In light of the recent Paris attacks, the house has passed a bill "that would suspend the program allowing Syrian and Iraqi refugees into the U.S. until key national security agencies certify they don't pose a security risk." This bill goes directly against Obama’s belief that we should continue to allow Syrian refugees into the country. Obama has promised to veto this bill because of his beliefs in supporting the refugees. Obama stated in the Philippines that “We are not well served when, in response to a terrorist attack, we descend into fear and panic… We don't make good decisions if it's based on hysteria or an exaggeration of risks.”
This rapid decision to suspend Syrian refugees from entering the country may not have been decided logically. People may be letting their emotions cloud their judgement. Refugees are not allowed to simply walk into the U.S. whenever they want. The process to enter this country can be painfully long and many people are rejected. Refugees are only allowed into the country “after subjecting them to rigorous screening and security checks.”
What people fail to realize is that ISIS is not a representation of the Islamic religion. In fact, ISIS is hurting Islam. Muslims are now being attacked for being a “terrorist” when in fact most Muslims do not believe in violence. A verse from the Quran even states "Whoever kills an innocent person, it is as though he has killed all of mankind." I believe that historian Reza Aslan said it the best when he stated “Islam doesn't promote violence or peace. Islam is just a religion and like every religion in the world it depends on what you bring to it. If you're a violent person, your Islam, your Judaism, your Christianity, your Hinduism is gonna be violent. There are marauding Buddhist monks in Myanmar slaughtering women and children. Does Buddhism promote violence? Of course not. People are violent or peaceful and that depends on their politics, their social world, the ways that they see their communities.”
Rejecting refugees is not only wrong because of the blatant prejudice it has against Muslims, but because it goes against our American beliefs. Obama argues that “Slamming the door in their faces would be a betrayal of our values… Our nations can welcome refugees who are desperately seeking safety and ensure our own security. We can and must do both." I completely agree with this. America itself was founded by immigrants wanting to start a new life. Everyone in America today, including myself, is of immigrant decent. FBI Director James Comey fears that this legislation would only “make it impossible to allow any refugees into the U.S., and could even affect the ability of travelers from about three dozen countries that are allowed easier travel to the U.S. under the visa waiver program”
What do you think? Was the house acting too rashly? Should Syrian refugees be allowed in America? Is this bill more beneficial than harmful?
Sources:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/19/politics/house-democrats-refugee-hearings-obama/index.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/11/16/obama-calls-idea-of-screening-syrian-refugees-based-on-religion-shameful-defends-white-house-strategy/
http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/16/world/not-in-my-name-muslims-speak-out/index.html
http://www.vox.com/2015/11/14/9735806/islam-isis-violent
8 comments:
I agree with Cat, and believe that we should allow Syrian refugees into the United States. I feel that people are letting the rapidness of the situation as well as their emotions cloud their judgment. I, for one, see the effects in social media every day. The same issue that has been haunting our nation since 9/11 is returning. Instead of blaming people, many are blaming Muslims in general. Philistine Ayad, a Muslim feminist, says, “I don't see ISIS as Muslim. I see terrorists when I look at ISIS. To me, terror knows no religion.” If that is what is keeping the US from allowing Syrian refugees to take asylum in the US, then that is wrong. In addition, people seem to think that the entry of Syrian refugees is easy, but Obama would only continue to accept more refugees from Syria “after subjecting them to rigorous screening and security checks”. Precautions are still being taken before allowing entry. However, the bill would make it impossible to allow refugees into the US and would affect travelers from over 30 countries from entering the US even under the visa waiver program. Therefore, I believe that bill is more harmful than beneficial.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/19/politics/house-democrats-refugee-hearings-obama/index.html
The house was acting too rashly in their decision to suspend refugee asylum, which would be morally wrong. However, the Question remains, if people come in great numbers, how will we be able to support all the people coming to America? Our unemployment rate isn't the best, so this might only compound the problem, at least in the short term. In any case, I do hope that this bill is vetoed as the generalization of terrorism as being somehow part of Islam is toxic and has no place in our legislation.
To me, this bill is an irrational and senseless act by the United States.The American people must recognize that innocent Syrian civilians have been suffering and have been perpetrated from the same terror of the victim of Paris as well as 9/11. We are brother and sister. Human to human, we both greatly fear and have been victims of terrorist acts. These refugees should most certainly be allowed to seek refuge in the United States. Not only would we be committing a hypocritical act as a country that fosters equality, but we would be wrongly accusing the Syrian refugees of terrorist behavior. As a niece of a Muslim family I can provide that Muslims increasingly suffer from bigotry in the United States. My uncle, a successful neurosurgeon left Iran in the 1980's in efforts to save himself from what is now a dangerous country in deep turmoil. Some Americans would assume and generalize my uncle as a terrorist, however he is everything but that. I see my uncle as a refugee, an intelligent man, harmless, and above all, a human. Americans too must recognize this. Practicing Islam, or living in Syria is not a formula of a terrorist. There are children, men and women hopelessly suffering in Syria. To restrict the innocent civilians of Syria from seeking refuge in the United States shows a great flaw to our country's character. Gursimar's point in recognizing the public's generalization of a group of people, especially by religion, is very important to acknowledge in regards to this issue. Immediately after 9/11 American's did not take caution toward terrorists, but rather the entire Islamic community. This fueled anti-muslim bigotry in the United States which has progressively become worse throughout the past decade. The recent ISIS attack in Paris have further fueled American skepticism toward Muslims. Our country has reason to protect itself, however through reasonable background checks and security our country can provide Syrian refugees with what they so desperately need, as well as what ALL humans continuously seek after; safety and security.
