy or inclination, as a Christian, to barricade the gates - that I do not get, as you say. Not saying open up the floodgates with no order or security. Just think about what to do and how, without the reflexive move to keep others out of these lands of plenty. Do we personally own them? Don't think so. And hey, somebody let me in when I was a toddler. How come I got so lucky? Chance, circumstance, place of birth. That's completely random, not necessarily on merit alone. But then I'm WASP.

And I wasn't bleeding, starving or pregnant at the time.

Sometimes there is a huge disconnect between what people preach and what they do. (Duh). The reason for this board, in many ways. Some of us can't tolerate the hypocrisy of that.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/25/2018 06:23PM by Nightingale.

Many evangelicals act as if they have never read the Gospels and have no idea what Jesus taught concerning the poor, needy and strangers.

Anyone who feels very strongly about this issue should take as many people as possible into their own home.

That goes especially for wealthy do-gooders who travel the world by private jet and live in gated mansions.

This post reminds of an incident that happened to my Dad a number of years ago.

Someone working in a soup kitchen approached Dad and asked if he had a spare bedroom for a homeless person. At the time it was just Mom and Dad living in their house, so they had 2 empty bedrooms.

This isn't the start of a feel good story. Dad said he didn't want some stranger coming into his house and possibly stealing everything and killing him and Mom.

My observations of the people on RFM, we are all mostly older and more than likely empty nesters and we do have spare bedrooms.

Will you put your religious beliefs into action and take in a stranger for a night or two?

I guess I'm not half as good a person my dog thinks I am.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2018 11:36AM by tumwater.

I agree with Dad. No way I'm letting strangers into my home.

...can't we just take a short break from the "refugee deluge'? Even if it's just for 90 days?...…..we already have a treasure-trove of folks who we really don't know their true motivations. I'll bet some of the 125,000 Cubans who arrived during the 1980 Mariel Boatlift haven't totally been assimilated...some of which were released by the Castro-era prisons, then shipped off to the US....WTH?.

...oh wait. "Racist" ...……...My bad.

Elizabeth Smart.

tumwater Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> This isn't the start of a feel good story. Dad
> said he didn't want some stranger coming into his
> house and possibly stealing everything and killing
> him and Mom.

Edward Smart thought it was a good idea to welcome strangers (and STRANGE PEOPLE) onto his property.

When they helped themselves to his daughter, that should have been no surprise.

When you risk what you cannot afford, you always lose.

Faith is often very stupid. And cold comfort in loss.

I am an atheist and am perfectly happy turning away refugees. Let other countries deal with that shipwreck.

The question was posed,

The US,
a. Has a responsibility
b. Does not have a responsibility
to accept refugees into the country.

No definition of "refugee" or "responsibility" is suggested. If you're hoping to isolate one group to demagogue the results, it's a good survey. For an actual, comprehensive gauge of attitudes, it's probably lacking.

But if you feel we are obligated to accept refugees, is there any limit to the number? The vast majority of those seeking to enter the country are economic refugees. And our standard of living is better here than in most of the world. Should we decide to stop enforcing our borders and let unlimited numbers of refugees enter our country? Should we put a limit at one million, five million, 100 million? At what point (if any) do we as a country decide we're full up and maybe shouldn't keep the welcome mat out for everybody?

Are you willing to make any distinction between those following our laws and entering legally and those who are illegally entering the country? Most politicians on the left have stopped differentiating between illegal immigrants and legal ones.

Minority youth have the highest unemployment rate of all our citizens. Does flooding the low wage labor market with millions of new low wage workers help or hurt actual citizens competing in that sector?

Though the passage you cite clearly identifies itself as an end-of-times judgement for believers and nonbelievers, you seem to be insisting this verse represents a governmental edict. That being the case, will you explain how you plan to implement the penalty cited in the following passages for those who did not feed or clothe the hungry? Will you be opening a new Bureau of Eternal Punishment?

" Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ 46 And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”"

Since you're citing a Bible passage as an edict for proper governmental conduct, are we correct to assume you're pushing that we function as a theocracy? Should we abide by other biblical edicts, or is this specific verse (which has to do with Christians aiding other Christians in context) the only one you're willing to insist our government follow?

In later verses in Matthew, we have an account of the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus. Are you suggesting our government should impress upon our population the importance of accepting the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus as a fully truthful account and one that every citizen should embrace just as the passage you cited above?

You forget how difficult (and expensive) it is to *legally* emigrate to the US. America takes in far fewer refugees percentage wise than many other countries. There's no tsunami of refugees like vermin attacking the border like the Arachnids from "Starship Troopers."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgq0ecMHfzc

MTV News: Why legal immigration to the US is difficult:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLrYMTc585I

The "deluge" is relative. There are plenty of surveys that show how many (not all fortunately) white Americans become uncomfortable when they are in an environment that is less than 75%-80% white and it's worse for people who grew up in areas that are overwhelmingly white -- like Utah.

I just wanted to point out the hypocrisy of religious people who are just nuts about a young couple who couldn't find a place to stay two thousand years ago and had to sleep in a stable but don't want to help people who are living today.

You can rationalise it as much as you want -- I've heard all the excuses -- but you are speaking out of xenophobia, racism, and nationalism.

Some people think that's OK.

I'm not one of them.

There's going to be a lot of turmoil over the next ten to fifteen years but at least I know people like you are on the way out.

I don't know if you have children or grandchildren but if you have descendants who will come of age past the middle of this century they will live in a world where people with attitudes like yours will be very, very difficult to understand.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 05/28/2018 12:12PM by anybody.

Is it best to help people at home or to allow them to become displaced persons, thousands of miles from their homeland, their families, their cultures, etc.

Well lets look at some of the stats:
The pew research estimates that as of 2017 8.1% of Sweden is Muslim (refugees) and many of them are poor and need help. That number is surely going to rise in the coming decades as more people rush into these really 'nice' countries. There is trouble no one denies but what irritates most Europeans is that they aren't getting to voice their opinions on this subject. Or how they should help these people.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Sweden

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/crime-sweden-part-ii-refugee-men-overrepresented-swedish-crime/

Claims that newly-arrived asylum seekers are causing a crime wave in Sweden are not supported by data or local officials.


https://www.government.se/articles/2017/02/facts-about-migration-and-crime-in-sweden/

Sometimes, simplistic and occasionally inaccurate information about Sweden and Swedish migration policy is disseminated. Here, the Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs looks at some of the most common claims.


https://religionnews.com/2017/11/29/europes-muslim-population-growing-but-wont-be-a-majority-anytime-soon/

But when they are resettled in small towns or cities suddenly there's a "crisis:"

http://www.governing.com/topics/politics/gov-refugees-twin-falls-idaho-immigration.html

"Kaleb Gourley, a high school sophomore, came to the refugee center in search of an Eagle Scout service project. Gourley remembered a lecture he’d heard at his church the year before. “Less than 200 years ago, Mormons were refugees ourselves,” he says. “We were driven state to state by persecution.” Gourley found out that the refugee center needed a car for driver education. He worked with a local auto dealer to get a red 2007 Pontiac Grand Am donated to the center."

The reality is that there is no crisis.

Again, I just wanted to point out the hypocrisy of religious people who are just nuts about a young couple who couldn't find a place to stay two thousand years ago and had to sleep in a stable but don't want to help people who are living today.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/28/2018 12:09PM by anybody.