24/09/2015 07:14 BST | Updated 23/09/2016 06:12 BST

Let's Show Some Humanity and Accept Our Fair Share of These Refugees

Will someone please remind me when humans suddenly became intrinsically ranked in terms of importance? Oh wait, this never happened! So who gave the right for people to dehumanise these refugees from the most tormented homelands and turn them into an almost animal-like infection?

To prove this all I need do is to look at some of our most popular tabloids or just walk down the street to the tune of 'we haven't got any space for them'. Unfortunately, this is no longer a minority view in Britain. It should not take a dying child on the beach for people to show even a shed of sympathy. Let alone, David Cameron only demonstrating any shed of morality in his decision making to appease some of us lefty loud mouths. So let this lefty loud mouth tell you why we should we should accept these helpless refugees with these three simple reasons.

Would you even notice if we accepted our fair share of these refugees? No I promise you, you would not. Currently, our Prime Minster has guaranteed to accept 20,000 refugees by 2020, which is 4000 each year - how generous of him. Did you know that an estimated 320,000 Britons emigrated in 2014 and we can somehow only take 4,000 refugees each year? Somehow I just don't buy it. Indulge me in some simple maths to prove that you wouldn't notice this. On average, 492 people will emigrate out of your constituency each year, and for argument's sake lets say Britain took 20,000 refugees each year, that would only be an influx of 31 refugees in your constituency on average. Somehow I think our constituencies could deal with that. Yes, I do realise that current net migration would leave your constituency with an extra 501 people each year. However, if immigrants are 50% less likely to claim benefits then surely they are only a productive benefit. Therefore, I promise you would barely even notice the influx of refugees and if you did, you would only notice an increase in productivity.

We have only worsened the problem in Syria. How can our government refuse asylum while contributing to the bombing of these refugees' homeland? Short-sighted some may say. There seems to be a general consensus that people only want to live here to exploit the system. However, what about the factors pushing them out of their country? It's estimated that 71 civilians have been killed by US bombing in Syria with the use of British pilots, that would make anyone want to leave their country. So, I ask, why should we not be accepting more refugees when we are part of the problem causing them to leave?

My third and final point, a basic sense of morality. These are human beings that we are talking about, not a 'swarm' of insects like our Prime Minster would have us believe. We have no right to refuse these people a chance in life. We cannot sit and watch the pain being endured by these people trying to have something which most of us haven't had to work for, a chance. Just a chance. They are human beings so let's treat them like we treat each other.

This is not a normal blog post. This is a plea. A plea to David Cameron to help make this country a world leader once more and show everyone how great we are by only taking our fair share of these desperate refugees.