When it comes to crises in the Middle East, one thing is for certain – they aren't about to end anytime soon. That means more instability, more destruction, more persecution and most certainly more refugees leaving in search of greener pastures. While I would strongly argue that one of the reasons so many are wanting to come "over here" is because our policies and actions have undoubtedly made things worse over there, the fact remains that we are facing perhaps the greatest humanitarian crisis since the end of World War II, with no end in sight.
The focus, for now, is on Syria and the thousands upon thousands of refugees departing that war-torn country, some of them bound for the United States. Historically and going forward, the focus will be on the millions of Third Worlders who have set their sights on fleeing their home countries for the West. In light of the Paris attacks and the promise of more to come as well as the natural desire of people worldwide to improve their circumstances, what is our responsibility as not only decent, compassionate people, but as Christians, to meet the needs of our fellow man?
From what I've seen, the typical Christian response, particularly from those of the liberal Christian bent, has been something like, "let's take them ALL in because, well, that's what Jesus would do." Many others, including myself, don't want to accept these refugees any more than we want to open our borders wide to anyone who wants to come strolling in. That doesn't make us bad Christians, it just means we understand reality. After all, anyone with a grain of common sense unencumbered by the restrictive thought processes demanded by political correctness these days can understand a few things about unfettered Third World immigration and culture that the elites in Washington seem to be missing.
People create cultures. Sadly, many cultures from which most recent immigrants have come and are coming are lacking in many areas most Americans consider important. Do our elites really think that replacing the entire population of Kansas City with that of Mexico City (or Paris with that of Damascus), particularly the people their origin countries usually don't even want, will result in the majority of these folks suddenly and miraculously embracing the freedoms, morality and values that made us a great nation in the first place? I don't think they do, if they are intellectually honest.
The people who founded our nation, while certainly fleeing persecution and loss of freedom, came from nations and cultures that, frankly, are far superior in terms of accomplishments, religious tradition and even freedoms earned over hundreds of years. While this may indeed qualify as a "hate-fact," that doesn't make it any less a fact. Why, then, are we in such a hurry to replace their descendants? Will our culture not eventually become like the cultures that have come here in droves? And when that happens, will there be anywhere else to flee?
When pressed, all but the most ardent liberals and idealistic, starry-eyed Christians will admit that, while we can certainly take some immigrants, we can't take the entire globe on our shores and hope to maintain any sort of standard of living for our own people. And if we can't maintain our own strength and financial stability, how can we expect to help the rest of the world in any meaningful way?
Good fences make good neighbors. Drug trafficking, people smuggling, gun running, you name it – these have all been a result of a porous border with our neighbor to the south. If we had a solid, well-maintained and well-manned (both physically and technologically) border fence, these problems, and the resulting ill-will, could have been avoided. The fact that this hasn't been done after all this time is mind-boggling, and the promise that it may finally be done is what ultimately could get Donald Trump elected.
At some point, these societies have to learn to help themselves. When the earth was teeming with wilderness, one can understand the impulse to flee bad circumstances and fill it. Sadly, there are no longer any wide-open spaces to fill. At some point, these deficient cultures need to take the steps needed to advance and evolve in a positive direction, just like those in the West did. If all the soldier-aged men leaving Syria are indeed good people just looking for a better life (despite my sarcasm, I'm sure some are), what hope of change exists for those who remain? I understand the desire to immediately help by bringing them all to the relative safety of our country, but would not the ideal long-term solution be for them to effect change where God placed them?
So, if we shouldn't bring them all here, what should we do? In truth, we could accomplish so much more from afar than we could by trying to plug the dike by taking some people in and leaving the rest to suffer. How about we stop supplying weapons to areas where they are likely to get into the wrong hands? How about a sane foreign policy that recognizes that maybe "democracy" doesn't work the same everywhere and stops meddling in the affairs of other sovereign nations? How about we stop grandstanding and start supporting nations, like Russia, whose interests, particularly in their desire to eliminate the scourge of ISIS, align with our own? How about we demand that other Muslim countries actually practice their religion and provide a haven for their fellow co-religionists in need?
More immediately, we have more than enough muscle and resources to provide a "safe space" for refugees somewhere in the Middle East and take care of them until the situation can be stabilized. Such measures are surely better and more effective in the long run than permanently altering the religion and demographics of the only countries these folks seem to want to get into.