I heard they just killed the mastermind of the Paris attacks. His name was Abdulhamid Abaaoud. I guess Obama probably thinks he was a Presbyterian and a member of the NRA.
Some time ago, I set up a category in my word processor called “Terrorism”. This is the first entryl:
“Terrorism is an attack by an enemy who doesn’t have the ability to engage in open warfare. It is directed to the defenseless rather than the strength of its enemy. The objective is not to destroy war fighting capability, but to affect the morale of the victims.”
There is no strategic value in the attacks that ISIS Bioko Haram, and others are doing.
If the Non-Muslim world were to decide to fight, this issue could be settled in a couple of years.
But it wouldn’t[ be pretty. It would be akin tow what the British and French did for years until they discovered that that isn’t what they are. .
A couple of days ago, there was some discussion on TV about a woman in Paris who called for help to get police close. Then she blew herself up with explosives strapped to her body. Some discussion on why she would do that
.
I went to the “Terrorism” entry on my word processor, and found this:
Martyrdom—“Al-Muqudam ben Ma’ad Yakrub relays that the prophet of Allah said, “The martyr is special to Allah. He is forgiven from the first drop of blood that is shed. He sees his throne in Paradise, where he will be adorned in ornaments of faith. He will wed the Anyhour (wide eyed virgins) and will not know the torments of the grave and safeguards against the great terror (hell). Fixed atop his head will be a crown of honor, a ruby that is greater than the world and all it contains. And he will couple with seventy-two Anyhour and be able to offer intercessions for seventy of his relatives. (From The Al Qaeda Reader p. 141.)
There is no explanation in the book about what a woman would get, presumably she would get the intercessory capability that a man would get. But she wouldn’t likely want 72 big, handsome men. (But who knows? :lol:) I checked on-line and there was speculation that she would get a husband of her choice. Presumably not a martyr. He already has 71, 😉
.
You don’t hear of many women martyrs. It is reported that some captive women are raped and then told that they must martyr themselves to regain honor and redemption.
I know this doesn’t make sense to you infidels, but that’s the way it is.
It appears that the Muslim afterlife is all about sex.
Chas, you touched on something I’ve been thinking about. All the chatter about the “women and children” imply that they are innocent. However, aren’t many of these acts perpetrated by women and even children (most likely instigated by an adult, but still . . .)? These guys aren’t stupid, so if they want to infiltrate, might those “innocent” women and children be just as suspect as the “young males?”
“A leader of New York City’s Syrian community told The Post on Wednesday that ISIS terrorists have “absolutely” sneaked into America by posing as civil-war refugees — and joined sleeper cells just waiting to be activated.
“I believe the terrorists from Syria have been coming into the United States, not only in the past few years, but way before that,” said Aarafat “Ralph” Succar of Bay Ridge, Brooklyn, home of the city’s largest enclave of Syrian immigrants. “I think they’re already at work.”
Succar, a member of the Bay Ridge Community Council, said corruption in his homeland is so rampant that anyone could easily pay bribes and obtain official identification papers bearing a fake name to disguise their real identity.
“You can go to the Syrian government today and say to them, ‘I need a piece of paper that says I’m Tony Caterpillar.’ And they give it to you,” he said.
“These are not forged documents. These are written out by a government employee who needs money, whose family has no food.”
Succar, 57, who immigrated to the United States when he was 10, also noted that “Third World countries, particularly places like Syria, do not have the network of information the United States has.”
“In Syria, there’s no such thing. So when they tell you that [the refugees] are vetted, are you out of your mind?” he said.”
——————–
It would appear that many, including the President, are. So much for that whole “carefully vetted” idea.
“The FBI told ABC News two years ago the U.S. may have already allowed in “dozens” of terrorists as refugees. The revelation came after two al-Qaida terrorists who were admitted as refugees and lived in Bowling Green, Ky., later said they attacked U.S. military personnel in Iraq.
“We are currently supporting dozens of current counter-terrorism investigations like that,” FBI Agent Gregory Carl, director of the Terrorist Explosive Device Analytical Center, said in an ABC News interview at the time.”
“In 2011, Mohanad Shareef Hammadi and Waad Ramadan Alwan attempted to ship sniper rifles, rocket-propelled grenade launchers, explosives and money to Iraq to be used against U.S. troops.
Alwan applied for asylum and was allowed into the United States in 2009, three years after being arrested in Kirkuk, Iraq. At that time, he confessed on video during an interrogation that he was an insurgent, the U.S. military and FBI officials told ABC News.”
