AND...let me point out the irony of it all here. It's funny, but seems now the far left is screaming we "as a Christian nation" should be taking these guys in...when the other 99.9% of the time they say this isn't a Christian nation and should be looked upon as secular in nature. That flip-flop is big enough to get MY foot in.

 

1) When I hear "Christian nation" arguments it's usually in regard to the government being Christian, i.e. there's no "wall between church and state." There's plenty to disagree with there, but I don't think there's any argument that the majority of the population are Christians.

 

2) On this issue I think it's simply a matter of making an argument that has wider appeal. Conservatives aren't going to accept liberal arguments on this issue (opposition is xenophobic) and liberals aren't going to accept conservative arguments (Muslims = terrorists), so if you want to be convincing to the other side you have to make your case differently (isn't a principle of Christianity to extend a hand to those in need regardless of whether it's easy or not?).

1) When I hear "Christian nation" arguments it's usually in regard to the government being Christian, i.e. there's no "wall between church and state." There's plenty to disagree with there, but I don't think there's any argument that the majority of the population are Christians.

 

2) On this issue I think it's simply a matter of making an argument that has wider appeal. Conservatives aren't going to accept liberal arguments on this issue (opposition is xenophobic) and liberals aren't going to accept conservative arguments (Muslims = terrorists), so if you want to be convincing to the other side you have to make your case differently (isn't a principle of Christianity to extend a hand to those in need regardless of whether it's easy or not?).

 

Wisely, not willy-nilly without any regard to a NATIONS safety. There are THOUSANDS of missionaries all over the world right now spreading the gospel, many of them in very dangerous situations. They CHOOSE to put themselves in those situations and know the sacrifice and potential PERSONAL danger, and the Church in this country sends millions and millions in charitable aid, along with the US government.

 

HOWEVER, the FIRST job of the federal government is to protect this country and it's borders and it's citizens within it from threat/dangers. The current policy of accepting refugees from a known terrorist country, knowing there is a great possibility (and I and many others say certainty) that in doing this we will be letting terrorists into our country who WILL do harm eventually.

 

Help can be given from abroad without bringing people here.

Wisely, not willy-nilly without any regard to a NATIONS safety. There are THOUSANDS of missionaries all over the world right now spreading the gospel, many of them in very dangerous situations. They CHOOSE to put themselves in those situations and know the sacrifice and potential PERSONAL danger, and the Church in this country sends millions and millions in charitable aid, along with the US government.

 

HOWEVER, the FIRST job of the federal government is to protect this country and it's borders and it's citizens within it from threat/dangers. The current policy of accepting refugees from a known terrorist country, knowing there is a great possibility (and I and many others say certainty) that in doing this we will be letting terrorists into our country who WILL do harm eventually.

 

Help can be given from abroad without bringing people here.

 

I just answered your question about alleged hypocrisy re: Christian nation. I don't care to be involved in this debate otherwise.

Maybe more information like this will calm the hysteria.

 

I agree and I'm sure you'll agree with me that the administration in it's arrogance has done a poor job of informing the public of the process. This "trust me, I know what's best for you" attitude has come back to haunt them on this one.

In 1794, Congress appropriated $15,000 for relief of French refugees. James Madison stood on the floor of the House to object, saying, "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."

What you aren't seeing is that evidence shows we aren't knowingly creating another opportunity for "them" to enter...

 

What you aren't understanding is that that particular "spin" is intended for consumption by people who want to keep their head in the sand about how these organizations operate.

 

I will not change my opinion based on some article that is intentionally slanted to paint a rosy picture of this situation.

 

I will, however, be continually reminded by events such as the coordinated Paris killings, Benghazi, 911, etc... that we are at war and under attack and our enemies do not line up in their red coats and march directly into the line of fire.

 

They will use any and every means possible, to include misinformation campaigns, to lull us into a false sense of security in order to more effectively erradicate us.

I just answered your question about alleged hypocrisy re: Christian nation. I don't care to be involved in this debate otherwise.

Chicken.

...and yet, you still aren't presenting the "years and years of data to support your claim".

 

9/11...Paris attacks...plane after plane bombed or shot down...innocent people beheaded...bodies burned...

 

Years and years and it's not going to change.

9/11...Paris attacks...plane after plane bombed or shot down...innocent people beheaded...bodies burned...

 

Years and years and it's not going to change.

How does that prove that the article is wrong?

Paris Attack 2015: Named Terrorists All European Nationals, Not Syrian Refugees

 

Paris Attack 2015: Named Terrorists All European Nationals, Not Syrian Refugees

Letting others into our country, given the risks associated with that practice, is not the standard for determining "Christian behavior". Many, many Christians assist those in need without an unnecessary added risk to our safety in country.

 

I always thought that the standard for Christianity was "are we doing what Jesus would do?"

 

Somehow, I just don't see Jesus saying, "Nope, keep them out. All of them. Kids, women, old people, those running from terrorism. We don't want them."

I always thought that the standard for Christianity was "are we doing what Jesus would do?"

 

Somehow, I just don't see Jesus saying, "Nope, keep them out. All of them. Kids, women, old people, those running from terrorism. We don't want them."

Again, I will ask the question again...why can't we help the refugees WITHOUT having them come to the US? Seems to solve the problem to me. As a Christian I do think we should help these people, especially since a big reason why the Syrian problem exists is because of our president's ridiculous foreign policy and that he bailed on these people when they needed him years ago and let ISIS run rampant.

 

I am all for setting up safe zones with military protection for these people in the ME until it is safe to go back to Syria. They do not have to come to the US for us to help them.

Again' date=' I will ask the question again...why can't we help the refugees WITHOUT having them come to the US? Seems to solve the problem to me. As a Christian I do think we should help these people, especially since a big reason why the Syrian problem exists is because of our president's ridiculous foreign policy and that he bailed on these people when they needed him years ago and let ISIS run rampant. I am all for setting up safe zones with military protection for these people in the ME until it is safe to go back to Syria. They do not have to come to the US for us to help them.[/quote']

 

To add to the questions why can't we bring the 50,000 translators the US military used in Iraq and Afghanistan for a decade? They are seeking asylum and fear for their lives in the desert now. Anybody care about them?

[/b]

Again, I will ask the question again...why can't we help the refugees WITHOUT having them come to the US? Seems to solve the problem to me. As a Christian I do think we should help these people, especially since a big reason why the Syrian problem exists is because of our president's ridiculous foreign policy and that he bailed on these people when they needed him years ago and let ISIS run rampant.

 

I am all for setting up safe zones with military protection for these people in the ME until it is safe to go back to Syria. They do not have to come to the US for us to help them.

 

Since the original post that I quoted concerned "Christian behavior" I am answering that question using that lens. Simply, I don't think Jesus would say "help people from afar." I believe more so that he would say to us to bring the stranger in, feed him, clothe him and take care of him, to treat him as we would treat Jesus himself.

 

In any case, fkyw's article makes it clear that the refugees in most cases have already been in refugee camps for years. They have been screened and of all refugees have less than a 1% chance of making it to the US. That statistic alone makes it so unlikely that an ISIS terrorist would decide that is how they would come to American...to have to wait for three years and have less than a 1% likelihood of being chosen. It just seems more likely that they would try to find another, easier route.

Looks like the refugees took a detour to Mali first, hold off on the care packages until late next week. They're going to be a little late.