Should Canada screen potential immigrants/refugees for Canadian Values

DogOnPorch · September 13, 2016

Ah yes ... good ole greed and corruption!

.

Western values = freedom and equality among others.

Hint: Humans are greedy.

Argus · September 13, 2016

That Canadian values vary makes it all the less likely that you could test for them.

No, it does not. For the most part values vary within a narrow range. Something like executing gays is way outside that range. So is total segregation between men and women.

First - Muslims are not doubling every year. There will not be 2M next year.

I meant to say every 7-10 years.

Second - Not many Canadian Muslims wear burkas. Not many middle eastern ones do.

But the number that do doubled, and the number wearing the hijab is now more than 50%

Third - The same surveys showed that Muslims were more likely to accept the tenants of their faith, but were unlikely to see that as contradicting their view of Canadian values (probably different from yours), and were extremely proud of their country.

While only 5% of immigrants say their attachment to Islam weakened since arriving, 41% say it's strengthened.

They're also less tolerant of liberal values, as the study explains: "Muslims are more likely than other Canadians to value patriarchy ('the father must be the master in the home') and to reject homosexuality."

Argus · September 13, 2016

That's the dirty secret Ontarians don't accept......we're not all extensions thereof.

Being Muslim first and Canadian second means the laws of Islam trump the laws of Canada.

What does being a Newfoundlander first and Canadian second mean?

No. There is a difference between your values and Canadians.

Not according to the polls.

Argus · September 13, 2016

There should be no confusion: The statement "laws and values are not mutually exclusive" can be rewritten as "laws and values are mutually inclusive"

I would suggest you might benefit from a few elementary English courses.

Argus · September 13, 2016

Jason Kenney slaps down this policy proposal....

Kenney spent most of his time in parliament wooing ethnic groups and incorporating them into his party's political strategies. He approaches the question from purely that perspective. Ie, will this harm or hurt us at the ballot box. Like all politicians over the past fifty years he sees the primary purpose of immigration as being to benefit his party.

Argus · September 13, 2016

Well no, I'm saying the Conservatives values are just a watered down version of the values they want to ban from entering the country.

As the views of progressives and liberals are watered down versions of the policies of Lenin and Pol Pot.

Edited September 13, 2016 by Argus

Argus · September 13, 2016

Which is why I say forget about talking about values and talk about laws instead.

Much more objective and much more practical.

And a waste of time. We already enforce laws. But as I've already pointed out, laws will change as the percentage of extremely religious people with extremely backward social views begin to affect politics.

And I'm sure that twenty and thirty years ago progressive Frenchmen were sneering at any worries that bringing in lots of Muslims would possibly cause any social upheaval in the future. Yet here we are with riots and terrorism, armed guards over every Jewish school and synagogue and women being attacked by Muslims for wearing shorts in public.

Edited September 13, 2016 by Argus

Argus · September 13, 2016

Mhm.

How do you 'test' for those vague concepts?

Have you ever applied for a job with a major employer and been given a long test consisting of a series of seemingly unrelated questions? A lot of major employers are quite attached to these psychological screening tests which, according to those who write them (and which seems to have found approval among some pretty big corporations) will give indications of a candidate's honesty, integrity, initiative, leadership, public service ability, salesmanship, and other key personality traits. In fact, some of the things these tests look for are among the values listed, like tolerance and the ability to respect and get along with co-workers.

Edited September 13, 2016 by Argus

jacee · September 13, 2016

There are a couple of "far left" posts above ridiculing the idea of screening for Canadian values, yet 67 to 74 percent of Canadians (depending on which of the two major polls are used) disagree with you. Disagree! That includes conservatives, ...

I think Kellie Leitch and the majority of Canadians have not thought this through, as we are doing here:

Conducting such a "screening" of prospective immigrants would be an expensive and ridiculous farce.

When asked to choose the values respondents believe are important, equality came out on top (27 per cent), followed by patriotism (15 per cent), fairness (12 per cent) and tolerance (11 per cent).

Conservative backers put patriotism at the top their list of important values. Liberals and New Democrats ranked equality as their first choice.

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2016/09/10/canadians-favour-screening-immigrant-values-poll-shows.html

Prospective immigrants are just going to say whatever will get them a visa.

Whatever survey they are given must first be standardized on a good sample of Canadians to determine what "Canadian values" actually are, what the range of opinion is and the variance among existing Canadians.

