Moral obligation to the 3rd world??

Time after time i hear people say that America, Canada, Australia and Europe have "Moral obligations" to allow mass immigration to their country's from the 3rd world. Why? Why don't Asian country's jump on this if its such a great idea?

The problem with this is that we DON'T have a moral obligation to the third world. We were a developing country back in the 1700s and did not achieve superpower status until World War I when we had to bail out Europe from the depredations of the Kaiser and later Hitler. We had the inventiveness, industry, and good old Yankee know-how to make this country into what it is today. Apparently that is rare for most countries to even contemplate doing.

We are also the finest product of western civilization whereas most civilizations, though existing far longer in history, are the most static in terms of their development.

If you look at the history of countries like America, Canada and Australia, you will see that these countries prospered only after mass immigration.

Of course we have a moral obligation to the third world. If you were to put yourself in the situations of the people who need to get out of often horrific situations, you would soon realise that we, as a society, need to take responsibility for people who have been in sometimes extreme situations.

Have a heart.

We don't owe them anything. What a crock of crap. I am all for LEGAL immigration AS SOON AS WE STOP AND DEPORT THE ILLEGALS.

Ben...yep, the US exploited the world to get ahead, oppresses everyone, is uncharitable, and the most terrible country on the planet. *sarcasm* I cannot stand liberal pukes like you who blame everything bad on America, and say that we could not have become the great nation we are without pissing on the other countries of the world. You clueless idiot. We are the most compassionate, giving country on the planet. We have become a great nation through the Biblical principle "Give and it will be given unto you."

Andy...you are full of crap about success after mass immigration. There is destruction after mass immigration and always has been. We are teh most compassionate country on the planet, but that does not mean we should be compassionate to the point of self-destruction. If we are generous to THAT fault, then we lose our ability to become generous. It is like the whole mistake made by several Christians who would call me (another Christian) greedy because I have a large home, have 3 businesses, and some large investments. Some Christians would say "I only need enough for me, and the rest I give to charity and church." and they think I am greedy. I would answer that I give more each year than many of them earn in 10. Which is more greedy, getting by, or giving to charity, but not so much that you cripple your ability to help many. None of those who call me greedy have given away houses, cars, and checks with six figures on them...and they call me greedy. America will fall if we give compassion to the point where we lost the ability to give.

The only obligation we have is to our own people. As for the low rating guy who thinks we "exploit" people. What a load of bull. We built the oil fields in the middle east and then, the locals decided to "repatriate them". Same with Venuzuela. Also, speaking of people like OOOGO Chavez...he has more money from oil than he knows what to do with. And what does he do with it? Does he help his own people? Nope, he sends it out to other communists to show his support. While his people starve and the intelligent class flees the country.
So...they need to end corruption in their own countries, get a good rule of law and stop whining about how we are supposed to fix their problems.
As for children starving....I did not father them and neither did anyone else, except their own people.
The problem with giving aid with an ongoing program is that you never teach people to be responsible for taking care of themself. So...if we have tough economic times, more children starve than if we had simply not given aid at all. After all, if they were not well fed and feeling groovy, they would not be popping out babies.

By the way, England, France and Canada have all modified their immigration policies, just like Sweden did ten years ago, when they realized that immigrants who had never contributed and would most likely never contribute, where bleeding the social services to death.

The Prophet Mohammed (s) was the ideal example of moral conduct, as well as the other high moral standards. By means of his ideal moralities, he could seize the hearts, and deserved, worthily, the praise of God:

鈥淢ost surely, you conform yourself to sublime morality. (68:4)鈥?br>


Imam Ali (a), describing the moralities of the holy Prophet (s), said:

鈥淗e was the most generous, the bravest, the most truthful and the most faithful, and in terms of temper, the most lenient and in terms of association, the most honorable. Any one seeing him for the first time is filled with awe, and any one associating with him loves him. I have never seen his like before and after him.鈥?br>

As a picture of the Prophet鈥檚 moral conduct, it is sufficient to refer to his story with people of Koreish who allied each other against him and showed him various sorts of bitterness that obliged him to flee his hometown. When God gave him victory against them, they were quite sure he would revenge himself upon them. He said nothing to them but, 鈥榳hat do you think I am going to do with you?鈥?鈥極nly the good, for you are a noble brother and the son of a noble brother,鈥?answered they. He said: 鈥業 will repeat the same wording of my brother Joseph the prophet: (Today, you are not condemned.) Go, you are released.鈥?br> http://moralsandethics.wordpress.com/

The idea of a "moral obligation to the 3rd world" is just a wishy-washy reformist attitude taken as a reaction against the horrors of imperialism.

If we have any only moral obligation at all, it is the obligation to destroy modern capitalist society as a whole, not to try and work within it.

No moral obligation whatsover.

The moral obligation is with the third world countries to stop corruption, ensure fair distribution of wealth, and to curb population explosion. Make it possible for people to have a future in their own land.

America does not have a "moral obligation" to allow immigration from 3rd world countries. America does however have a moral obligation to respect the right to immigrate and the right to emigrate.

I don't know who your hereing this from, but if they're friends you need to find new ones.
Don't listen to this ( we must save the world crap) because we'd be much better off if we would put 1/2 that attention right here at home. USA.

We are slowly depleting our natural resources, if we continue to do so we wont have enough for us.

It's not a great idea. I believe we only do it to keep the peace. You know

Well since most countries in Asia are incredibly poor, except a few smaller ones, I would say its probably because the western world exploited (and still does) them to get wealth. Why do you like seeing African children starve or something?