Welcoming migrants is a humanist duty

This argument is used in the debate Should we accept immigration?.

This argument is a “pro” argument in the debate Should we accept immigration?.

Summary

Quotes

“In addition to all these arguments, let's add that'beyond the figures and statistics - which already tend to prove that a realistic and respectful welcome is far more virtuous for the host population than a massive and violent rejection - ethical questions arise: should a human life necessarily be profitable? Are they really the cause of all our problems, or do those responsible lurk elsewhere? What do borders and hospitality mean to us, and what would we hope for in their place (which could well be ours one day)?”

Simon Verdiere, “Out of hate: 5 unfounded prejudices about immigration”, Mr. Globalization, July 21, 2023.

References

Justifications

It is inhuman to remain indifferent to the fate of migrants
One of the foundations of ethics is welcoming the stranger
Refusing to welcome migrants is like refusing to welcome Jews in 1940.
We take in very few migrants given Europe's resources
To refuse migrants is to be racist
We must not create a fortress Europe
Ultimately, we must abolish borders
Only the far right rejects migrants
It is inhuman to leave people to die when they are forced to flee their homeland.
We are all potential migrants

Objections

We can't afford to take in migrants
Welcoming migrants encourages a new trade in human beings
We need to be concerned about the consequences of welcoming migrants
Why welcome these migrants to faraway Europe rather than to Muslim countries?
We have a moral duty to welcome refugees, not economic migrants
Helping people to live in their own country is humanist, not uprooting them.
The pro-migrants - especially the celebrities - have a clear conscience at the expense of the country.
Today's migrants are almost exclusively men, who have therefore abandoned women.

Parent debate