Then it would have to be determined what variance would be allowed among immigrants: The same as existing Canadians? More variation? Less variation?

And what to do with the existing Canadians who fall outside the allowable variances?

Deport them where possible?

Strip them of citizenship?

Deny them benefits and services?

/sarcasm

And ... for heaven's sake ... how on earth are such restrictions consistent with the most important Canadian value of all ... "2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

(a) freedom of conscience and religion;

(b ) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, ..."

?!?!?!

Maybe first we should be screening existing Canadians to see whether they actually agree with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

.

Edited September 13, 2016 by jacee

Smoke · September 13, 2016

I think Kellie Leitch and the majority of Canadians have not thought this through, as we are doing here:

Conducting such a "screening" of prospective immigrants would be an expensive and ridiculous farce.

When asked to choose the values respondents believe are important, equality came out on top (27 per cent), followed by patriotism (15 per cent), fairness (12 per cent) and tolerance (11 per cent).

Conservative backers put patriotism at the top their list of important values. Liberals and New Democrats ranked equality as their first choice.

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2016/09/10/canadians-favour-screening-immigrant-values-poll-shows.html

Prospective immigrants are just going to say whatever will get them a visa.

Whatever survey they are given must first be standardized on a good sample of Canadians to determine what "Canadian values" actually are, what the range of opinion is and the variance among existing Canadians.

Then it would have to be determined what variance would be allowed among immigrants: The same as existing Canadians? More variation? Less variation?

And what to do with the existing Canadians who fall outside the allowable variances?

Deport them where possible?

Strip them of citizenship?

Deny them benefits and services?

/sarcasm

Ohhhh...Okay, I get it now. Only jacee and the rest of the 26 to 33% that are against screening have thought this through. The rest of us are just a bunch of dumb racist xenophobes.

/sarcasm

Smallc · September 13, 2016

Kenney spent most of his time in parliament wooing ethnic groups and incorporating them into his party's political strategies. He approaches the question from purely that perspective. Ie, will this harm or hurt us at the ballot box. Like all politicians over the past fifty years he sees the primary purpose of immigration as being to benefit his party.

In other words, he knows more about it than most people.

No, it does not. For the most part values vary within a narrow range. Something like executing gays is way outside that range. So is total segregation between men and women.

And that's meaningless. We don't execute anyone. Canada is one of the few countries that not only allows but embraces the full range of gay rights. That's what sets Canada apart. You don't agree, and you're out of step.

But the number that do doubled, and the number wearing the hijab is now more than 50%

And the number is still tiny. The Hijab is nothing to be scared of. It's a hat.

While only 5% of immigrants say their attachment to Islam weakened since arriving, 41% say it's strengthened.

So what? They're in a free country and can practice their religion as they see fit.

They're also less tolerant of liberal values, as the study explains: "Muslims are more likely than other Canadians to value patriarchy ('the father must be the master in the home') and to reject homosexuality."

And you're less tolerant of liberal values than I am. I'm less tolerant than Cybercoma. He's less tolerant than Jacee. I don't get why I'm supposed to think this is a big deal.

Edited September 13, 2016 by Smallc

jacee · September 13, 2016

Ohhhh...Okay, I get it now. Only jacee and the rest of the 26 to 33% that are against screening have thought this through. The rest of us are just a bunch of dumb racist xenophobes.

/sarcasm

Can you tell me how to create a valid survey of opinions/values?

How would you make sure people don't just respond with what you want to hear?

I'm not opposed to it in principle.

But I do understand the complexity of such a survey.

It would be very expensive and of questionable validity.

.

Argus · September 13, 2016

In other words, he knows more about it than most people.

If by that you mean he knows more about getting votes from ethnic groups, sure. How is that actually relevant to this discussion?

And that's meaningless. We don't execute anyone. Canada is one of the few countries that not only allows but embraces the full range of gay rights. That's what sets Canada apart. You don't agree, and you're out of step.

If you DO agree you're out of step with Islam. So no, it's not meaningless. It demonstrates the depth of commitment to extreme and violent punishments for moral behaviour which goes against the Islamic code.

And the number is still tiny. The Hijab is nothing to be scared of. It's a hat.