————————————-
They don’t have as good a record ensuring terrorists are kept out as they would like you to believe.
Mumsee, from yesterday, I may not be able to spend much time in discussion. I was away most of yesterday, helping, and it looks like I will be again today. I was thinking, though of our discussion this morning, and what really bothers me about what I see being said. It isn’t so much the discussion of what to do for the refugees. There is room for thinking that resettlement may not be the best plan for some or even all of them. What I am concerned about is the terms in which that discussion is taking place. Right now, those terms are more about our security, than about their welfare.
As I have said before, I tend to view Revelation as the spiritual warfare behind the history of the world. With that interpretation, I see some cause for thinking that Islam is one manifestation of the beast with two horns. I say one manifestation, there are others with similar features, one of them being Mormonism, which I sometimes call the American version of Islam. So, I do understand the implications, perhaps more clearly than some of you, for I have lived in a Muslim country. But, as Paul said, in our spiritual conflicts, we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, in other words, against other human beings; rather we wrestle against angels, principalities, and powers. Our enemy is not the humans which practice the false faith, it is the fallen angel which gives them that delusion. Once again, Paul said, the weapons of our warfare are not carnal (better understood as weapons fleshly or physical in nature) but spiritual. We know Christ has already defeated all the beasts of Revelation.
In my case, the government of my country has announced its intention to welcome 20,000 of these refugees. The media here has contacted those responsible for the processing of these refugees, and it is proceeding as slowly as government agencies usually do. There is no cause for thinking that they will be processed any differently than any other refugees have been in the past. I also trust our law enforcement to deal with any who try to break the law when they come here, as they have with others who have plotted or committed attacks here. Looking at all the major issues in our society, such as gay marriage, abortion, rights based on sexual orientation; as a Christian, the last issue I would want to start a campaign against is the one were the government is actually showing some care and compassion, however clumsily they may manage it. Finally, the question has been raised about whether we can really trust the refugees. Frankly, I don’t think we can really trust any non-Christian. There are secular activists whose vicious rhetoric against Christianity matches that of radical Islam. We have no reason to expect any of them to like us, yet we are told to befriend them, to love them, to pray for them, to care for them. I cannot control what they do to me. I can, by God’s grace and the strength of Christ, control what I do to them.
Unfortunately the refugee issue has quickly become merely a political football in the U.S., like most everything else these days.
__________________________________________
Obama then compounded the backlash by slamming Republicans raising concerns about the screening process for Syrian refugees.
“Apparently, they’re scared of widows and orphans coming into the United States of America as part of our tradition of compassion,” Obama said Wednesday, in the Philippines. “… They’ve been playing on fear in order to try to score political points or to advance their campaigns.”
__________________________________________
I don’t see the concerns about the refugee issue, however, as primarily one of “fear” or trying to insist on our own (selfish) security.
It’s being played that way, I know, but I think there’s valid reasons to be cautious. It is a legitimate role of the civil government to protect its citizens to the extent that can be done. (And yeah, I know, terrorists are already among us, that’s a given.)
I just wish this discussion could be more thoughtful — instead, it’s turned into yet another overly simplistic political food fight, “compassion vs. fear.” Sigh.
To be honest, though, our southern border has been de-facto open for so long now, I’m not sure what the fuss is about. 😉
I am bothered by the president’s demeanor of late, however. Seems that in his final year in office (YAY) he’s become incredibly dismissive, disengaged (in anything except his own increasingly odd agenda) and entirely unwilling to work with anyone who might have a different view. Can he ever NOT be snarky anymore? I don’t think so.
The Lutheran Catechism explains the meaning of the commandment against bearing false witness against one’s neighbor as, “We should fear and love God that we may not deceitfully belie, betray, slander, or defame our neighbor, but defend him, [think and] speak well of him, and put the best construction on everything.”
I’m familiar with this because I break this commandment every day. I cast aspersions and question the motivations of others, even as I freak out when other people do the same to me.
Whether you’re the president, a GOP candidate for president, a reporter with strong opinions, or just an average Facebook user, we could all work on treating our opponents’ arguments better. So don’t say people who aren’t as concerned about security risks as you are despise America. And don’t say people who don’t trust the government’s vetting processes as much as you do are scared of toddlers.
Consider the possibility that other people simply have different prudence and charity calculi than you. Then, consider their arguments with an open mind rather than simply reacting emotionally.
And this (author of above & below is Mollie Hemingway):
“Don’t oversimplify Christian ethics.
