Should Canada Accept Gay Refugees?

[sharkman]

you clearly aren't getting it yet... you're not even aligning with Harper Conservative Bill C-11 related proclamations that presume to newly qualify and clearly identify one of the recognized persecutions to... now... include persecution related to sexual orientation.

I don't agree with Harper? So what.

I think I partly agree with cyber on this one, it's the persecution that should be the determining factor.

[waldo]

I don't agree with Harper? So what.

I think I partly agree with cyber on this one, it's the persecution that should be the determining factor.

yaaaaah... but unless refugee persecution is explicitly defined and recognized to include persecution based upon sexual orientation, there is a gap. It is not sufficient to simply state what Canadian law is and assume refugee persecution determinants will inherently include it.

[sharkman]

yaaaaah... but unless refugee persecution is explicitly defined and recognized to include persecution based upon sexual orientation, there is a gap. It is not sufficient to simply state what Canadian law is and assume refugee persecution determinants will inherently include it.

Okay, so maybe you can explain how the Cdn government would accept proof of homosexuality. By taking the applicant's word for it? Like I mentioned above, if you just take their word for it you might be letting in someone who is just trying to get around the immigration line up. And this would not be fair to those trying legally to get into Canada.

[eyeball]

I still figure as long as corporations are allowed to cross any border any time they choose to seek a better opportunity that humans should be able to as well. We're still people too goddammit.

Even the queerest corporations are allowed to prance about the globe without a care in the world.

It just doesn't seem right.

[sharkman]

I'm not sure if that was a response to my post or just your take on the issue in general.

But I think that people have the same freedom to cross borders any time they wish. But to move to another country permanently you have to emigrate, which is done at the pleasure of the country, not unlike a corporation. If a corp has a record of not paying taxes and many legal infractions, they might be denied entry too. IMO, the refugee issue is far different.

Edited January 4, 2012 by sharkman

[August1991]

Why did Canada enter the war ? Because Germany was arresting homosexuals, Roma and Jews ? That is not why.

On the contrary, I disagree. Canadian men were willing to die in Europe in WWII because they saw that Nazi Germany was doing wrong.

It is fashionable now to pretend otherwise but that's the simple truth.

----

We can argue about why Canadians died in Europe in WWI. That would merit a different thread. We can also argue about previous European wars. (Sadly, Europe has had far too many wars. Compared to relatively peaceful North and South Americans, I have always thought that Europeans are an uncivilized, violent lot. And I speak French.)

I can see finally the point you're making: you are a moralist, and you want Canada to "do good".

Uh no, Michael.

I am wondering whether present/future Canadians will have the courage to defend the individual's freedom to choose. I am wondering whether present/future Canadians will have the courage of Canadian men born in the early 20th century.

Edited January 6, 2012 by August1991

[Michael Hardner]

On the contrary, I disagree. Canadian men were willing to die in Europe in WWII because they saw that Nazi Germany was doing wrong.

Wrong - how ? They invaded Poland and England declared war on them.

Did the recruitment posters admonish young men to go to Europe to save the oppressed ? Or was it to fight an aggressor ?

It's a minor point, really, since either choice could be seen as 'moral' but let's continue.

I am wondering whether present/future Canadians will have the courage to defend the individual's freedom to choose. I am wondering whether present/future Canadians will have the courage of Canadian men born in the early 20th century.

Your perspective on this issue is bent in several ways.

First of all this idea of "freedom to choose" is myopic, in that you (Auguste) set the parameters of what constitutes "choice". It mostly reflects consumer choice, and although that has been pointed out to you, you continue to refer to consumer choice as "choice".

Secondly, you seem to think that morality occurs in a vacuum. It does not. What is/was moral in the early 20th century and what is/was moral in the early 21st century are different matters.

You might argue that people are basically more selfish in the 21st century, and maybe I wouldn't disagree. But maybe that's because they have more "choice" eh ? Why fight in war when I don't have to choose to ?

Now, that's choice.

[cybercoma]

This is perhaps my favourite WWII poster. That beaver means serious business...

http://0.tqn.com/d/canadaonline/1/0/e/9/ww2tovictory.jpg

[sharkman]

I am wondering whether present/future Canadians will have the courage to defend the individual's freedom to choose. I am wondering whether present/future Canadians will have the courage of Canadian men born in the early 20th century.

You know, I have wondered about this very thing. How is it that Canadians were willing to leave their homes and families and careers, and go get killed by the thousands? It was such a large percentage of the population that left for WWI and WWII! I don't think we have such character and moral fiber these days.

[waldo]

This is perhaps my favourite WWII poster. That beaver means serious business...

http://0.tqn.com/d/canadaonline/1/0/e/9/ww2tovictory.jpg

why I do believe that's a maple-leaf on the beaver's helmet

The maple leaf

...

- leaf In 1939, at the beginning of World War II, numerous Canadian troops once again used the maple leaf as a distinctive emblem, displaying it on regimental badges and Canadian army and naval equipment.

Edited January 6, 2012 by waldo

[August1991]

I really need to start smoking more weed. I can't think of any other way to make sense of these types of August threads.

And I need another glass of wine.

[Michael Hardner]

You know, I have wondered about this very thing. How is it that Canadians were willing to leave their homes and families and careers, and go get killed by the thousands? It was such a large percentage of the population that left for WWI and WWII! I don't think we have such character and moral fiber these days.

As I said, I can't disagree with this. However, I don't know that we should lament about this. We have to accept it.

It's a different world today - we have elevated the individual on so many levels that the idea of sacrifice or self-control is no longer a value. To attribute this change to the left or the right is really just finger-pointing as all sides of the political spectrum have contributed to it.

If the public wanted to change this, how could it happen ? First, we'd have to have some kind of common set of values of any kind, and I'm not sure that we even have that.

