Refugee status accepted on Chinese birth restrictions!

[Scotty]

Should refugees be psychologically tested in English or their own language? Do we have reliable assessments that work for all cultures and languages? There are complexities to your suggestion that make it of questionable practicality. Do we exclude men who might tend to commit domestic violence without any evidence of such? Will the courts see that as valid when appeals of such decisions are heard?

And how is this relevant to a woman fleeing the birth restrictions of China?

The woman being accepted is merely an example of what few standards we have for refugees -- and by extension, since virtually all refugees become immigrants, for immigrants. And as I said in an earlier post, topics veer from side to side, and I was addressing the questions on Muslim immigrants. As to your queries on the difficulties of testing. I don't claim it would be easy. I simply think it would be worth it. These are people who are going to be here for life. Why not ensure we get the best possible? I don't think courts can intervene, however, with a failed immigration candidate. At least, I've never heard of them doing so.

[Scotty]

The test already asks questions about what is protected in the Canadian Constitution. The ceremony is where you swear to accept your responsibilities as a Canadian. If you don't recite the oath you don't get to be Canadian.

If you're trying to keep religious zealots out, you're better off making them swear to do something than just asking a multiple choice quiz. If you phrase things cleverly, you're just going to snag a lot of false positives.

Anyway, you should be glad that what you're asking for is already in place I suppose.

It's not in place. Swearing to accept responsibilities is far too vague. And in any event religious people have always found ways around their oaths. They simply tell themselves God doesn't want them to obey that oath and they're good to go. What I'm looking at is better screening on an individual level of people's cultural/emotional mindset, its divergence from Canadian values, and willingness to accept the need for change.

[Michael Hardner]

It's not in place. Swearing to accept responsibilities is far too vague.

But it's more effective, especially to religious zealots. Unless they're willing to lie, as you've pointed out. If that's the case then no screener will keep them out of the country.

[jacee]

It's not in place. Swearing to accept responsibilities is far too vague. And in any event religious people have always found ways around their oaths. They simply tell themselves God doesn't want them to obey that oath and they're good to go. What I'm looking at is better screening on an individual level of people's cultural/emotional mindset, its divergence from Canadian values, and willingness to accept the need for change.

It doesn't exist.

Probably half of Canadian men would fail a mysogyny test.

There is no test to predict future violence accurately, against women or otherwise.

There is no such screening that would stand up in a court appeal of a decision to refuse refugee status.

What you are suggesting can't be done.

Screening is based on past and current behaviour.

The best 'test' of ability to adapt to Canada is doing it.

[bjre]

Democracy is a system that encourage people to tell lies. This can easily be seen from the story Running for Governor by Mark Twin's to Dalton McGuinty said he would reduce tax if he become the premier of Ontario, but he did not.

When western courtiers promote democracy to China, more and more Chinese grasped this advanced technologies to tell lies.
Western country enjoy negative stories about China, no matter if the stories are lies or not. So many such lies comes include this one: http://www.amazon.ca/Bend-Not-Break-Life-Worlds/dp/1591845521 (Bend Not Break), When more and more Chinese come to western countries, more and more such lies be identifies although most are ignored by mainstream media.

Many Chinese thought western countries are heaven after hear the propaganda from western countries years after years, so there are people try to tell various lies to get a refugee's status. Give some story that western countries enjoy, there are chances for them to stay in their dream country. This is the need of political correctness.

[Michael Hardner]

Democracy is a system that encourage people to tell lies.

Is there a way to tell if there are more lies in an open democracy, or less ? How would we investigate that ?

[g_bambino]

Democracy is a system that encourage people to tell lies..

As opposed to a dictatorship which punishes those who speak their honest opinions that conflict with the regime's?

[Scotty]

It doesn't exist.

Probably half of Canadian men would fail a mysogyny test.

If personality tests can accurately suggest the level of a potential employee's honesty then they can also suggest a personality predisposed towards violence and intolerance, and unwilling to change. That's especially so for those not smart or sophisticated enough to try to fool the tests.

Edited July 2, 2013 by Scotty

[guyser]

The woman being accepted is merely an example of what few standards we have for refugees -- and by extension, since virtually all refugees become immigrants, for immigrants.

Is 38% acceptance* virtually all refugees?+

So 62% abandon their claim.....and that would mean 62% of testing would be wasted.

* = abandon, leave the country, die, go somewhere else and so on.

+ - Ed Koning, AP , U of Guelph , Study

[Scotty]

Is 38% acceptance* virtually all refugees?+

If the standard for qualifying now is simply being from a country where only one child is permitted then we can say virtually all will be accepted.

[guyser]

If the standard for qualifying now is simply being from a country where only one child is permitted then we can say virtually all will be accepted.

It isnt so now what?

Wait a while to find a way to fit non-sequiters in ....k?

[Scotty]

It isnt so now what?

