Should the U.S. take in Syrian refugees? | The Tylt

What is the point of the great experiment known as America if we cannot open our doors to families who are fleeing horrific suffering and violence? OxFam America is calling upon President Trump and the U.S. government to lift the ban on Syrian refugees.

"The innocent families who were killed in Idlib are no different than the people who are attempting to seek refuge in the US.
Oxfam is urging the President to change course on his discriminatory ban that blocks Syrian civilians from finding refuge in the United States. If we truly want to help protect the people of Syria, we must also be willing to offer assistance as they flee attacks in search of safety."

Others say that we cannot allow sympathy for refugees to blind us to the dangers they might pose to U.S. citizens.

Many people say they voted for Trump to support an "America first" agenda—we simply cannot be responsible for the world's problems any longer.

Trump said we had to launch airstrikes because of the devastation of Assad's chemical attack on defenseless women and children. But critics say if we can bomb Syria, we can also open our doors to people fleeing the country.

But millions of Americans are vehemently opposed to letting more immigrants in, even if they are refugees fleeing civil war. 

They see refugees as the enemy.

Others think we just need to implement solutions that make these unstable nations safer, rather than taking in millions of people.