While driving to the dentist today and then to the Pharmacy, I stumbled across several National Public Radio (NPR) talk shows. One of the shows featured a Trump supporter and a liberal with a moderator who was, for NPR, surprisingly even-handed. The other show quoted local Republican congressmen, who were not on the show, and then featured a spokeswoman for the Church World Services in Lancaster that helps to resettle refugees, a law professor who specializes in immigration law, and a Somali immigrant — all of whom, in fine NPR balance, were firmly in the Democrat camp. Later that day, I got to watch Fox News while exercising at the gym. The NPR debate and Fox News shows were the most balanced, with both sides being heard and able to address their concerns.
They were all talking about the “Muslim Ban.”
The liberal position
Though there’s much that could be said, I would like to mention just one aspect of this “ban”. The liberal views stressed how unsettling it was — not to mention unconstitutional — that Trump told the Christian Broadcasting Network that he wanted to bring more Christians into the country. Making a distinction like this was anti-American, they said. Rudy Giuliani was quoted as saying that Trump wanted an executive order that would ban Muslims but wouldn’t look like it. Eventually, someone said that a religious test like this would establish a state church, at which point, I said, “Huh? How do you figure?”
The liberal position examined
I have to admit, the Democratic position is making less and less sense to me, and I’m not alone. One of the callers into NPR identified himself as a liberal, but he supported the ban. Why? Because he wants to ensure that everyone who comes to this country doesn’t mean it any harm. We could quibble that refugees haven’t been a danger in our country (except that it’s not true), but I can’t imagine we want to wait until after someone is dead to prevent it. We know for a fact that ISIS is sending recruits disguised as refugees into Europe, and they’ve committed some heinous crimes already. Do we need to wait until that happens here to take action? Can’t we learn from their mistakes?
Why not rescue Christians?
I know I can’t be the only one who remembers ISIS beheading Christian children (and adults, of course) if they didn’t convert. I can’t imagine ISIS will stop until they run out of victims, can you? To be frank, it appeared that no one, Republican or Democrat, was concerned about these Christians, until now. Or, if they were concerned, no one was doing anything about it. Finally, President Trump seems to want to take action.
Wouldn’t it be a good thing to get the Christians over here where they could keep their heads on their shoulders? If someone is making a distinction between Muslims and Christians (not to mention Jews), it would appear to be ISIS. Shouldn’t we try to save their victims from death? I’m a Christian. Does that invalidate my position? I hope we’re all concerned about this kind of persecution. In the past, I’ve supported anyone, of any faith, coming to this country to be free from persecution. I only have one stipulation: that they do it legally. We bring people here for economic reasons, for reasons of safety, and for political reasons. Considering the horrible persecution they are enduring in the Middle East, why not purposefully bring more Christians here?
I think we can do that without establishing a state church, don’t you?