The house was not acting rashly against the muslim refugees for simply being Muslim. Leaders of ISIS have clearly stated that they will place their people amongst the Syrian refugees at once they have placed their assets in the United States they will strike us as they had done in France. This may seem like a fearful overreaction to the attacks in Paris, but let's not forget that ISIS was actually able enough assets in our ally's boarders to launch a thoroughly planned, coordinated attack killing 130 and wounding over 300 innoncent people (including Americans). If they were capable of sending their operators to France without being detected, it isn't a "rash" decision to take precautionary measures to ensure that the US, ISIS' number ONE enemy, does not suffer the same fate. It may seem like our humanitarian duty to let all refugees into our country, but it is our government's top priority to see to our protection from all threats foreign and domestic. My sister lives in NYC, one of the biggest targets in America, and if there's even the slightest risk that allowing the refugees into our country could put her in harm's way, there is no way I would allow any of them to touch American soil. If it were to come between the lives of family and the lives of strangers I will always take the former over the latter.
I agree with Cat that the bill halting the program allowing refugees into America is wrong because these people are simply trying to find safer, better lives, which we can offer them. In my opinion, Syrian refugees should definitely be allowed into the country. We have an obligation to help as many people as possible, while still maintaining our national security. This is very doable considering there are rigorous screenings and procedures that ensure the nation's safety upon the arrival of each refugee. If we were having a crisis and people needed to flee, I hope other countries would help us and take us in. So, why shouldn't we take them in? It would be selfish of us not to help these innocent people who are being killed and put in danger. Other, less suitable countries have been extremely generous and accepting to the refugees. For example, in 2013, Lebanon, a country of population 4.3 million, accepted over 2 million refugees. They accepted the equivalent of almost half their population in order to help these people, but we can't accept any? That's ridiculous. Overall, the bill to stop allowing Syrian refugees to come to America is morally wrong, and I agree that Obama needs to veto it in favor of the refugees.
Source:
http://www.news.com.au/world/simple-points-to-help-you-understand-the-syria-conflict/story-fndir2ev-1226705155146
I agree with Cat and Caitlyn that while national security should be a priority, it goes against our values as a nation to deny Syrian refugees an escape from their war-torn home country. This bill which would halt refugee programs from Syria and Iraq plays directly into ISIS's hands. We discriminate against Muslims, furthering ISIS's goal to create a divide between the West and the Islamic World. It's important for us not to turn our backs on the majority of Muslims in Syria and Iraq who are simply trying run from the same enemy. If we reject them, this may create animosity towards the West due to unfair discrimination; therefore, our actions of intolerance would be a perfect recruiting tool for ISIS. I found Caroline's personal story of her uncle really interesting in that Muslims in America experience prejudice, and we should be attempting to exterminate this feeling rather than strengthen it. One cool fact I found while researching this was that Steve Jobs' dad was a Syrian refugee (as was the father of Jerry Seinfeld)! We are a country of immigrants and these immigrants contribute to our society as seen in this case. Back to the bill, I think it's important for us to have faith in the vetting process in order to ensure that we uphold our American values and do what is right. As I cited in my launch, since 9/11, 785,000 refugees have entered the U.S. and only 3 have been arrested on terrorist-related charges. As Nicholas Kristof discussed in his most recent column, they are just like us and it's simply the right thing to do.
Sources:
http://www.ibtimes.com/famous-syrian-americans-amid-refugee-fearmongering-remember-steve-jobs-jerry-seinfeld-2190439
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/19/opinion/betraying-ourselves.html
As Ally, Cat, and Caitlyn have said, it is obvious that we as a nation have a humanitarian obligation to help refugees in need. Surely, if millions of Americans were displaced, we would hope that our Canadian and European friends would lend us a hand. However, I think that it should be noted that there is an inherent danger in taking in these refugees. I think that is impossible to say that ISIS does not have an enormous global radicalizing influence. If we were to accept refugees, there are bound to be a few bad apples that ruin the bunch.
Would I would not advocate for is the closing of our borders to all Syrian refugees; there are millions in need, and it is our duty as humans to help those without the opportunity to succeed on their own. However, I would advocate for a restrictive screening process and monitoring for these refugees. Although this is an unfair burden upon the millions of refugees who are not affiliated with radical groups at all, I think it is worth it if it potentially saves the live of many Americans.
Although I 100% believe that ISIS does not represent the majority of muslims, for the time being the refugee program should be suspended. At least 3 of the paris attackers entered through France's refugee program and it is a known possibility that they can easily slip their way in. Before we start allowing droves of refugees in we need to put into place security measures and screenings that actually work. Currently our screenings are limited and this presents a serious risk to our National Security. This is a very tough issue to decide upon but a change must be made. We have to be aware of our current situation and cannot undermine the resources and motivation ISIS and related terror groups possess. In the meantime we should aid the refugees IN syria in an effort to help them in their predicament. We should enact this aid until our screening services are capable of accurately eliminating every refugee with ties to extremism from entering our country.
Post a Comment