Politics & Current Events
MommyLiberty5013
member
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Homeless
I saw a homeless man today on the street and asked him to get into my van with the 3 kids. I drove him here to our house and now he's asleep in the basement bedroom, which is right next to the kids' play area. After supper, I sent the kids downstairs to play unsupervised. I hope they're okay...
Re: Homeless
If so then that is a ridiculous comparison...
Is it???
The truth is, I do not have a homeless man in our basement. I put this post on my FB yesterday and was amazed at how many family and friends were alarmed that I had done this very thing! Every. single. person. said "what on earth?!?"
I wrote this post to make a point. I love people and DH and I support people in many ways around the globe ($10k+ each year, last year was over $40k, so it's not like I'm a cold heartless person). We actually give money to organizations that help...Syrian Refugees. We do open our home for friends, family, and neighbors that we know. We teach our children to serve others and we do demonstrate it as well.
My point is this: Many, many people found it alarming for me to open my home to an unknown, potentailly unstable and unsafe person, why then, should the U.S. open her homeland to potentially unstable and unsafe people en masse? People are aghast that I would allow a potentially dangerous person to live near us in our home. But, when others want to put on the breaks for opening the door to a mass of unknown people without proper background checks, that's crazy?
People who are not in favor of letting in thousands of refugees are not racist or bigots, they are not intolerant or heartless, they are not fear mongers either. What they are trying to be is protective of their homes and families and the families of others. Chances are my made up homeless man would have been fine and not harmed us here. And probably a few thousands Syrian refugees would be fine too.
But, would you open up your basement bedroom to an unknown stranger without vetting him first? If not, then why are people so angry that other people want to vet and check out refugees before they are granted access to our kids and our lives? We can give aid and loving help (as DH and I do) to these people while they wait to receive access to the USA.
Years ago when I worked in banking, a man came to see me and sat in my office for awhile doing banking business. He held business accounts with our national institution. He was of Middle Eastern dissent. He said this to me and I will never forget it, "(insert my name), only in America could I come from my country and work hard and grow my business and now I am a millionaire. America is the place for dreams."
I understand that this is an emotionally charged topic. But, please be assured, I will never say the Syrian refugees should be banned from the USA. I say we need to take a pause and review each of them before granting them access. Just as you would not open your basement bedroom to anybody off the street before getting to know them, so the U.S. needs to continue to be strict in its admittance of foreigners. Refugees or immigrants from Syria, or other places, have a vital role in the Melting Pot of our nation as noted in my above story.
My own family's ancestors came from Italy, Belgium, Norway, England, Holland, and they went through a process. Most of families in the U.S. trace their ancestry back to immigrants. But, they all went through a process. Why should today's refugees or immigrants be any different?
Furthermore, throughout the 1980s - into the 2000s, the U.S. has opened its borders to refugees from Sudan...but those people went through a process to gain access here. Again, why should Syrian refugees be any different?
Just this past weekend at a travel plaza on the Ohio Turnpike, our family observed a Muslim woman out in the cold, on a prayer mat, kneeling in the dark, praying. My children saw that and liked that. We talked about how God loves everybody and had a moment of discussing how others do not share our Christian beliefs - and that's okay. America is a place of welcoming.
Refugees are just like us and many have education and had jobs before their displacement. They are families too. People seem to be saying that because they may be educated and had jobs and have little ones that they should get open access to this country. How can those benchmarks be viable and reliable check marks for their stability and non-adhesion to terrorism?
Before being a commercial pilot, DH flew and was a trainer at a flight school in OK. His time there overlapped with Zacharias Moussaoui's time - he was a terrorist in 9/11 now serving life without parole. They never flew together and DH did not know him well personally, but if you asked DH about him, DH would say, "He seemed like a nice guy." So he was obviously educated and had a job, he had money too, to pay for flight school. Point being, you cannot just "trust" people. Syria is a war-torn nation with multiple groups vying for control. ISIS and/or other terror groups ARE alive and well there. It's just plain stupidity to think otherwise. People need to wake up to the realities of this.
Clearly we cannot assume that all the Syrian refugees are terrorists. But, can we also assume that they all aren't?
It is part of my calling as a Christian to "feed and clothe the hungry and to welcome the stranger." But being a follower of Christ does not void me from using my intellect to assess people or situations.
I would like the U.S. to give the refugees help and aid immediately. But, I am okay having the federal government putting a pause on the open door policy until a plan for getting refugees here can be worked out safely.
Yes, it is.