“The media aren’t known for their friendliness to Christian beliefs, so it was surprising to see some reporters attempt biblical exegesis of their preferred domestic policies. As Hans Fiene has explained in ‘The Christmas Story Is About Christ, Not Obama’s Syrian Refugee Policy,’ the Christmas story is about Jesus Christ, not Obama’s Syrian refugee policy. Reasons he cites include that Mary and Joseph were not foreigners in Bethlehem, Mary and Joseph were not refugees, Mary and Joseph were most likely not denied room at a hotel, and, most importantly, the Christmas story is not a morality tale about hospitality.
It would be somewhat easier if scripture did tell everyone exactly what to do about this complicated global problem, but it does not. Christian philosophers have discussed issues of charity for millennia, and one topic of concern was precisely about showing charity to others. …”
And more from hemingway (good piece overall if you have a chance to read it):
” … The question of what Christians should do about refugees, particularly those who are their religious brethren, is actually a different question than what the U.S. government should do about Syrian refugees. The scriptures are clear that Christians are to help others and that we are to help fellow Christians first. This is written throughout the scriptures but perhaps most clearly in Galatians 6:10, which says, “So then, as we have opportunity, let us do good to everyone, and especially to those who are of the household of faith.”
“While Christians have a duty to help fellow Christians first, the U.S. government doesn’t have that same duty. Having said that, of the 2,184 Syrian refugees admitted into the U.S. since the 2011, only 53 have been Christian, even though Christians have been victims of special persecution at the hands of ISIS. Despite what Obama has said on the matter, U.S. policy does privilege refugees fleeing such persecution, so these numbers should be higher.
“Again, though, while Christians are called to open their homes and communities to strangers, the U.S. government doesn’t necessarily have that role. There are many things that Christians do through their churches that are different than what the government does. The church preaches the gospel and administers the sacraments. That’s not a role for the state. The state punishes those who violate moral laws, such as prohibitions against murder or rape. That is not the role of the church. …”
“Barack Obama is feigning outrage over the desire of governors and GOP presidential contenders to pause the inflow of Syrian refugees. In tweet from Manila, where he also verbally lambasted his political opponents, he wrote:
Slamming the door in the face of refugees would betray our deepest values. That’s not who we are. And it’s not what we’re going to do.
But in 2011, by his own standards, Obama was betraying “our deepest values.””
Are we talking past each other here? The discussion isn’t between flinging open the door without any vetting at all or walking away and leaving them to die. The discussion is about who we let in and who we try to help where they are.
Even some Democrats see the need to further ensure the refugee vetting process is thorough and complete. And with these Dems, it’s enough to over-ride Obama’s threatened veto. 🙂
“The House voted overwhelmingly Thursday to slap stringent — and difficult to implement — new screening procedures on refugees from Syria seeking resettlement, seizing on the fear stemming from the Paris attacks and threatening to cloud President Obama’s Middle East policy.
The bill, which passed 289 to 137with nearly 50 Democrats supporting it, would require that the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security and the director of national intelligence confirm that each applicant from Syria and Iraq poses no threat, a demand the White House called “untenable.” The measure received significant support from Democrats, even after administration officials implored them to abandon the measure on Thursday morning.
The Senate is expected to take up the measure after the Thanksgiving recess, but its fate in that chamber is unclear.
“Our duty is to protect the American people,” said Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the majority leader. The House measure, he said, “increases the standards to keep those who want to do us harm out.””
When you see two guys shaking hands on an agreement, and they’re both looking at the camera instead of each other- You know that’s what it’s about. The appearance of agreement.
It won’t last.
Anonymous, on your National Review link: The author’s primary argument seems to be that the government and Christians are two different entities and have different responsibilities. Agreed, they are different, and governments are ordained by God to execute justice. In the terrorist attacks that have taken place on Western soil, the Western governments have executed that justice. The 9/11 hijackers could not be arrested for obvious reasons, but the U.S. proceeded to hunt down the planners. The French police have confirmed the kill of the planner of the Parisian attacks. The lone wolves who committed attacks in Canada were both killed by security and law enforcement. The surviving Boston terrorist is under sentence of death. Furthermore, the refugees are being screened. The government is carrying out its function there as well.
However, I read links put up that do not trust the government to do screening, and seem to think that the government should be able to stop all terrorist attacks if it worked a little harder. But, if the government is to execute justice, it can only punish crimes committed. It cannot make assumptions of guilt prior to the crime. To do so would be bad for all of us. And that is where the assumption that all or some of the refugees come with evil intent becomes dangerous not only to a Christian view of our neighbours, but also to the ability of a government to execute justice.
