Syrian Refugees

Depending on the news of the day, I will scroll through my Facebook feed to find good articles people post.  Invariably, people will post articles that agree with their perceptions of events, but that is good.  My news feed becomes a news aggregator – my own personal Drudge Report (but inclusive of liberal articles as well).

Every so often, there is a universality of uselessness in the articles people post and surface on my newsfeed.  Articles heavy on opinion as well as cherry-picked facts – facts only shared to support the heavy opinionating.  Not interested in those.

The first article I spotted that had useful information in it was here (additional primary sources derived from the article: this and this), indicating that 4 out of 5 migrants pouring into Europe were NOT from Syria.  Hmmmmm….

Then followed a long period of unproductive reading for me.  I eventually spotted this from Senator Carper, which, interestingly, rung my bell a bit.  I had, for a long time, been casually reading through various news sources (to include the aggregator of Facebook) to find source material that would help me formulate an opinion on the topic dominating my Facebook feed, and was reminded by the good Senator that maybe I should be looking to scriptural sources for guidance (to be sure, others, including my own church leaders, had suggested the same.  But, I learned long ago, that sometimes, you gotta hear it from someone else.  One’s mind isn’t always open sufficiently to hear things from the “usual suspects”.  Someone that you don’t expect it from – like a politician – can sorta smack on you the back of the head and get your attention.  Senator Carper’s statement had that effect on me.)

What I liked about Senator Carper’s statement was not only that it assisted in reorienting my thinking on the issue, but it also, for the first time in my recent reading, actually provided useful information on the refugee process.

This was further expanded on during the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs (HSGAC) hearing held on this topic the other day.  It’s a long hearing, but tremendously informative.  A grown up conversation held by grown ups.  A few nuggets I pulled from it:

• Senator Carper’s statement that there’s a long process by which someone can obtain refugee status from the US;
• There is, indeed, not a lot of intel available to validate claims of applicants from Syria;
• If there isn’t sufficient information available to validate claims of applicants, the process will kick that applicant out of the candidate pool.
• The bill passed by the House to address this issue does little more than to require that relevant federal agencies “certify” that the process already in place for screening a refugee applicant is adhered to (a reporting requirement)
• As I wrote to a friend earlier, the bill was written to give the finger to the President and express Congress’s lack of faith in his Administration to administrate important things correctly; the President’s veto threat is a finger back at Congress for meddling in things that, technically, don’t need* meddling (since there’s already a screening process in place); and the House’s passage by overwhelming bipartisan numbers is an acknowledgement by Congress that the voters are jittery about this issue.
• *I say don’t “need” meddling because the bill doesn’t actually propose to change anything in the actual process that evaluates a refugee applicant.  The applicant doesn’t have to go through a single step more than if the bill were never passed.  So, if Congress didn’t see fit to change the actual process – other than adding a lame reporting requirement – then, Congress doesn’t think the process  “needs” meddling.
• The news coverage on this bill, and claims by all parties as to what this bill does and doesn’t do is abhorrent.  The bill is 5 pages long – in the GPO print format. Which means it’s actually 1 page long in normal single-space type.  Read the bill and you’ll know that Congress did NOT “close the door” on refugees.  They didn’t impeded refugees in the slightest way.  They just required the President to certify that his agencies followed the existing process.
• The Administration’s lead witness in the hearing indicated that the House bill “doesn’t really add anything” to the process. 

So, this is all useful information to me. 

Returning to the admonition of many to use the Holy Word for guidance on how to approach this issue, it must be said that I can find 10 references in the scriptures to support embracing the refugees, and 10 references in the scriptures to oppose it.  The scriptures are a spiritual guide.  And matters of the spirit can only be understood with the companionship of the Holy Spirit.  So, while the scriptures have many practical do’s and don’ts, it is not a step-by-step in all things – at least, not the New Testament which contains the “higher law” the Savior ushered in.  Further, it is my belief that the Holy Spirit only communicates direction to us when we are willing, before receiving His guidance, to accept and act on whatever direction He gives us.

(Sorry for the gospel doctrine according to Krikava, but I’m explaining how I came to my conclusions on this issue – not necessarily how you will come to yours.)

So, with the scriptures as a starting point, I feel compelled (or inclined) to be helpful to the refugees.  Matthew 25:38 gives me a starting point, as it seemeth good and applicable.  I want to help.  But the help I want to offer then must be mitigated against the risk that is most certainly out there.  That’s what the refugee application, review, and analysis process is for.  That mitigates risk.  One can never mitigate all risk away.  Just as I can never (nor would I ever accept) all mitigation measures to protect me from the risks associated with flying on commercial airlines, I must be able to admit that there is a certain amount of risk I am willing to accept if I want to adhere with my starting point of wanting to help.

Incidentally, I think the risk associated with refugees coming is less about the possibility that there may be lunatics among them; but, rather, that they will bring with them an utter lack of understanding of the Rule of Law.  Not understanding or adhering to the Rule of Law – by either immigrants or citizens – is the great threat to our Republic.  But that’s a topic for another time.

So, I support bringing in Syrian refugees (and refugees from other areas).  I support fully implementing the background checking measures we have in place.  Once they’re in, it is our job to love them, support them, cultivate them (e.g. help them understand the Rule of Law), and show them what being an American is all about: working hard, playing by the rules (Rule of Law), and loving your neighbor.

We are NOT to harass them, drive them out or our communities or states, or slap a scarlet letter on their chests.

That’s how I feel, and why I feel the way I do.