Church World Service

[Mike M (the other one)]

(12-30-2016, 04:53 PM)Dill Wrote: No.

First the logic isn't very clear here. Zaidi are a smaller minority than Christians and more persecuted, so would you take a Zaidi family over a Christian? Muslims are a minority in Russia, so would you prefer a Muslim family fleeing persecution in Russia over a Christian family?

The fact of persecution is not clear either.

Christians in Bethlehem are persecuted because they are under Israeli occupation. If you grant them the status of political refugees, then you are condemning an ally. Same for Chaldeans in central Iraq.

Finally, All Christians in the Middle East are not persecuted. There are many places, like Mt Nebo in Jordan, where they administer and worship holy sites together. One of the biggest Catholic churches in the Middle East is in Qatar. No persecution there whatsoever. Christians dominate Lebanon.

So a policy of automatically preferring Christians from anywhere in the Middle East because some are persecuted  somewhere there, generally much less than Muslims, doesn't follow from your premises--unless you replace the secular ideal of universal equality with an ideal of inequality founded upon religion.

All things considered equal, Refugees from the Middle East where the only difference is Christian vs Muslim.

Zaidi Christian or Muslim?
Russia is not a part of the Middle East.
Christians in Bethleham are prosecuted by both, extremist Jews and Muslims and barely make up 1% of the total population in Gaza, so yes I would welcome them.
The Chaldeans have a strong presence in Iraq, but I don't know much about them.

I didn't know people were fleeing Jordan, Qatar and Lebanon. So were not talking Refugees then are we? Because they certainly are in the OP.