Is The U.S. Ethically Obligated To Grant Asylum To All Oppressed Women?

In a recent irresponsible statement in reference to the government shut-down over President Trump’s wall, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said that he didn’t want a border wall to be the symbol of America, that he wanted the Statue of Liberty to be that symbol. In this context, it is impossible to interpret Schumer’s words as anything but a weaselly, wink-wink, coded endorsement of open borders. When the statue was dedicated on October 28, 1886, the U.S. had few limitations on immigration. Non-citizens could vote in most states. The population was about 50 million, or about 1/7 of what it is today. The famous poem by Emma Lazarus,  “The New Colossus,”  is not part of the statue, nor is it official U.S. policy. Today it resides in the Statue of Liberty Museum. In short, it was a different country, with different problems and priorities.

Now comes the terribly sad story of two young Saudi sisters who apparently committed suicide by drowning themselves in the Hudson River rather than return to their country, where women are second class citizens. Should such a story have any relevance at all to U.S. immigration and asylum policy? Should how much a non-citizen wants to live here be a factor in what the U.S. decides is the best criteria for allowing an immigrant to arrive and stay? If the two sisters could be granted asylum because they were women in a culture hostile to women, why not all Saudi women? Why not all Muslim women who are “yearning to be free”?

The public and social media just aren’t logically and ethically equipped to consider this issue rationally. On Professor Turley’s blog, after he related the story of two women’s tragic act, some commenters wrote things like…

“It’s just not fair that the law does not apply to illegal immigrants, who are welcomed with open arms in sanctuary cities, but girls like this didn’t get the help they needed.”

What’s wrong is that illegal immigrants are shielded from the law, not that these young women couldn’t get asylum.

What is the point of a “women’s movement” if girls like these have nowhere to turn? Time to remove ourselves militarily from the medieval Middle East and serve as a refuge for women seeking freedom.

The U.S. shouldn’t be the world’s policeman, but it should be the world’s abused women’s shelter. Is that the idea?

13 thoughts on “Is The U.S. Ethically Obligated To Grant Asylum To All Oppressed Women?

  1. The United States is an incredibly wealthy nation, but that does not mean we can give handouts to the entire world (or half the world, since we’re just speaking of women). The responsible thing to do is allow in immigrants at a pace our society can handle (which I personally believe is a higher rate than we’re currently allowing, but then, I’m not by any stretch an expert on healthy immigration rates), provide assistance to other countries within our means, and support the rule of law. Once the rule of law breaks down, there’s no longer a rich nation that help out the troubled world. It becomes just one more place of chaos and suffering.

  2. The U.S. shouldn’t be the world’s policeman, but it should be the world’s abused women’s shelter. Is that the idea?

    It’s tragic that people are treated so horribly that they’d rather die than return to their own country. Let’s just get that right.

    But it’s also tragic when a child anywhere perishes for want of food, clean water, and medical care. Does that child’s lack of desire to come here (other than in the abstract to be anywhere his life could be preserved) mean that we have an ethical obligation to seek him out and shelter him? Or her? Or xir?

    The United States cannot be the place where the threatened and dying come to escape their circumstances. What we can, should, and do do is try to help with our charity.

    Regarding the geopolitical advice from the one commenter, does that mean we should get out of Africa as well? Because many countries there are as bad or worse than Saudi Arabia on women’s rights — but that would be racist, wouldn’t it?

    There is no winning with this type of “logic.” Just as policing the world hasn’t worked, trying to feed, clothe, cure, and enforce our Western civil rights ideals on the world cannot work either. When we reject radical Islam, we are called “Islamophobes.” How do we reconcile that with the traditional lack of women’s rights embedded in their religious traditions? You can’t, but depending on who’s ox is being gored, you can count on a member of the Left hitting you with an “ism” or “phobe.”

    None of these people are self-aware enough to even ask these questions of themselves. They simply emote, sure in the knowledge that they’ll get likes and approval, because who can disapprove of trying to help women avoid suicide?

    • Plus, if we withdraw from the “Medieval Middle East” due to their treatment of women as argued here, one of the most progressive, female-forward societies on earth becomes vulnerable….

