Why are people so cruel? Refugees

[Joods]

Not really sure how I feel about a wiki article, but if any of that is true, then when the US government rejected offers of help, they were doing the citizens of the US a huge disservice, not to mention refusing aid doesn't exactly show we're being very neighborly. Our government is disappointing to say the least, and I'm very disgusted that any refusals for help happened at all. But thanks for posting that link for me.

[Mister Agenda]

We spend less than 1% of our budget on foreign aid, about the same as Portugal and Japan. The top eight are Sweden, Luxembourg, Norway, Denmark, the UK, Germany, France, and Switzerland. The UAE donated 1.1% of its GNI to foreign aid, Australia donated about 0.27% of its national income to foreign aid (2014).

https://www.theguardian.com/global-devel...t-generous

That wasn't the point. The issue brought up was: why doesn't the US help more, because it was being assumed that we only let in 4000 people last year, when in fact, we have done so much more than just help 4000 people. So it's not about our budget. 600 million dollars on top of the five BILLION dollars already donated to help the cause is a lot of money. For people to say we weren't helping, was wrong and I was pointing that out, strictly on principle because I'm tired of the accusations that the US is not stepping up to help out more.

People seem to forget that it's not always about relocating refugees. It's also about bringing in resources to assist them so that they can remain in their own country. It's about volunteers, food, shelter, medicine and other types of aid. There is a lot more that goes on with helping out those in need that reaches beyond having to necessitate a relocation. I'm sure if those people had the choice to remain in their own places, with help, they would want to stay where they are as long as it was safe to do so.

I think it does matter what the percent is. If we give 0.2% of our national income and the UAE gives 1.1%, how can we claim to be so generous just because we're a developed country with over 320 million people and a federal budget of around 3 trillion a year so our 0.2% works out to more cash than their 1.1%? How can we say we've done 'our share' with 0.2%?

Who is being more generous, a millionaire who gives you $1,000 or a poor person who gives you $100?

[Mister Agenda]

I think in Syria before the war the legislation of the country was still based on Islamic laws.

I think you're mistaken.

To be fair, it's complicated. Syria doesn't have an official state religion, but Islamic law is certainly a strong influence (particularly in family courts), as is French law from the days of the French Mandate. And Ottoman law from even further back.

[paulpablo]

I think in Syria before the war the legislation of the country was still based on Islamic laws.

I think you're mistaken.

Article 3 of the 1973 Syrian constitution declares Islamic jurisprudence one of Syria's main sources of legislation.[141] The Personal Status Law 59 of 1953 (amended by Law 34 of 1975) is essentially a codified Sharia law.[142] The Code of Personal Status is applied to Muslims by Sharia courts.[143] In Sharia courts, a woman's testimony is worth only half of a man's.[144]





The Constitution provides for freedom of religion.[22] However, the Government restricts this right. While there is no official state religion, the Constitution requires that the president be Muslim and stipulates that Islamic jurisprudence, an expansion of Sharia Islamic law,[23] is a principal source of legislation.


article 520 of the penal code of 1949, prohibits having homosexual relations, i.e. "carnal relations against the order of nature", and provides for up to three-years imprisonment.[26]

In 2010 the Syrian police began a crackdown that led to the arrest of over 25 men. The men were charged with various crimes ranging from homosexual acts and illegal drug use, to encouraging homosexual behavior and organizing obscene parties.[27]

Apologies for the rushed copy and pasting, I need to leave the house, these are a few articles I found which make me think Syria, although secular, still had a major influence from Islam in it's laws and culture, and attitude towards free speech and homosexuality.

[abaris]

It just really bothers me, that people are like this there. Sorry.

My own heritage is at least half hungarian. If I wanted I could apply for hungarian citizenship at any time. Fat chance for that to happen, as long as Orban is at the helm.

People were always that way. Even in the most brutal times of the 20th century, countries closed their borders to refugees, virtually leaving them to die. My own family was lucky, because of their hungarian heritage, they could make it over the border in '39. And while Horthy was an antisemite too, he didn't actively persue jews before the Germans invaded in '44.