KBells, I agree, that is where the discussion should be. Unfortunately, that is not where it is. I have a habit of reading comments after articles, usually to see what kind of people read the publication and what their opinions on it are. On Donna’s link from The Federalist, here is a comment – copied and pasted:
“If they stay in their own country, they’d die, and that solves that problem right there. Dead people don’t commit too many acts of terrorism.”
They told us on TV that they found the location of the house the French raided Wednesday by searching by a captured cell phone.
They shouldn’t have told us that.
The enemy will correct the problem.
Donna, I was not trying to use the comment to cast aspersion on The Federalist Article. As I said, I read them to get a picture of the kind of people and opinions that read the publication. I have read other Federalist articles before, and I generally have a good opinion of the publication. However, as a conservative publication, it does attract right-wingers who have very concerning opinions. And it isn’t the only such publication to attract such opinions – I have been very saddened to read what people have been writing on similar World articles. I also read commenters on liberal publications who have very concerning opinions. My purpose in using the quote was to show that unfortunately the discussion is for many not about how to vet the refugees.
Hemmingway wrote for the Get Religion blog for a while, she’s a pretty cogent and informed thinker. Her piece was one of the better ones I’ve read.
And I’m probably about to break some of her suggestions for civility, if I haven’t already, myself. 🙄
But honestly, can this subject get any more knee-jerk emotional or “us vs. them” (on both sides)??? Bickering, lecturing, outrage, holier-than-though FB posts, it goes on and on.
There’s talk now of an expanding operation against ISIS, including establishing a safe zone for refugees in Syria and Turkey. They’re modifying the rules of engagement as well. That’s good news.
Yes, Phos, it is a spiritual battle. One question is what is to be done with 2 John verse 10? We apply it to Jehovah’s Witnesses and to Mormons. That is on a personal, familial level. We have had Mormons and JW’s in our home as well as Muslims, but it clearly says not to do that. We have done it in a form of hospitality, but the Bible is saying not even to greet them. Is it only talking of those who pervert the Gospel? Don’t they all pervert the Gospel?
We have offered to take in Christian refugees. My old self would have not hesitated to bring in Muslims as well and I could nearly say that now, but God has put a stop in my life. The old me would have given away our last dollar. But my stop (husband) says no, we need to pay our bills and provide for the family. Am I being untrusting to do that? I don’t think so, I think it is good stewardship.
We can certainly pray for the refugees, and we can certainly send money to appropriate missions to help them. Do we insist that our neighbors take them in? We have seen when large numbers of Muslims arrive, they understandably want to have things their way: swimming pools open depending on the sex of the swimmers, medical help by male doctors for men, food prepared certain ways. Do we have the willingness and infrastructure to do that? If they build a mosque and say that their religion does not allow a church to be higher, do we lower our churches? How far do we go to assimilate? With Ananias and Sapphira, they could have kept their home or part of the money, it was theirs to do with as they would. They were not required to sell and give it all to the church. God gives us the ability to be responsible with His resources. So many questions.
Tough-worded piece but I’m wondering if she’s not right in her conclusion:
“Some have argued that America’s messy refugee debate is a distraction from the larger fight against ISIS. I see it as an important warning sign. The challenges, after all, might get greater from here on out. A country can’t successfully function this way.”
Wandering Views 
I heard they just killed the mastermind of the Paris attacks. His name was Abdulhamid Abaaoud. I guess Obama probably thinks he was a Presbyterian and a member of the NRA.
LikeLike
Some time ago, I set up a category in my word processor called “Terrorism”. This is the first entryl:
“Terrorism is an attack by an enemy who doesn’t have the ability to engage in open warfare. It is directed to the defenseless rather than the strength of its enemy. The objective is not to destroy war fighting capability, but to affect the morale of the victims.”
There is no strategic value in the attacks that ISIS Bioko Haram, and others are doing.
If the Non-Muslim world were to decide to fight, this issue could be settled in a couple of years.
But it wouldn’t[ be pretty. It would be akin tow what the British and French did for years until they discovered that that isn’t what they are. .
LikeLiked by 2 people
A couple of days ago, there was some discussion on TV about a woman in Paris who called for help to get police close. Then she blew herself up with explosives strapped to her body. Some discussion on why she would do that
.
