The nice part about Internet discussions on politics and religion is that in the end, everyone always comes away more open minded about the opposing view point.
I don't know if you are being sarcastic or not (note Matty-not sarchastic,) but I definitely do. I was (if I haven't mentioned this before-ha) the 605 state debate champion which sort of instilled in me to dig in my heels in arguments. I have definitely gotten better, and I do see both sides of this.
I think MF is correct that it seems inconsistent with Christian values to turn away the persecuted. However, if the point is made (which it often is) that Christians don't have the corner on morality and good values, then they should not be held to a higher standard than Joe good morals atheist.
Nina is correct that most of GL has a very narrow minded view Christians in general. The wingnuts that make the news are a small minority. The missionaries and other Christian good doers don't make good news. Westboro Baptist does.
Laugh at what you view as ignorant, uneducated believers if you must, but personally, I find it hard to believe that some people DON'T believe in a supreme being, at least of some sort. In any case, don't judge Christians by their worst specimens, and don't hold them to a higher standard than the equally moral and good unbelievers that you reference.
So yeah, basically I'm no closer than having a clear -cut opinion than I was yesterday.
I agree that fear cannot rule our decisions, and to me, the financial implications are more of a concern. When we are having to talk about the elimination of an insolvent social security system, it's hard to see bringing in more people, as much as we might want to. Although I really do like Canada's private sponsorship program. I haven't read the justifications for not already doing so here (other than just not wanting them here altogether.)
That's all.