It's a commitment to Islam, not secular Islam, but dedicated, fundamentalist Islam. You don't wear that getup every single day of your life and then blithely ignore the rest of the moral code of Islam. This is what you progressives seem to have adopted as a common view. That just because they're so dedicated to Islam it impacts their daily life every single day doesn't mean they actually give a damn about Islam and its rules and laws! How you've convinced yourself of this is really beyond me.

It reminds me of when the NDP made the mistake of recruiting Maher Arar's hijab wearing wife as a candidate here in Ottawa, to demonstrate how inclusive they were, and then someone asked her about the NDP's gay rights positions. Her response was that of course there was no way she would ever support gay rights or vote for them. Whoops. Seems the NDP simply assumed that getup was just for show. Good thing for them she lost or they'd have faced the embarrassing prospect of booting their Muslim heroine out of the party.

So what? They're in a free country and can practice their religion as they see fit.

Ultra-Orthodox Jews do that, but their religious values don't get pushed onto others and they don't have the numbers. Muslims are not so self-effacing. They have demonstrated that in every western country where their numbers have grown to the size they feel confident of being able to agitate for their values and laws to be recognized and accepted by society.

And you're less tolerant of liberal values than I am. I'm less tolerant than Cybercoma. He's less tolerant than Jacee. I don't get why I'm supposed to think this is a big deal.

Because unlike you I am can foresee where things are heading. You don't seem to care enough, nor do you or other progressives seem to have the ability to understand that it's easier to confront a problem before it becomes insoluble. You're like the French from thirty years ago. "Ah, what could happen?"

Argus · September 13, 2016

Can you tell me how to create a valid survey of opinions/values?

How would you make sure people don't just respond with what you want to hear?

I'm not opposed to it in principle.

But I do understand the complexity of such a survey.

It would be very expensive and of questionable validity.

Why do you suppose so many large corporations go through the added expense of subjecting their candidates to personality screening? Because they like wasting money? If they didn't find it worked they wouldn't be doing it. Can they be fooled? Of course! But how many people are going to spend hours carefully researching personality tests to give themselves an edge in fooling them? A few, but not very many.

Edited September 13, 2016 by Argus

Smallc · September 13, 2016

If by that you mean he knows more about getting votes from ethnic groups, sure. How is that actually relevant to this discussion?

He knows more about their actual communities and what actually goes on there.

If you DO agree you're out of step with Islam. So no, it's not meaningless. It demonstrates the depth of commitment to extreme and violent punishments for moral behaviour which goes against the Islamic code.

It's a commitment to Islam, not secular Islam, but dedicated, fundamentalist Islam. You don't wear that getup every single day of your life and then blithely ignore the rest of the moral code of Islam.

This is your interpretation of that stats - an interpretation not supported by reality or by the quotes accompanying the survey that you are referencing.

This is what you progressives seem to have adopted as a common view. That just because they're so dedicated to Islam it impacts their daily life every single day doesn't mean they actually give a damn about Islam and its rules and laws! How you've convinced yourself of this is really beyond me.

I know a lot of really dedicated Christians. Their views don't stop them from being generally good people. It doesn't mean that I don't find some of what they say and think abhorrent. I find a lot of what you say and think abhorrent.

Because unlike you I am can foresee where things are heading. You don't seem to care enough, nor do you or other progressives seem to have the ability to understand that it's easier to confront a problem before it becomes insoluble. You're like the French from thirty years ago. "Ah, what could happen?"

You see things the way that you do because of the bias that you hold. Toronto's Islamic population is by now above 8%, and it hasn't been any more of a problem than any other group.

DogOnPorch · September 13, 2016

The Quran is very specific on homosexuality and behaving like the people of Lot. No guessing needed.

https://quran.com/7:80 (Several verses starting 80)

Yikes...rain down those stones.

Edited September 13, 2016 by DogOnPorch

Smallc · September 13, 2016

The Quran is very specific on homosexuality and behaving like the people of Lot. No guessing needed.

https://quran.com/7:80 (Several verses starting 80)

Yikes...rain down those stones.

The bible is just as specific.

DogOnPorch · September 13, 2016

The bible is just as specific.

Where d'yah think Lot comes from...eh?

DogOnPorch · September 13, 2016

Oh...are you going to the stonings later? I hear the Xtians have a good assortment of witches set for roasting.

In other words...I think we've gotten past stonings.