I went to the “Terrorism” entry on my word processor, and found this:
Martyrdom—“Al-Muqudam ben Ma’ad Yakrub relays that the prophet of Allah said, “The martyr is special to Allah. He is forgiven from the first drop of blood that is shed. He sees his throne in Paradise, where he will be adorned in ornaments of faith. He will wed the Anyhour (wide eyed virgins) and will not know the torments of the grave and safeguards against the great terror (hell). Fixed atop his head will be a crown of honor, a ruby that is greater than the world and all it contains. And he will couple with seventy-two Anyhour and be able to offer intercessions for seventy of his relatives. (From The Al Qaeda Reader p. 141.)
There is no explanation in the book about what a woman would get, presumably she would get the intercessory capability that a man would get. But she wouldn’t likely want 72 big, handsome men. (But who knows? :lol:) I checked on-line and there was speculation that she would get a husband of her choice. Presumably not a martyr. He already has 71, 😉
.
You don’t hear of many women martyrs. It is reported that some captive women are raped and then told that they must martyr themselves to regain honor and redemption.
I know this doesn’t make sense to you infidels, but that’s the way it is.
It appears that the Muslim afterlife is all about sex.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Chas, you touched on something I’ve been thinking about. All the chatter about the “women and children” imply that they are innocent. However, aren’t many of these acts perpetrated by women and even children (most likely instigated by an adult, but still . . .)? These guys aren’t stupid, so if they want to infiltrate, might those “innocent” women and children be just as suspect as the “young males?”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Even the Syrians in the US know that ISIS has infiltrated the masses of refugees. Some are already here, and more are on the way.
http://nypost.com/2015/11/19/syrian-community-leader-isis-is-already-in-new-york-city/
“A leader of New York City’s Syrian community told The Post on Wednesday that ISIS terrorists have “absolutely” sneaked into America by posing as civil-war refugees — and joined sleeper cells just waiting to be activated.
“I believe the terrorists from Syria have been coming into the United States, not only in the past few years, but way before that,” said Aarafat “Ralph” Succar of Bay Ridge, Brooklyn, home of the city’s largest enclave of Syrian immigrants. “I think they’re already at work.”
Succar, a member of the Bay Ridge Community Council, said corruption in his homeland is so rampant that anyone could easily pay bribes and obtain official identification papers bearing a fake name to disguise their real identity.
“You can go to the Syrian government today and say to them, ‘I need a piece of paper that says I’m Tony Caterpillar.’ And they give it to you,” he said.
“These are not forged documents. These are written out by a government employee who needs money, whose family has no food.”
Succar, 57, who immigrated to the United States when he was 10, also noted that “Third World countries, particularly places like Syria, do not have the network of information the United States has.”
“In Syria, there’s no such thing. So when they tell you that [the refugees] are vetted, are you out of your mind?” he said.”
——————–
It would appear that many, including the President, are. So much for that whole “carefully vetted” idea.
LikeLike
And just a reminder….
http://dailycaller.com/2015/11/17/fbi-in-2013-dozens-of-terrorists-in-us-through-refugee-program/
“The FBI told ABC News two years ago the U.S. may have already allowed in “dozens” of terrorists as refugees. The revelation came after two al-Qaida terrorists who were admitted as refugees and lived in Bowling Green, Ky., later said they attacked U.S. military personnel in Iraq.
“We are currently supporting dozens of current counter-terrorism investigations like that,” FBI Agent Gregory Carl, director of the Terrorist Explosive Device Analytical Center, said in an ABC News interview at the time.”
“In 2011, Mohanad Shareef Hammadi and Waad Ramadan Alwan attempted to ship sniper rifles, rocket-propelled grenade launchers, explosives and money to Iraq to be used against U.S. troops.
Alwan applied for asylum and was allowed into the United States in 2009, three years after being arrested in Kirkuk, Iraq. At that time, he confessed on video during an interrogation that he was an insurgent, the U.S. military and FBI officials told ABC News.”
————————————-
They don’t have as good a record ensuring terrorists are kept out as they would like you to believe.
LikeLike
Mumsee, from yesterday, I may not be able to spend much time in discussion. I was away most of yesterday, helping, and it looks like I will be again today. I was thinking, though of our discussion this morning, and what really bothers me about what I see being said. It isn’t so much the discussion of what to do for the refugees. There is room for thinking that resettlement may not be the best plan for some or even all of them. What I am concerned about is the terms in which that discussion is taking place. Right now, those terms are more about our security, than about their welfare.