      • They don’t count.

        I read the progressive playbook, and just like Muslims throwing homosexuals off of buildings is not a thing, anything pertaining to Israel does not matter.

  3. The U.S. cannot afford to take in every person from every country that’s poor, at war or run by a dictatorship, nor should it be expected to. It’s irresponsible to think that we can. At some point, citizens of a country have a responsibility to work to improve conditions where they are.

    We have a path to citizenship for those who come here, we have asylum agreements, we have systems in place for refugees.

  4. Sure, all these women should be let in. And then they can bring their brothers and uncles and fathers and boys and boyfriends who can then slap them around, marry multiple wives and run sketchy business. Or these women can get elected to Congress and lecture us on how bad Israel and the Jews are. By all means, let’s bring Saudi Arabia here!

    • Wait, isn’t the women’s movement in favor of respecting Islam? Aren’t women in Islamic countries lucky to live in such a wonderfully diverse, Anti-American culture?Aare we supposed to be imperialists and try to get other countries to treat women how we happen to treat them. But wait, there’s more. Isn’t the US full of rampant toxic masculinity and rape culture. Shouldn’t women be warned not to come here? Plus they’ll only make three quarters of what men make. Shouldn’t they go to Sweden? At least there the only rapists are muslim guys.

        • Man, isn’t that the truth? Any questioning of doctrinal, handed down from on high and revealed truth bans one from civil, i.e., lefty society.

  5. I’d like to know why the suffering of persecuted and oppressed MEN around the world is not relevant to these people? It’s almost like they don’t care about human beings and just exploit our natural instincts (to protect women and children) for their own selfish purposes or something…

  6. The answer is absolutely not.

    What makes a women special that she deserves better treatment legally than 2 twin brothers from Hungary or Uganda or anywhere else for that matter.

    I thought women were every bit equal to men so Middle Eastern women can tackle their issues.

    The only reason that justifies giving women special immigration status is to accelerate the political power of women. Sorry, but I can no longer accept that I, as a male, have duty and obligation to be a protector of women. They are on their own.

  7. I’m not a math/macro-economics guy, but I learned a looooong time ago that, harsh as it appears, picking up strays isn’t a viable long-term strategy, regardless of the intoxicating emotional gratification it provides as it ramps up one’s Messiah Complex endorphins.

    How much longer do you believe the leader and friend to free people and people seeking freedom can afford to continue as:
    *the world’s free haberdasher,
    *the world’s free clinic,
    *the world’s free landlord,
    *the world’s free smorgasbord,
    *the world’s free babysitter,
    *the world’s free mental health provider,
    *the world’s free jobs training/placement provider
    *the world’s free educator,
    *the world’s free transportation service,
    *the world’s free police force,
    *the world’s free disaster relief repository, and NOW
    *the world’s free abused women’s shelter?

    And to a world that hated us long before Hope-n-Change delivered us from evil?

    Welp, hated us riiiiiight up until their time of need, [intermission: Jeopardy Music while the check clears] with that hatred incuriously commencing riiiiiiiight after their empty hat had something in it.

    Free (frē) adverb:

    *Without cost, charge, or required payment; gratis.

    *At _The_Expense_Of_Others.

    • Our children?
      THEY’RE too fat, or starving to death (depending on the narrative du jour), aren’t receiving sufficient education, lack affordable health care, and haven’t a whisper of a chance at the life expectancy/economic opportunities of their parents.

      The parents?
      THEY’RE too fat, or starving to death (depending on the narrative du jour), weren’t sufficiently well-educated, lack affordable health care, have wage stagnation, no savings, poor job prospects, are two days away from the dole themselves, and the ones that aren’t already homeless will be by the end of the month, haven’t a whisper of a chance of accumulating enough financial resources to ensure a bare bones, let alone adequate, retirement, AND must care for their children, whose situation (listed above) ain’t no prize, ad infinitum ad nauseum.

      And you want the good ol’ U. S. of A. to take on mucho mas more, the majority of whom will require services several orders of magnitude greater than those that are already here?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.