That comparison is so extreme that all it amounts to is fear mongering. No reasonable person would believe that allowing Syrian refugees into the United States is synonymous with recklessly going out of your way to invite a homeless stranger into your personal home with your children and belongings and just blindly trusting them.
Refugees have been allowed into the United States for years. Is that how you have been affected by it all this time? You've been obligated to bring homeless strangers home with you and leave them around your children unattended? Any point you were trying to get across in that analogy is lost in the absurdity to me.
PP is right, refugees are one of the most stringently vetted groups out of all people entering the United States. It has never been put out by the administration that the US would be opening the doors to everyone without any type of security or screening protocol or "without proper background checks."
Posts like yours bother me because they resort to fear mongering and misinforming people as a way to try to get your point across and get people to agree with you. It's essentially propaganda, and probably partisan at that. And as far as allowing a "potentially dangerous person" to live near you- there are potentially dangerous US citizens living everywhere.
So yes, it is a ridiculous comparison.
Oh and just some more mind-numbing FACT since everybody here loves fact so much.
Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, UAE, and Bahrain have all taken zero, yes 0 Syrian refugees and have said they will not take them. Why? The nations site terrorism concerns.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/09/05/gulf-states-refuse-to-take-a-single-syrian-refugee-say-doing-so-exposes-them-to-risk-of-terrorism/
But, the USA isn't even say "no." People are asking for the government to PAUSE and figure out better ways to vet them. They need a place to live. No one wants them.
But we have to have a responsibility for our nation's own safety first. It is the federal government's main and in some cases, sole purpose.
The thing is, your OP did not evaluate the situation from all angles, which is why I felt the need to respond in the first place.
Refugees are being vetted and have been for years. No system will ever be foolproof and to think that we will develop a system that will be able to weed out every bad apple is not plausible.
You can "explain" and manipulate your 70% statistic any way you want. From the tone of your posts, it seems like you want to infer that since they are men and teens-20s then they are obviously terrorists- but there could be other explanations. Maybe Syrian women and children are having more difficulty because they are travelling in larger groups and with children. Maybe they don't have the resources. Same with the elderly, they probably have different priorities and different ambition concerning their circumstances. I don't personally know the reason for that statistic but I'm also not going to be presumptuous and brand an entire demographic based on the actions and beliefs of some.
If you had a firm grasp on the political climate in the Middle East then you would understand moreso why the region is so volatile and why though Persian Gulf nations are "refusing" refugees. Syrian refugees also do not prefer to flee to these Middle Eastern nations as they do to European and Western nations for a multitude of reasons.
I have a strong personal and professional responsibility to the safety of our country and I am very well-versed in the responsibilities of the federal government. I don't feel the need to flash my credentials in an official capacity but just know that I do believe in and am required to examine the issues from all perspectives, formally and with evidence.
I feel like this refugee situation is turning into a purely partisan issue vice an objective debate, and so much of the "reasoning" people provide for their stance is highly discriminatory and reminiscent of systematic racism. My comment about fear mongering was referring to your OP where you essentially tried to make an extreme analogy for the purpose of shock value.
And the fact that you stated "No one wants them" pretty much sums up your beliefs and your bias, and is NOT the reality. If "no one" wanted "them" there wouldn't be a debate.
Um...the 70% number was made up based on a comment Ben Carson made in September that the majority of refugees were young men. The ACUTAL numbers are:
-50.3% of refugees are female
-51.2% of refugees are children under age 17
-22% of refugees are male aged 18-59
The 2% number describes male refugees of military age who have no families which is more typical of jihadist. For those of you using that 70% statistic, knock it off now because it was planted by politicians who have no idea what they are talking about, but who want you to be afraid.
The vetting process takes 2-3 years and is filled with interviews that are check as best they can. They can check things like military actions that occurred in certain areas on certain days and stuff like that. Either way, it would be extremely difficult and inefficient for a terrorist to enter the US this way. I usually don't agree with Obama, but I sympathize with his frustrations right now. People are being fearful and stupid.
Lol most of politics is a show. The bill has pretty good bi-partisan support (not enough to be veto-proof though), so it's meant to show that the president isn't listening to Congress or the people (2 to 1 Americans support pausing the refugee program until better intelligence can be found on the refugees or a better screening process is found). It's also meant to show that Congress is actually acting. We've accused them of not acting for a very long time, so they are actually doing something with their new Speaker of the House. Ryan's trying to do be "better" (whatever that means to you) than Boehner.
What is his plan for Isis. I admit I haven't read much about that topic.