Many of our Christian brethren demand more refugees be brought to the U.S., citing as justification the Good Samaritan parable and commandments to love our neighbor and to share the Gospel.
For starters, the Good Samaritan didn’t bring home the victim he found along the roadside. Ever wonder why? He took him someplace where he could be properly cared for.
For the billions of dollars in expenses and welfare benefits refugees cost American taxpayers, refugees could be treated more humanely, yes, even more lovingly, by persuading our Middle East friends to put them up there, where they will be among people who speak the same language, worship the same religion and consequently have more of a chance to obtain gainful employment and return to the lives they once lived.
For every dollar it costs to bring one refugee to America, 12 refugees can be cared for in the Middle East.
Rather than forcibly transplanting these people to America, a land completely foreign in customs, language and faith, wouldn’t it be more kind, let alone more cost-effective, to use diplomatic pressure to persuade or even coerce Middle East nations to shoulder the burden of caring for their own?
As far as loving our neighbors, do our actual neighbors count?
How loving is it to dump tens of thousands of non-English-speaking, almost exclusively Muslim, unemployable people into U.S. neighborhoods where they constitute an immediate underclass, subsisting on welfare and food stamps, resented and viewed suspiciously by the people who already live there, who purposely were never asked if they wanted them living next door?
Ever wonder why communities aren’t asked whether they want large groups of Somalis or Syrians moved in to their neighborhoods? Two guesses.
An obvious concern is whether the refugees are dangerous. Both the FBI and Department of Homeland Security have admitted in recent months that refugees from the Middle East are impossible to vet. We have no idea how risky they may be because there is no reliable way to identify them, let alone to run background checks in a region where governments are reduced to chaos and corruption.
That’s our government admitting these people can’t be vetted.
The over-used cliché of one poison M&M in a bowl of M&Ms has been over-used and become a cliché for good reason. It’s true.
If you were handed a bowl of M&Ms and told that only one of them contained poison, how many M&Ms would you gulp down? Yeah. Me either.
Notice that the people lobbying to bring refugees to America aren’t lobbying to bring them to their houses.
The 9 “volunteer” agencies that accept these refugees then relocate them in U.S. neighborhoods (without consulting existing neighbors) are paid $2,000-plus for each one they process.
And process is all they are permitted to do because even though several of these agencies are connected to religious groups, they are prohibited by law from sharing the Gospel with the refugees because it’s a government program.
Nevertheless, the more refugees they process, the more money the non-profit volunteer agencies make in this billion-dollar refugee placement industry financed, not by private donations, but by tax dollars.
Here’s a quaint reason we must be absolutely certain people we permit to enter our country are eager to assimilate and willing to abandon philosophies and ways of life incompatible with the American constitutional system: If we don’t, we sow the seeds of societal and cultural destruction.
Islam is a political system with a religion attached. Its goal specified in its holy book is to bring the entire world under Sharia law, by persuasion or by force. Don’t take my word for it.
A 1991 Muslim Brotherhood memo explains Muslims are engaged in a “Civilization-Jihadist Process.” It states: “The Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”
Those are their words, not mine.
How reasonable is it to expect people with that worldview to assimilate and become loyal to an American way of life they reject as an offense to Allah? Rather than assimilate, Muslims holding to this view demand their religious views be honored by the wider culture. The first step is to extend to Muslims what Bernard Lewis calls a “privileged immunity.” Lewis, author of “The Crisis of Islam,” is an internationally recognized historian on the Middle East.
This “privileged immunity” is manifest in things like blocking traffic with mass prayer, local Sharia courts and no-go zones, where civil law enforcement backs off and concentrated populations of Muslims enjoy “a level of immunity from criticism that Christian majorities have lost and the Jewish minorities never had,” in Lewis’ words.
You might say, “Surely not all Muslims are like that.” If you can figure out how to determine which Muslim refugees do and don’t subscribe to that philosophy among the thousands of un-vettable immigrants brought here, please tell the FBI and DHS. As we saw in Part 1 yesterday, they obviously haven’t been good at detecting the threats from the non-threats before they get here.
While you’re at it, factor in the Muslim deception called “taqiya,” which permits Muslims to lie to advance their faith.
The Muslim Brotherhood’s motto: “Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope. Allahu akbar!”
What could go wrong with a religion advanced by a false prophet demanding obedience to a false god when death “in the way of Allah” is the highest hope?
In the United States, members of the Muslim Brotherhood rose to places of authority in the Obama Administration. The U.S.-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), an unindicted co-conspirator in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation for financing the Hamas terrorist group, is connected to the Muslim Brotherhood and prominent in public relations efforts to shape Americans’ views of all things Islamic.
As for our commandment to share the Gospel, whatever happened to taking it to the whole world? I don’t recall Peter or Paul bringing caravans of foreigners to Jerusalem to hear God’s message. They went to where the unbelievers were.
The church has gotten a bit slothful reaching out to the lost. Worse, even when unbelievers are brought to us, we plop them down in instant ghettos where they are least likely to assimilate, let alone to hear the Gospel.
Here’s advice for those with a burning passion to bring refugees to Christ: Go to where they are. Take the Gospel to them. Don’t rely on the government to round them up and pay opportunists $2,000 a pop in tax money to bring them here where they instantly huddle in insulated ghettos, go on welfare and food stamps.
There’s another thing to be aware of in sharing your faith with a Muslim. Ever since their prophet, Muhammad, laid down the law 1,400 years ago, when a male Muslim converts to another faith, “he must be put to death,” historian Lewis points out. For women, “flogging and imprisonment may suffice,” he explains. “For this offense, there is no human forgiveness.”
That brings us back to loving our neighbor. American taxpayers, not all of them Christians by a long shot, are not asked whether they want to finance these festering, impoverished slums like Little Mogadishu in Minnesota.
There was a day in this country when Christians took the Gospel to foreign lands, and if they brought refugees here, they personally sponsored them, helped house them and find them jobs, and took some degree of personal responsibility in their lives – all loving, personal acts.
Today, Christians seem content to hand off that charity work to the government, which spends tax money few taxpayers intended to be spent that way, to achieve outcomes that strain credulity to imagine anyone would have paid for it up front, if they knew that’s what they were going to get.
Finally, safety first. All the debate about costs and assimilation and being good Christians can’t be honestly addressed if we create dangerous cesspools of budding or secretive jihadists, biding their time until they are ready to slit throats or blow up buildings.
The 2015 San Bernardino Muslim terrorists, one born here to an immigrant Pakistani family, the other a Pakistani immigrant on a visa, seemed outwardly to be acclimating to America. Their co-workers threw them a baby shower. But not long after, the duo walked into a Christmas party for co-workers, fired 150 rounds, murdering 14 and wounding 22 others. Neither was on Terrorist Screening Database lists.
President Donald Trump has suggested we should back off importing refugees and other immigrants until we at least know who they are and what their intentions are. That sounds like a pretty basic starting point. How many would you invite into your home based on the existing “rigorous” vetting of your government?
How many jihadist murders in your neighborhood are you willing to accept before you acknowledge this is a dangerous problem? Got a number in mind? Mine is zero.
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Barb Wire.