The recent terrorist attacks in
France have resulted in two polarizing positions regarding North America’s
desire to welcome several thousand refugees from the war torn middle-east.
Many US governors have decided
against receiving refugees due to the probability terrorists would infiltrate
this migration into the United States and plan attacks similar to those in
Paris.
A similar outcry reverberates
through Canada’s media against the new government’s unrealistic attempt to
bring in 25,000 Syrian refugees by this year’s end. In addition to the
logistical challenges it faces, the foremost concern is lack of time to ensure
adequate security checks.
Justin Trudeau’s promise shows
the other extreme: the primary need of a humanitarian response to the suffering
of those displaced by war that outweighs other concerns. Few would deny the
need for some level of compassionate response.
So on which side of this balance
should we err: enforcing thorough security checks that would slow down the
process to a trickle, or letting large numbers in quickly that would present a
potential danger to Canadians?
Here are some thoughts I have
considered to think through and determine my own response. Perhaps they may be helpful
to you.
First, no level of security will
ensure zero attacks. Apart from those infiltrating into this country, we have
enough youth ripe for radicalization within Canada. We are all aware of planned
attacks thwarted by our own security, while others, unhappily, have caused
death and grief.
Second, Ann and I had the
privilege of mixing with a group of Muslims from Iran during our time living at
the coast. They, like ourselves, and probably ninety percent or more of those
desiring to enter Canada, all seek the same: a place of relative peace,
security, and opportunity, in which to raise a family away from the dangers of
war.
Third, I consider my personal
ability to live in a free democratic society as an accident of geography. Born
in England and able to travel freely, Ann and I immigrated to Canada in 1965.
So I find it hard to deny others the same free life simply because they were
born in a place of conflict.
Fourth, I have to ask myself
what cost am I prepared to bear to allow others that same privilege? Yes, there
is risk in letting in thousands of refugees. Some entering this country may also
seek my destruction. That in turn begs the question: what price was paid to allow
me to live in peace and security for
eternity with God?
I might pay the ultimate cost,
but the chances of that happening are far less than dying in my car. Certainly,
security tests are necessary to provide sufficient protection for Canadian
citizens. But should the fear of a remote chance of being a victim deter me
from aiding those in need?
I cannot speak for others whose
lives may be at risk; they must speak for themselves. But my faith cals me to
follow my convictions and listen to the voice of Jesus:
“Then the righteous will answer
him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you
something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or
needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to
visit you?’ The King will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did for
one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.’” Matthew 25:37-40.