The_Squid · September 13, 2016

Oh...are you going to the stonings later? I hear the Xtians have a good assortment of witches set for roasting.

In other words...I think we've gotten past stonings.

Yes we have... Not all Christians have though....

Recent reports by UNICEF, UNHCR, Save The Children and Human Rights Watch^[5]^[6]^[7]^[8] have also highlighted the violence and abuse towards children accused of witchcraft in Africa. Accusations of witchcraft in Africa are a very serious matter as the witch is culturally understood to be the epitome of evil and the cause of all misfortune, disease and death. Consequently, the witch is the most hated person in African society and subjected to punishment, torture and even death.^[9]^[10]

The victims of witchcraft accusations in African society have usually been the elderly, the disabled, albinos and anyone who was considered different.^[11]^[12]^[13] In recent years due to the impact of rapid urbanisation, economic decline, as well as the HIV/AIDS pandemic, children have become more and more the victims of witchcraft accusations, especially orphans. Child victims of witchcraft accusations are more vulnerable than adult victims as they cannot defend themselves as they are confronted with physical and psychological abuse from their family and community.^[14]

Children accused of witchcraft may be subjected to violent exorcism rituals by African Pentecostal-Charismatic pastors who mix Christianity with African witchcraft beliefs. Such exorcism may include incarceration, starvation and being made to drink hazardous substances.^[14] In other cases accused children are expelled and end up living on the streets, are trafficked and in some instances they are killed.^[4]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witchcraft_accusations_against_children_in_Africa

cybercoma · September 13, 2016

An maybe Canadians do need to be taught the same thing. We could make it a requirement for high school graduation too.

Expecting people to understand the laws of the country they are coming to is a perfectly reasonable thing. More importantly, it is relatively objective since we have actual court cases to use as a basis for creating scenarios. Also the tests do not have to be written using legal jargon. As far as memorization: that is actually the point. If they have to memorize concepts so they can pass the test then there is a high probability that they learn the elements of Canadian law which they may not be familiar with.

A more relevant question: why are you so desperate to let people into this country without any attempt to educate them? Would you rather see people break laws because no one told them what the laws are?

Educate them? You're talking about memorizing our country's laws. Do you know how much legislation there is? And to what end? You can look up any law you want online. Even the top legal scholars don't have ever law in the country memorized. When they're done with the Criminal Code of Canada, should they memorize the Highway Traffic Acts in all 10 provinces. Should they understand the intricacies of both common law and the civil code?

My point is that it's a silly request because very few people have legislation memorized; memorizing legislation is no guarantee that someone is going to follow it; and memorizing legislation is completely unnecessary when it's so easy to look up.

By the bye, there is a question in the citizenship test that addresses the fact that Québec uses the civil code. Someone on a contract here to work for a few months doesn't need to memorize legislation. A student who's only here for a few months at a time before going home for holidays and the summer doesn't need to memorize legislation. Those people don't even have access to our social services, yet they're counted as immigrants here on visas.

This is the problem with these discussions. People are opinionated about things they don't understand. They don't know who immigrants are or they conflate all the various types of immigration, ie, temporary visas with permanent residents or immigrants with refugees. These topics are annoying as shit because people don't know what they're talking about here.

DogOnPorch · September 13, 2016

Yes we have... Not all Christians have though....

They were burning witches in Africa well before any Lutheran showed-up. It might surprise you, but black folk have odd beliefs about the supernatural, too.

cybercoma · September 13, 2016

And the number is still tiny. The Hijab is nothing to be scared of. It's a hat.

Not to mention that it's not only worn by Muslims but also Orthodox Jews, Hindus, and Roman Catholics. But Muslims bad, rabble rabble.

DogOnPorch · September 13, 2016

Not to mention that it's not only worn by Muslims but also Orthodox Jews, Hindus, and Roman Catholics. But Muslims bad, rabble rabble.

As I've mentioned here in this thread and the others no doubt, the tiny number argument assumes Canadians will accept a certain level of "radical" Islam and the problems/casualties known to be associated with the religion.

Is that the deal? Perhaps then provide me with car crash statistics to 'sooth my worries'?

Edited September 13, 2016 by DogOnPorch

cybercoma · September 13, 2016

Wearing a hijab doesn't make someone a radical, unless you consider someone like Malala Yousafzai an extreme radical bent on the destruction of Western values.