[eyeball]

You know, I have wondered about this very thing. How is it that Canadians were willing to leave their homes and families and careers, and go get killed by the thousands? It was such a large percentage of the population that left for WWI and WWII! I don't think we have such character and moral fiber these days.

People just aren't as gullible. They have nowhere near as much faith in the rhetoric of the politicians and interests that goad and cajole them to pick up their cause and make it everyone's cause. I think we have more character and moral fibre as a result, not less.

[eyeball]

To attribute this change to the left or the right is really just finger-pointing as all sides of the political spectrum have contributed to it.

I attribute this change more to the numbers of people who have moved south on what I guess would be the so-called authoritarian libertarian axis.

[sharkman]

People just aren't as gullible. They have nowhere near as much faith in the rhetoric of the politicians and interests that goad and cajole them to pick up their cause and make it everyone's cause. I think we have more character and moral fibre as a result, not less.

So people left their homes, families and careers, went to fight Hitler because they were gullible. I just don't buy that.

I do believe if Hitler came along today there would be fewer Canadians interesting in opposing him on a battlefield though.

[Rick]

People just aren't as gullible. They have nowhere near as much faith in the rhetoric of the politicians and interests that goad and cajole them to pick up their cause and make it everyone's cause. I think we have more character and moral fibre as a result, not less.

Exactly so when you have Stephen Harper doing his best George Bush impersonation with his idiotic fear mongering rhetoric proclamations such as

Iran wants to use nuclear weapon, Harper says

"Your listeners should be under no illusion, Iran is a very serious threat to international peace and security. In my judgment, it is the world's most serious threat to international peace and security," Harper said during an appearance on the Rutherford Show, an Alberta-wide radio call-in program.

People simply tune fear mongering idiots such as Bush and Harper out.

They're today's version of the boy who cried wolf...nobody believes them anymore.

[sharkman]

That's interesting about Harper's quote. Do you have any links for that?

[Rick]

That's interesting about Harper's quote. Do you have any links for that?

Yes

[jacee]

Canada's acceptance of rejection of a refugee claim should not be dependent upon the potential refugee's sexual orientation. If a potential refugee meets the criteria for qualifying as a refugee under Canada's laws (such as facing danger/persecution from the state they are fleeing), then that's that. That being said, the influx of refugees and immigrants in general must be limited to a reasonable number, so that it does not cause adverse effects in Canada. A country can only assimilate so many people over a given period of time. Canada's current 1%/year annual immigration rate is already quite possibly in excess of the rate at which people can be assimilated.

I think Harper's inclusion of persecuted gays as grounds for refugee status is intended as a slam on Iran.

[sharkman]

Yes

Nice to see a PM willing to call a spade a spade here.

[eyeball]

So people left their homes, families and careers, went to fight Hitler because they were gullible. I just don't buy that.

No they went because the previous generation of politicians botched the conclusion of WW1. WW1 of course happened because the previous generation of politicians...see where I'm going with this?

Now, can you show me any example of a spontaneous call to arms arising out of the blue from the ranks of the common man on either side in these or any other great war?

I do believe if Hitler came along today there would be fewer Canadians interesting in opposing him on a battlefield though.

I do believe if Hitler came along today it would have to be a miracle or a result of time travel.

Please stop with the silly ghost of Hitler rhetoric and get a grip.

[sharkman]

No they went because the previous generation of politicians botched the conclusion of WW1. WW1 of course happened because the previous generation of politicians...see where I'm going with this?

Now, can you show me any example of a spontaneous call to arms arising out of the blue from the ranks of the common man on either side in these or any other great war?

I do believe if Hitler came along today it would have to be a miracle or a result of time travel.

Please stop with the silly ghost of Hitler rhetoric and get a grip.

I'm not sure why you're so sensitve about this issue. I don't know what you're asking or what point you are making with the request for a spontaneous call to arms. Nonetheless, in WWII, Canadians were willing to risk their lives in amazingly large numbers to stop Hitler. And if a Hitler-like dictator came along today, Canadians would rather get caught up in debates/arguments over whether he had a point, or if we should stay out of other people's wars, etc, rather than confront an evil bent on taking over multiple countries.

You may have had a point about WWI, but hindsight is always 20/20, isn't it.

[g_bambino]

No they went because the previous generation of politicians botched the conclusion of WW1.

Hindsight is 20/20, as they say. In other words, there's no way to predict the future, so it's hard to lay the blame for WWII at the feet of those who put together the Treaty of Versailles.

------------

Ed. to add:

Sorry, didn't notice sharkman already raised the hindsight matter.

Edited January 6, 2012 by g_bambino

[msj]

And if a Hitler-like dictator came along today, Canadians would rather get caught up in debates/arguments over whether he had a point, or if we should stay out of other people's wars, etc, rather than confront an evil bent on taking over multiple countries.

You mean like the Americans did?

Or the British did up until Chamberlain finally (and obviously) failed?

You are washing over history.

After the fact everyone claims that going to war against Nazi Germany is right etc... even when at the time many had doubts about it.

No country knew what evil Hitler had in store for the Jews and even if "we" did very few cared about the fate of those refugees anyway.

------------------------------------

I am following RealTimeWWII on twitter/face book and the premise is to tweet many times per day various headlines and snippets of information about what happened on today's date back in 1940 (it started last year with 1939).

It is quite fascinating to read it as if it is happening now.

It also forces one to think about the war from less of a hindsight point of view and more of a it's happening now point of view which can be very revealing at times.

Everyone should give it a try.

Edited January 6, 2012 by msj

[Black Dog]

Nice to see a PM willing to call a spade a spade here.

Except he's calling a plastic spoon a spade in this case.