Should we take in refugees? (Pros, cons, & my Christian role)

The issue of taking in refugees here in the U.S. is complicated. As a Christian, I believe we have certain responsibilities and expectations. But does that mean our government should carry those same responsibilities and expectations? Below I lay out what supporters say, what opponents say, and what my thoughts are as a Christian U.S. citizen.

Supporters say

We are rescuing women and children from violence, homelessness, poverty and starvation. The Syrian Civil War alone continues to go on (since 2011), as more than 11 million people have either been killed or have been forced to leave their homes. Life inside Syria is horrible, and these innocent people need help getting out. Many orphans, young women and children are stranded with no home or even anyone to take care of them, not to mention the horrible human rights violations that are committed. {source}

There aren’t nearly as many terrorist connections as the media might portray. As of 2015, of the 859,629 refugees admitted from 2001 onwards, only three have been convicted of planning terrorist attacks on targets outside of the United States, and none was successfully carried out. To put that in perspective, about 1 in every 22,541 Americans committed murder in 2014.  The terrorist threat from Syrian refugees in the United States is hyperbolically over-exaggerated and we have very little to fear from them because the refugee vetting system is so thorough. {source}

Vetting is a long process. Because refugees are abroad while the U.S. government checks their background, potential terrorist links, and their claims to refugee status, the vetting is a lot more thorough and can take up to two years for non-Syrians.  For Syrians, the vetting can take about three years because of the heightened concerns over security. {source}

It’s the right thing to do. If it were me, if it were you, and we were fleeing a war-torn country, wouldn’t we want someone to let us in?

Opponents say

Vetting refugees, in large numbers, is very complicated and difficult to do efficiently. Several high-level administration officials have warned in recent months just how challenging [screening Syrian refugees] can be. While they say U.S. security measures are much better than in the past, vetting Syrian refugees poses a quandary: How do you screen people from a war-torn country that has few criminal and terrorist databases to check? {source}

There are high costs associated with resettling refugees. On average, each Middle Eastern refugee resettled in the United States costs an estimated $64,370 in the first five years, or $257,481 per household. For what it costs to resettle one Middle Eastern refugee in the United States for five years, about 12 refugees can be helped in the Middle East for five years, or 61 refugees can be helped for one year.  Also, very heavy use of welfare programs by Middle Eastern refugees, and the fact that they have only 10.5 years of education on average, makes it likely that it will be many years, if ever, before this population will cease to be a net fiscal drain on public coffers — using more in public services than they pay in taxes. {source}

Despite what the media says, the majority of refugees are not women and children. Military-age males were the “forefront of the human torrent flowing into Europe from Syria,” according to Time magazine. In a 2015 Pew Research Center review of Eurostat data, 72 percent of asylum applicants are male, and over half are men under the age of 40. {source}

---

My own thoughts: 

Just for perspective, the current ceiling (2016) on taking refugees into the U.S. is 85,000. {source}

I believe there are two priorities we need to keep in mind as Christians in relation to refugees: First is our responsibility to the disenfranchised and vulnerable; the second is a responsibility to protect and care for our community and nation. Some Christians emphasize the first, while forgetting the second, while others emphasize the latter, but dismiss the first. But I believe both to be important.

While those outside the Christian community are often outspoken about the “separation of church and state” when it comes to many issues, this is an instance where some point out the government should be acting in a Christian way. It is confusing and conflicting to me. I’ve realized I believe the issues of refugees are both political and spiritual:

The issue is political because I believe our government’s role is to secure our borders, protect our people and decide what type of immigration policy our country is going to have. But I don’t believe it’s the government’s role to solely bare the burden that comes with taking in new members of our society (I guess that’s the libertarian in me). As you can see above in my notes about what opponents of taking in refugees say, there are very high costs incurred with taking them in.

How do we pay for it all? How many people is too many people? Logistically, can we really afford to help everyone? And should we help so many people that in the end, our country crumbles under the weight of its burden?

The issue is also spiritual because I believe, as Christians, we are called to help care for the orphan and the widow. (James 1:27, Psalm 82:3, Jeremiah 7:6) We have a higher calling than the average Joe Schmoe who has no belief in a higher power. However, if we are going to speak out in favor of taking refugees into our country, then members of the church should also be willing to bare the burden of those refugees (financially, emotionally, and functionally). We have to be willing to put our money where our mouth is, and as a libertarian-leaning person, I don’t believe it’s the government job to take care of us all, as nice as that may be.

The issue of taking in refugees is complicated and difficult. I don’t believe we need to seal our borders completely and stop taking in refugees altogether. But I also don’t believe all refugees or immigrants should have a free pass. In my ideal world, we (as Christians) would be able to support grassroots efforts that are on the ground in countries of persecution to aid those being forced to flee. We should support organizations like World Relief and Compassion International, who have their boots on ground, helping refugees and the poorest of the poor. Again, though, while I’m sure many disagree with me, I do not believe this is the responsibility of our government. I also believe there is a middle ground of accepting immigrants into our country thoughtfully, vetting them as well as we can.

If people of faith stepped up to help in war-torn countries, we may not have such a desperate need to address the issues of refugees here in the U.S. As humans, we are naturally members of a global community and should seek to help our fellow citizens of humanity. When one of us hurts, we all hurt. However, we don’t just live as part of a global community, but as members of families and neighborhoods. We should protect our families, cities, and nations from potential threats. I believe it is our duty to appropriately screen refugees, to ensure they are who they claim to be—persecuted and vulnerable individuals.

All of that to say I am not opposed to some refugees coming into our country, but I believe the ideal would be to find ways to support them in their own countries. This is most likely difficult and dangerous, but as I said, this issue is complicated. I don’t think we can have a blanket “keep them all out” or “let them all in.” There is a balance in there somewhere, the question is whether our government will find it, and whether we, as Christians, will do our part.

I think what we do have to be careful of is demonizing those who don’t agree with us. While I do believe, as Christians, we are called to love people as Jesus did, how that is manifested in each of our lives will be different. Just as I do not believe every person is called to adoption (although some Christians would make that claim), I do not believe every person is called to be involved with the refugee movement either. Sure, we should all be kind and helpful and loving, but it doesn’t mean that the burden that lays on my heart is required to be the same burden on yours.

Our church body is made up of many parts (1 Corinthians 12), and we need people who are impassioned about caring for refugees. At the same time, we need those who are burdened to care for foster children, those who care for the homeless, those who are called to teen moms or special needs kiddos or single parents or victims of sexual abuse. The important thing is that we are each doing our part, listening to God’s call on our lives, and being willing to listen and know the people He puts in our path.

No one should feel guilty if they are serving every week making coffee for the church service instead of actively serving in a ministry that is taking in refugees. And I believe we are doing a disservice to other believers when we point fingers and say “My cause is greater than yours.”

As Bob Goff says, “Our oval office is the 30 foot radius around ourselves.” What are we going to do in our oval office? How are we going to impact the people we come in contact with daily?

---

Your thoughts on taking in refugees?