Which of the following images is most disturbingly etched in your mind?
- A still shot outside the Bataclan theatre in Paris, where multiple victims of the radical Islamic terrorists lie. Or…
- A shot of a 3 year old refugee lying still on the shore, as he and his family fatally attempted to flee the terrorists in Syria.
Both are — in a phrase recently articulated here — by all means, awful. How are we to choose between the two? They are equally heartbreaking… equally awful. Each is evident of all that is not good, not true, and not right in this world.
In recent days, sadly, a “whole lot of awful” has entered into our national conversation. Shocked by the evil on the streets of Paris and in the Egyptian air, we feel helpless; we haven’t been able to halt the radical Islamic terrorists who are determined to destroy us. And so in our shock and horror, we react — sometimes positively, sometimes negatively, sometimes respectfully, sometimes not. Predictably, in our efforts to stop this obvious evil, we gasp and grasp for solution, yet we approach it from varied angles. We then are lured into finding something new about which to argue, something fresh that divides, and finding fault in perceived, opposing perspective. The rhetorical battlefront is now how to handle the thousands of Syrian refugees attempting to flee their country’s civil war. Should they stay or should they go?
You will remember the scenario which was magnified late this past summer… Actually beginning in 2011, Syrians began fleeing their country en masse as a means of survival, with over 300,000 refugees crossing into the European Union in the first half of 2015 alone. The story gained increased global attention when the lifeless body of 3 year old Aylan washed up on a Turkish shore. It was awful. The U.S. has thus sent more than $2.9 billion in aid so far, and along with multiple other countries, the U.S. announced we would welcome up to 10,000 refugees here in our land of the free and the brave. Sec. of State John Kerry then later announced that the administration “will increase the number of refugees the United States is willing to accept in 2017 to 100,000.”
In Friday’s horrific incident in Paris, one of the terrorists possessed a passport from Syria. Just yesterday, in fact, Honduras detained 5 Syrian men with stolen Greek passports, reportedly heading for the United States. Hence, many are now concerned that in the mass welcoming of Syrian refugees on American soil, we will also inadvertently welcome some radical Islamic terrorists. Note that the terrorists have vowed to come here. Remember, too, that 9/11 was executed by only 19 men. It is also admittedly difficult, according to FBI director James Comey, to accurately vet the massive number of current refugees.
Let me state the bold, challenging, underlying reality…
Each of the above perspectives — both the laying out and withdrawing of the metaphorical, refugee welcome mat — is a position that may be motivated by compassion. One is moved most by the refugee in need of safety and security; the other is moved most to ensure the American citizen’s safety and security. Both positions — as difficult and challenging as this is for many to see and admit — are valid. Let me say this again: both positions are valid. Both may be motivated by love. We would all like to be on the side of love.
Want to know what gets my goat, so-to-speak?
The person, legislator, or lawmaker — from either perspective — who says, “Side with me. I am right. Those other people don’t know what they’re talking about. They are motivated by the impure. I am looking out for all people. I am the only one motivated by love.”
The reality is that each perspective is looking out for some people. Thus…
- Can we quit choosing?
- Can we quit taking sides?
- And can we quit labeling only one perspective as loving and compassionate?
Impure motives certainly exist on all sides of this equation. These motives include both fear-mongering and political posturing; they do not include caution and alertness. Let me also propose a related tangent that may be included in the impure motives: (1) the desire to portray all Muslims as terrorists — and (2) the desire to ignore the terrorists’ motivation, which is embedded within Islam. It is inaccurate to identify only one side as good and true and right.
Hence, let’s instead find a way to work together, respect opposing perspective, vet the refugees adequately, pause a little, assume some risk, recognize we can’t eliminate all risk, and love all people well… domestic and abroad, both here and there. Let us never be heartless toward any. Let us also quit encouraging a clearly divisive, taking of sides.
Respectfully…
AR