As I have said before, I tend to view Revelation as the spiritual warfare behind the history of the world. With that interpretation, I see some cause for thinking that Islam is one manifestation of the beast with two horns. I say one manifestation, there are others with similar features, one of them being Mormonism, which I sometimes call the American version of Islam. So, I do understand the implications, perhaps more clearly than some of you, for I have lived in a Muslim country. But, as Paul said, in our spiritual conflicts, we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, in other words, against other human beings; rather we wrestle against angels, principalities, and powers. Our enemy is not the humans which practice the false faith, it is the fallen angel which gives them that delusion. Once again, Paul said, the weapons of our warfare are not carnal (better understood as weapons fleshly or physical in nature) but spiritual. We know Christ has already defeated all the beasts of Revelation.
In my case, the government of my country has announced its intention to welcome 20,000 of these refugees. The media here has contacted those responsible for the processing of these refugees, and it is proceeding as slowly as government agencies usually do. There is no cause for thinking that they will be processed any differently than any other refugees have been in the past. I also trust our law enforcement to deal with any who try to break the law when they come here, as they have with others who have plotted or committed attacks here. Looking at all the major issues in our society, such as gay marriage, abortion, rights based on sexual orientation; as a Christian, the last issue I would want to start a campaign against is the one were the government is actually showing some care and compassion, however clumsily they may manage it. Finally, the question has been raised about whether we can really trust the refugees. Frankly, I don’t think we can really trust any non-Christian. There are secular activists whose vicious rhetoric against Christianity matches that of radical Islam. We have no reason to expect any of them to like us, yet we are told to befriend them, to love them, to pray for them, to care for them. I cannot control what they do to me. I can, by God’s grace and the strength of Christ, control what I do to them.
LikeLike
Unfortunately the refugee issue has quickly become merely a political football in the U.S., like most everything else these days.
__________________________________________
Obama then compounded the backlash by slamming Republicans raising concerns about the screening process for Syrian refugees.
“Apparently, they’re scared of widows and orphans coming into the United States of America as part of our tradition of compassion,” Obama said Wednesday, in the Philippines. “… They’ve been playing on fear in order to try to score political points or to advance their campaigns.”
__________________________________________
I don’t see the concerns about the refugee issue, however, as primarily one of “fear” or trying to insist on our own (selfish) security.
It’s being played that way, I know, but I think there’s valid reasons to be cautious. It is a legitimate role of the civil government to protect its citizens to the extent that can be done. (And yeah, I know, terrorists are already among us, that’s a given.)
I just wish this discussion could be more thoughtful — instead, it’s turned into yet another overly simplistic political food fight, “compassion vs. fear.” Sigh.
LikeLiked by 1 person
To be honest, though, our southern border has been de-facto open for so long now, I’m not sure what the fuss is about. 😉
I am bothered by the president’s demeanor of late, however. Seems that in his final year in office (YAY) he’s become incredibly dismissive, disengaged (in anything except his own increasingly odd agenda) and entirely unwilling to work with anyone who might have a different view. Can he ever NOT be snarky anymore? I don’t think so.
He was a poor choice to ever serve as president.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Actually, though ….
Some pretty good advice here on how to have a conversation on the refugee issue:
http://thefederalist.com/2015/11/19/3-tips-for-a-more-civil-conversation-about-syrian-refugees/
________________________________________
The Lutheran Catechism explains the meaning of the commandment against bearing false witness against one’s neighbor as, “We should fear and love God that we may not deceitfully belie, betray, slander, or defame our neighbor, but defend him, [think and] speak well of him, and put the best construction on everything.”
I’m familiar with this because I break this commandment every day. I cast aspersions and question the motivations of others, even as I freak out when other people do the same to me.
Whether you’re the president, a GOP candidate for president, a reporter with strong opinions, or just an average Facebook user, we could all work on treating our opponents’ arguments better. So don’t say people who aren’t as concerned about security risks as you are despise America. And don’t say people who don’t trust the government’s vetting processes as much as you do are scared of toddlers.
Consider the possibility that other people simply have different prudence and charity calculi than you. Then, consider their arguments with an open mind rather than simply reacting emotionally.
________________________________
I’m guilty, I admit. 😦
LikeLiked by 1 person
And this (author of above & below is Mollie Hemingway):
“Don’t oversimplify Christian ethics.
“The media aren’t known for their friendliness to Christian beliefs, so it was surprising to see some reporters attempt biblical exegesis of their preferred domestic policies. As Hans Fiene has explained in ‘The Christmas Story Is About Christ, Not Obama’s Syrian Refugee Policy,’ the Christmas story is about Jesus Christ, not Obama’s Syrian refugee policy. Reasons he cites include that Mary and Joseph were not foreigners in Bethlehem, Mary and Joseph were not refugees, Mary and Joseph were most likely not denied room at a hotel, and, most importantly, the Christmas story is not a morality tale about hospitality.