It is. The board and courts found it to be sufficient. By that precedent, anyone else facing a similar predicament will also be accepted.

[guyser]

It is. The board and courts found it to be sufficient. By that precedent, anyone else facing a similar predicament will also be accepted.

If you think so, then I can categorically state you didnt read the ruling. It was not just one child that was at issue, although it helps your cause, it isnt true.

Your premise has been flawed since the start.

38% ?

1 child ?

Both wrong as stand alone statements

Edited July 2, 2013 by Guyser2

[Scotty]

If you think so, then I can categorically state you didnt read the ruling. It was not just one child that was at issue, although it helps your cause, it isnt true.

Oh good. Since you clearly have a lot of knowledge, perhaps you'd like to tell me what else was at stake? What was unique about this individual that would not allow some other random woman who wanted more than one child to be accepted into Canada?

Edited July 2, 2013 by Scotty

[guyser]

Oh good. Since you clearly have a lot of knowledge, perhaps you'd like to tell me what else was at stake? What was unique about this individual that would not allow some other random woman who wanted more than one child to be accepted into Canada?

Right there in black and white.

Forced sterilization , witnessed the horror and so on.

[AlienB]

Apparently foreign affairs just approved 1600 syrians... because there is a war in Syria.

Its not like assad wouldn't let the women have babies.

Sure there are probably going to be issues but I think this chinawoman thing is being blown out of proportion by some people.

You know there is lots of room in Canada.. I think it is a valid human rights concern.

Probably a bit like the syrian refugees who see their country locked in an endless war where terrorism will escalate and they will potentially be killed by either side.

But wow 1600, a small number of people sure but I'm curious how this processing was done.

Edited July 4, 2013 by AlienB

[Scotty]

Right there in black and white.

Forced sterilization , witnessed the horror and so on.

In what way was this woman unique as compared to all other young Chinese women? That was the question, not how nasty the Chinese government can be.

[Scotty]

You know there is lots of room in Canada..

No, there isn't. None of these people are moving out into the Tundra. They're moving into the big cities.

[guyser]

In what way was this woman unique as compared to all other young Chinese women? That was the question, not how nasty the Chinese government can be.

Forced to witness the horrors. The link is not working now, but it spelled it out clearly.

All the other woman are not applying, so pretty much irrelevant.

[guyser]

No, there isn't. None of these people are moving out into the Tundra. They're moving into the big cities.

We need the growth. Plenty of room for that.

If you dont like it, dont vote CPC next time....I guess.

[Scotty]

Forced to witness the horrors. The link is not working now, but it spelled it out clearly.

All the other woman are not applying, so pretty much irrelevant.

It's entirely relevant. It's the whole point of this topic. One woman coming here is what's irrelevant. It's the precedent her being allowed in which is what people are discussing. By lowering the bar as much as it has the board and court have pretty much allowed any female of child bearing age in China or the Muslim world free entry into Canada.

[Scotty]

We need the growth. Plenty of room for that.

We most certainly do NOT need the growth. Nor is there 'plenty of room' unless you think these people are going to be moving to the frozen tundra.

[guyser]

It's entirely relevant. It's the whole point of this topic. One woman coming here is what's irrelevant. It's the precedent her being allowed in which is what people are discussing. By lowering the bar as much as it has the board and court have pretty much allowed any female of child bearing age in China or the Muslim world free entry into Canada.

No it isnt.

The precedent is set , as you say, so how many have applied since? 10,000? 200? None ? I'll take door number 3 please.

The last sentence is just silly hyperbole , par for the course for those who remain xenophobic in the face of reality.

[guyser]

We most certainly do NOT need the growth.

I suppose 'stagnancy ' is better? Economists do not agree.

Nor is there 'plenty of room' unless you think these people are going to be moving to the frozen tundra.

Now now, dont call Saskatchewan tundra. Neither is most of Alberta.

Just where do you think you get your gains on the house you have?

[AlienB]

No, there isn't. None of these people are moving out into the Tundra. They're moving into the big cities.

really, kindly supply information, immigration shifted to smaller communities in countries such as the US,...

well if there isn't room. then it looks like people won't have homes?

doesn't make sense to me.

None the less I advocate for a better immigration settlement system

one which takes into account and provides a supply demand basis for labour. example what are the persons skills, where are those skills in demand etc.. with factors such as sponsorship.

But no there is plenty of land beyond the tundra, there are various areas with a demand for skills.

I do as said think that the system could be vastly improved and should involve more consultation.

None the less I would guess there are already existing communities for these minority groups in urban areas.

I do need to state one more time I do agree to certain extent but it is not as simple as there is no room, there is room. but it isn't necesarily the ideal long term settlement location.

It is vital that refugees are settled into the system with work available where they would like to stay from a list of options.. where support programs exist for adjustment to the new culture.

Edited July 5, 2013 by AlienB