If we are pro-life, we are pro-refugee.
Yesterday was a critical day for U.S. relations with the world. When Candidate Donald Trump promised to overhaul immigration policies, it seemed like a long shot for many of us. But we are now seeing it unfold before our eyes. As I wrote in an article in the Washington Post:
Several drafts have been leaked of “Protecting the Nation from Terrorist Attacks by Foreign Nationals.” One draft copy, now widely distributed (and reported on here in the Washington Post), is eight pages long and puts many new policies in place, most notably a 120-day moratorium on the Refugee Admissions Program, a dramatic cut of the overall number of refugees allowed into the U.S. this year, and an indefinite ban on refugees from Syria, with the suggestion that refugees from additional countries will also likely be barred.
If this draft become policy, this unnecessary ban should concern us. But does it concern us? Will we speak up at all?
It is not wrong to be wise and cautious. And, part of President Trump’s plan is, I think, wise. For example, his call for safe zones in affected areas is good policy. Yet, I’m grieved by other parts of the policy.
You see, too much of the policy is driven by unfounded fear of refugees.
Yes, it is to be expected that terrorist attacks around the world and in our country, including the Orlando and San Bernardino shootings, would cause all of us to pause long enough to consider what kind of world we live in and how best to ensure safety for ourselves and our families.
But those were not refugees.
There is a 1 in 3.64 billion per year chance that you will be killed by a refugee in a given year. If those odds concern you, please do not get in a bathtub, car, or even go outside. And, for contrast, there …