It would be somewhat easier if scripture did tell everyone exactly what to do about this complicated global problem, but it does not. Christian philosophers have discussed issues of charity for millennia, and one topic of concern was precisely about showing charity to others. …”
LikeLike
Thoughts?
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/427278/syrian-refugees-bible-argument-against?ogg5guHK7TkWoUyk.01
LikeLike
And more from hemingway (good piece overall if you have a chance to read it):
” … The question of what Christians should do about refugees, particularly those who are their religious brethren, is actually a different question than what the U.S. government should do about Syrian refugees. The scriptures are clear that Christians are to help others and that we are to help fellow Christians first. This is written throughout the scriptures but perhaps most clearly in Galatians 6:10, which says, “So then, as we have opportunity, let us do good to everyone, and especially to those who are of the household of faith.”
“While Christians have a duty to help fellow Christians first, the U.S. government doesn’t have that same duty. Having said that, of the 2,184 Syrian refugees admitted into the U.S. since the 2011, only 53 have been Christian, even though Christians have been victims of special persecution at the hands of ISIS. Despite what Obama has said on the matter, U.S. policy does privilege refugees fleeing such persecution, so these numbers should be higher.
“Again, though, while Christians are called to open their homes and communities to strangers, the U.S. government doesn’t necessarily have that role. There are many things that Christians do through their churches that are different than what the government does. The church preaches the gospel and administers the sacraments. That’s not a role for the state. The state punishes those who violate moral laws, such as prohibitions against murder or rape. That is not the role of the church. …”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh, my. A video of that night in Paris: http://www.nytimes.com/video/world/europe/100000004046518/heroes-of-the-bataclan.html
LikeLike
“Barack Obama is feigning outrage over the desire of governors and GOP presidential contenders to pause the inflow of Syrian refugees. In tweet from Manila, where he also verbally lambasted his political opponents, he wrote:
Slamming the door in the face of refugees would betray our deepest values. That’s not who we are. And it’s not what we’re going to do.
But in 2011, by his own standards, Obama was betraying “our deepest values.””
(More at link.)
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/11/hypocrite_obama_ordered_a_6month_pause_in_processing_muslim_refugees_in_2011.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
Are we talking past each other here? The discussion isn’t between flinging open the door without any vetting at all or walking away and leaving them to die. The discussion is about who we let in and who we try to help where they are.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Even some Democrats see the need to further ensure the refugee vetting process is thorough and complete. And with these Dems, it’s enough to over-ride Obama’s threatened veto. 🙂
Now to the Senate……
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/house-approves-tougher-refugee-screening-defying-veto-threat/ar-BBndcL2?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=U142DHP
“The House voted overwhelmingly Thursday to slap stringent — and difficult to implement — new screening procedures on refugees from Syria seeking resettlement, seizing on the fear stemming from the Paris attacks and threatening to cloud President Obama’s Middle East policy.
The bill, which passed 289 to 137with nearly 50 Democrats supporting it, would require that the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security and the director of national intelligence confirm that each applicant from Syria and Iraq poses no threat, a demand the White House called “untenable.” The measure received significant support from Democrats, even after administration officials implored them to abandon the measure on Thursday morning.
The Senate is expected to take up the measure after the Thanksgiving recess, but its fate in that chamber is unclear.
“Our duty is to protect the American people,” said Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the majority leader. The House measure, he said, “increases the standards to keep those who want to do us harm out.””
LikeLike
A tip on how to evaluate things.
When you see two guys shaking hands on an agreement, and they’re both looking at the camera instead of each other- You know that’s what it’s about. The appearance of agreement.
It won’t last.
LikeLike
Anonymous, on your National Review link: The author’s primary argument seems to be that the government and Christians are two different entities and have different responsibilities. Agreed, they are different, and governments are ordained by God to execute justice. In the terrorist attacks that have taken place on Western soil, the Western governments have executed that justice. The 9/11 hijackers could not be arrested for obvious reasons, but the U.S. proceeded to hunt down the planners. The French police have confirmed the kill of the planner of the Parisian attacks. The lone wolves who committed attacks in Canada were both killed by security and law enforcement. The surviving Boston terrorist is under sentence of death. Furthermore, the refugees are being screened. The government is carrying out its function there as well.