This family history makes me cringe in disgust when people paint these refugees as some kind of invaders of dangers. Sometimes even by people who left their own country willingly - simply in hopes of better pay or better chances in life. Yet they are often the first ones to deny the same kind of courtesy to the ones fleeing from real war situations or because of a lack of outlook in life.

[AdamJa]

It just really bothers me, that people are like this there. Sorry.

My own heritage is at least half hungarian. If I wanted I could apply for hungarian citizenship at any time. Fat chance for that to happen, as long as Orban is at the helm.

People were always that way. Even in the most brutal times of the 20th century, countries closed their borders to refugees, virtually leaving them to die. My own family was lucky, because of their hungarian heritage, they could make it over the border in '39. And while Horthy was an antisemite too, he didn't actively persue jews before the Germans invaded in '44.

This family history makes me cringe in disgust when people paint these refugees as some kind of invaders of dangers. Sometimes even by people who left their own country willingly - simply in hopes of better pay or better chances in life. Yet they are often the first ones to deny the same kind of courtesy to the ones fleeing from real war situations or because of a lack of outlook in life.

Yes, many people left Hungary in the 30`s, 40`s and 50`s. Even i have relatives in Canada.


I still say, that the most important thing is, that we have to help anyone who`s life in danger. Even if they are not in danger, we can`t just leave them outside the border to starve. Because then they will steal or worse and become dangerous to the people who live there.

And no, don`t apply for citizenship haha. Even if Orban leaves any time soon, that place is a mess, with evil people. I`m lucky i had the chance to leave

[Joods]

That wasn't the point. The issue brought up was: why doesn't the US help more, because it was being assumed that we only let in 4000 people last year, when in fact, we have done so much more than just help 4000 people. So it's not about our budget. 600 million dollars on top of the five BILLION dollars already donated to help the cause is a lot of money. For people to say we weren't helping, was wrong and I was pointing that out, strictly on principle because I'm tired of the accusations that the US is not stepping up to help out more.

People seem to forget that it's not always about relocating refugees. It's also about bringing in resources to assist them so that they can remain in their own country. It's about volunteers, food, shelter, medicine and other types of aid. There is a lot more that goes on with helping out those in need that reaches beyond having to necessitate a relocation. I'm sure if those people had the choice to remain in their own places, with help, they would want to stay where they are as long as it was safe to do so.

I think it does matter what the percent is. If we give 0.2% of our national income and the UAE gives 1.1%, how can we claim to be so generous just because we're a developed country with over 320 million people and a federal budget of around 3 trillion a year so our 0.2% works out to more cash than their 1.1%? How can we say we've done 'our share' with 0.2%?

Who is being more generous, a millionaire who gives you $1,000 or a poor person who gives you $100?

I'm not going to argue with you over semantics, okay? I was making a point and I made it.

[chimp3]

I live in the U.S. Except for the first wave of immigrants - Europeans arriving here in 1492 - immigration has had a positive effect on our culture. New ideas , skills, languages, cuisines, skin colors and hair types. After a couple of generations assimilation , cultural modification, creativity. I would like to go back to the Ellis Island system A quick security check, health check. Check - your in.

I think if you're going to go that far back into the timeline of American history it isn't a case of judging what effect Europeans arriving there in 1492 had on your culture.

Because American culture as you know it didn't exist at that time so it wasn't there to be affected.  And who can really say how the timeline of history would have gone if Europeans hadn't arrived in America in 1492, you don't even know if your culture would exist at all if that didn't happen.

It's also slightly debatable to call them immigrants because from what I understand in 1492 none of those people stayed to live in central America.  I could be wrong about that point, did any Europeans stay and live in any land considered to now be part of the USA in 1492?

It would be a bit like me saying "Apart from the Romans coming to England in 43AD I think immigration to the UK has gone quite well."  In reference to what you're saying about Europeans arriving in America in 1492.

Sorry , I was being loose with the language. I did mean that the Europeans arriving in the Americas was bad for the First Americans. After the Europeans settling and forming the U.S. immigration has been a positive.

[Napoléon]

You think Syrian refugees are largely barbarians?

They're mostly muslims so yeah.