NYT - Trump Administration Considers a Drastic Cut in Refugees Allowed to Enter

[oxmixmudd]

This is rich coming from someone who falsely accused his fellow Christians of not obeying scripture and of being callous and hard-hearted because we disagree with applying Old Testament laws directly to the policies of the US government.

Well first of all I never said that. And second, once you drop into this deep a layer of mud, there is no coming back, so we are done for now.

[oxmixmudd]

Because Jim, I know resources are limited, we just can't take in all the world's poor or even just the ones that want to come in. For goodness sake we can't even take care of the poor we have.

That has little to nothing to do with what is happening. Cutting back to nearly zero is NOT a necessity. It is an administration on a warpath against anyone NOT born in the USA that might like to come here. These are people that are fleeing horrors you or I have never witnessed and hopefully never will. They have nowhere to go. And we have a responsibility to help with that. We don't have to take them all. But we need to take our fair share. We are one of the wealthiest nations on the Earth if not the wealthiest. We don't have those resources so we can just git fatter and richer. There are people out there suffering and we have the means to help some of them.

Jim

[oxmixmudd]

I have personally helped the poor and needy by my own hand. Have you?

Yes. But that is not the right question. The question is, how can a person have compassion for someone in the name of Christ, and then, in the name of Trump, support cutting off the poorest of the poor?

We can't serve two masters MM.


Jim

[Mountain Man]

The people arguing that it's no big deal to refuse refugees welcome in the USA (and a good many of them flat out think/say we shouldn't have no plan for effective resettlement elsewhere -- they just want it to be someone else's burden.

Nobody has argued that.

[Mountain Man]

This is rich coming from someone who falsely accused his fellow Christians of not obeying scripture and of being callous and hard-hearted because we disagree with applying Old Testament laws directly to the policies of the US government.

Well first of all I never said that.

This is a lie. You said exactly that:

Sam, you have it right. Only the hardest of hearts can hear these words and not be humbled, not be confronted by their own failure to live by these words. It is most disturbing to see the utter callousness by which they are here often dismissed. I rarely reference them anymore on these pages so distubed am I by how their power is mocked by so many here.


Jim

And in case you've forgotten, the premise of this thread is that a Old Testament law should be used as a guiding principle for United States immigration policy, a premise you have vigorously defended even to the point of hypocritically questioning the sincerity of your fellow believers.

And second, once you drop into this deep a layer of mud, there is no coming back...

I suppose a mud-dweller like you would know better than any of us.

[Mountain Man]

The question is, how can a person have compassion for someone in the name of Christ, and then, in the name of Trump, support cutting off the poorest of the poor?

We can't serve two masters MM.

I have never invoked the name of Trump, nor do I serve him as a master. As usual, your self-righteous condemnation misses its mark.

[Sam]

Nonsense, we can't care for the people we have.

The government decided that it had enough money to provide a $1.5+ trillion tax cut, almost all of which was built to wealthy families and corporations during a period of economic growth, and I don't think you complained at all.

A single F-35 jet will cost >$90 million and the government has been building tanks that DoD says it doesn't need because those tanks are built in influential congressmen's districts. The tanks just get parked.

We have resources aplenty.

--Sam

[Sam]

And in case you've forgotten, the premise of this thread is that a Old Testament law should be used as a guiding principle for United States immigration policy, a premise you have vigorously defended even to the point of hypocritically questioning the sincerity of your fellow believers.

As the OP, I can state with great certainty that that is not the premise of this thread. Using a Scriptural verse that originates in the Hebrew Scripture to describe a universal Christian statement that runs through the entire gamut of Scripture and Christian tradition does not equate to "a[n] Old Testament law should be used as a guiding principle for United States immigration policy".

--Sam

[Sam]

Nobody has argued that.

Yes, I would say that they have. Very few here have pronounced any problem whatsoever with the Trump administration's reduction of refugees or the proposal to reduce admissions to zero. Fewer still have decried it as a deep violation of Christian principles, something y'all have no problem talking about when it comes to hot-button conservative issues.

--Sam

[Mountain Man]

As the OP, I can state with great certainty that that is not the premise of this thread. Using a Scriptural verse that originates in the Hebrew Scripture to describe a universal Christian statement that runs through the entire gamut of Scripture and Christian tradition does not equate to "a[n] Old Testament law should be used as a guiding principle for United States immigration policy".

--Sam

You started the thread with a quote from Deuteronomy and then declared "We know what God has commanded in terms of the refugee, the dispossessed, and the desperate who come to our land" before chastising the Trump administration for contemplating a change in policy with regard to refugees.

I can't see how that can be interpreted as anything other than you proclaiming that Old Testament law should be used as a guiding principle for government policy. If you want to talk about our individual responsibility as Christians then say so and leave the government out of it.

[Mountain Man]

Fewer still have decried it as a deep violation of Christian principles...

Because it's not. Jesus said to give to Caesar that which belongs to Caesar, and to give to God that which belongs to God. You, however, are implying that we should compel Caesar to give to God on our behalf.

[Bill the Cat]

I would like Christians who believe that Christian principles regarding giving safety, comfort, and welcome to marginalized and desperate people carry at least as much weight as , say, who gets access to contraceptives or marriage licenses.

--Sam

Why?

[Sam]

You started the thread with a quote from Deuteronomy and then declared "We know what God has commanded in terms of the refugee, the dispossessed, and the desperate who come to our land" before chastising the Trump administration for contemplating a change in policy with regard to refugees.

I can't see how that can be interpreted as anything other than you proclaiming that Old Testament law should be used as a guiding principle for government policy. If you want to talk about our individual responsibility as Christians then say so and leave the government out of it.

"Leave the government out of it" would invoke an ironic chuckle if we weren't talking about desperate refugees.

And we do know what God has commanded, and not just back in those OT days that y'all have drawn from in your opposition to the State allowing same-sex marriage or adoption to same-sex parents.

--Sam

[Bill the Cat]

Yes, I would say that they have. Very few here have pronounced any problem whatsoever with the Trump administration's reduction of refugees or the proposal to reduce admissions to zero. Fewer still have decried it as a deep violation of Christian principles, something y'all have no problem talking about when it comes to hot-button conservative issues.

--Sam

It is not a Christian principle to force others to live by Christian principles, is it?

[Sam]

Because it's not. Jesus said to give to Caesar that which belongs to Caesar, and to give to God that which belongs to God. You, however, are implying that we should compel Caesar to give to God on our behalf.

Refusing to be gaslit, at least some of us know perfectly well the hell that would rain down as comments in this forum were the US government to announce that it would use taxpayer dollars to subsidize elective abortions in the country.

The abdication of moral expectation from government representatives here was sudden, sectarian, and shameful.

--Sam