However, I read links put up that do not trust the government to do screening, and seem to think that the government should be able to stop all terrorist attacks if it worked a little harder. But, if the government is to execute justice, it can only punish crimes committed. It cannot make assumptions of guilt prior to the crime. To do so would be bad for all of us. And that is where the assumption that all or some of the refugees come with evil intent becomes dangerous not only to a Christian view of our neighbours, but also to the ability of a government to execute justice.
LikeLike
KBells, I agree, that is where the discussion should be. Unfortunately, that is not where it is. I have a habit of reading comments after articles, usually to see what kind of people read the publication and what their opinions on it are. On Donna’s link from The Federalist, here is a comment – copied and pasted:
LikeLike
Hey, comments are comments, it’s a reflection of our culture, not the news site.
Just sayin’
LikeLike
Sheesh. People.
LikeLike
They told us on TV that they found the location of the house the French raided Wednesday by searching by a captured cell phone.
They shouldn’t have told us that.
The enemy will correct the problem.
LikeLike
Roscuro: And that’s exactly WHY I make it a practice NOT to read reader comments in general. 😉
Comment wars are not pretty but it’s a cheap shot to use them to cast aspersions on the quality of the news source.
Argh!
LikeLike
Not to mention way off topic.
LikeLike
Donna, I was not trying to use the comment to cast aspersion on The Federalist Article. As I said, I read them to get a picture of the kind of people and opinions that read the publication. I have read other Federalist articles before, and I generally have a good opinion of the publication. However, as a conservative publication, it does attract right-wingers who have very concerning opinions. And it isn’t the only such publication to attract such opinions – I have been very saddened to read what people have been writing on similar World articles. I also read commenters on liberal publications who have very concerning opinions. My purpose in using the quote was to show that unfortunately the discussion is for many not about how to vet the refugees.
LikeLike
Hemmingway wrote for the Get Religion blog for a while, she’s a pretty cogent and informed thinker. Her piece was one of the better ones I’ve read.
And I’m probably about to break some of her suggestions for civility, if I haven’t already, myself. 🙄
But honestly, can this subject get any more knee-jerk emotional or “us vs. them” (on both sides)??? Bickering, lecturing, outrage, holier-than-though FB posts, it goes on and on.
I’m so, so tired of it all. Done.
Just open the borders, we can be done with it. 🙂
Oh wait. We’ve already done that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The American Thinker just published this piece on Putin and Russia.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/11/what_putin_knows.html
Russia has problems. However, it is interesting to note that there are many things that Putin understands and Obama does not.
LikeLike
It appears that the Muslim afterlife is all about sex.
It appears that a lot of people think that way.
LikeLike
There’s talk now of an expanding operation against ISIS, including establishing a safe zone for refugees in Syria and Turkey. They’re modifying the rules of engagement as well. That’s good news.
LikeLike
Anon, apparently Obama isn’t part of that conversation.
LikeLike
Yes, Phos, it is a spiritual battle. One question is what is to be done with 2 John verse 10? We apply it to Jehovah’s Witnesses and to Mormons. That is on a personal, familial level. We have had Mormons and JW’s in our home as well as Muslims, but it clearly says not to do that. We have done it in a form of hospitality, but the Bible is saying not even to greet them. Is it only talking of those who pervert the Gospel? Don’t they all pervert the Gospel?
We have offered to take in Christian refugees. My old self would have not hesitated to bring in Muslims as well and I could nearly say that now, but God has put a stop in my life. The old me would have given away our last dollar. But my stop (husband) says no, we need to pay our bills and provide for the family. Am I being untrusting to do that? I don’t think so, I think it is good stewardship.
We can certainly pray for the refugees, and we can certainly send money to appropriate missions to help them. Do we insist that our neighbors take them in? We have seen when large numbers of Muslims arrive, they understandably want to have things their way: swimming pools open depending on the sex of the swimmers, medical help by male doctors for men, food prepared certain ways. Do we have the willingness and infrastructure to do that? If they build a mosque and say that their religion does not allow a church to be higher, do we lower our churches? How far do we go to assimilate? With Ananias and Sapphira, they could have kept their home or part of the money, it was theirs to do with as they would. They were not required to sell and give it all to the church. God gives us the ability to be responsible with His resources. So many questions.
LikeLike
Of course, tonight’s reading in Isaiah includes 58:7….and bring the homeless poor into the house…..
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tough-worded piece but I’m wondering if she’s not right in her conclusion:
“Some have argued that America’s messy refugee debate is a distraction from the larger fight against ISIS. I see it as an important warning sign. The challenges, after all, might get greater from here on out. A country can’t successfully function this way.”
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/11/19/americas_ridiculous_refugee_debate__128776.html
LikeLike