Should Canada screen potential immigrants/refugees for Canadian Values

[Argus]

Let's start with queston number one:

Should a person be discriminated against on the basis of belief independently of whether he has committed any crime?

Why not? You do it. I do it. Everyone does it.

[Argus]

Yeah, I don't get what Rue (or Argus) are asking for either. We don't like Nazi's. I don't want to live next to a Nazi or have anything to do with Nazi's. Yet it is not illegal nor criminal to hold Nazi beliefs.

But you WILL be living next to and among Nazis if we bring them over in sufficient numbers, year after year. And their beliefs WILL begin to influence your society towards the direction of their beliefs and demands.

[Guest]

This is the kind of answer I put down to ivory tower intellectualizing. It ignores reality in favour of theory.

Ie, if you bring over hundreds of thousands of paedophiles every year, as long as they haven't molested children yet and promise not to, then that's okay.

But what people DO is influenced by what they THINK. Most will not molest children in Canada, but some will. And inevitably, the larger the population of paedophiles, the more children will be molested. That is the downside to your intellectualizing. What is the upside? There is none. So you choose a policy with likely downsides and no upsides except satisfying your sense of nobility in not discriminating against foreigners on the basis of their thoughts and beliefs.

It has nothing to do with foreigners. I just don't subscribe to the notion that one should be punished for what they think. That applies to everyone.

Even if I don't like what they think.

[Guest]

You might feel differently if you were a Jew. I doubt a Jew would think "No problem bringing over hundreds of thousands of Jew haters every year. They'll obey the law, after all."

I also doubt women will be comforted that all those violently misogynistic Muslim men coming to live here only 'think' they are filthy whores who deserve to be raped and beaten for the way they dress and act. After all, who would suspect that any of them would act on their thoughts in any way.

I mean, honestly, who ever ACTS on what they believe?

See above. Act when they act.

[Argus]

It has nothing to do with foreigners. I just don't subscribe to the notion that one should be punished for what they think. That applies to everyone.

Even if I don't like what they think.

I don't either. But we're not talking about punishing. And we're not talking about Canadians. We're talking about being selective in who we want coming to live among us and around us. We have the choice to refine who we select according to who will make the best fit here and have the most positive impact on our society. Why would we stand on some kind of high theoretical moral horse and refuse to make a distinction between those who are likely to complement our value and those whose values run counter to ours?

[Guest]

I don't either. But we're not talking about punishing. And we're not talking about Canadians. We're talking about being selective in who we want coming to live among us and around us. We have the choice to refine who we select according to who will make the best fit here and have the most positive impact on our society. Why would we stand on some kind of high theoretical moral horse and refuse to make a distinction between those who are likely to complement our value and those whose values run counter to ours?

We don't. As I've advocated, show all potential immigrants exactly what is expected from them in terms of tolerance and behaviour, and then kick them out if they don't adher.

Hell, just asking them only invites a lie, anyway.

[Argus]

See above. Act when they act.

I'm sure that will be comforting to Jews when they get attacked on the street and we have to put armed police with automatic weapons outside every Jewish temple, school and community centre like the French do.

[Guest]

I'm sure that will be comforting to Jews when they get attacked on the street and we have to put armed police with automatic weapons outside every Jewish temple, school and community centre like the French do.

I'm sure it would be less comforting to them to see people marched off to some form of sanction for being just who they are.

[Argus]

We don't. As I've advocated, show all potential immigrants exactly what is expected from them in terms of tolerance and behaviour, and then kick them out if they don't adher.

Hell, just asking them only invites a lie, anyway.

Let's start from the point of reality that once they're accepted as immigrants they are here permanently. We are not going to kick them out. Period. So don't even mention it.

So once they're here and turn out to be highly INtolerent and contemptuous towards Jews/women/gays, there really isn't a whole lot we can do about it. Oh, if they get violent we can arrest them. But most of their interaction will, realistically, be non-violent. It will consist of active discrimination against women/gays/jews which they will do their best not to let be proven. Such people simply won't hire, promote or deal with women/gays/jews if they can possibly avoid it. And they will, in politics, support politicians who cater to their values. And of course, there will inevitably be a subset who will perform violence of various kinds, including supporting or even performing terrorist acts. Some will be caught. Many won't be.

This is the reality.

[Argus]

I'm sure it would be less comforting to them to see people marched off to some form of sanction for being just who they are.

Nobody is marching them anywhere given they are not Canadians and don't live here.

[Guest]

Let's start from the point of reality that once they're accepted as immigrants they are here permanently. We are not going to kick them out. Period. So don't even mention it.

So once they're here and turn out to be highly INtolerent and contemptuous towards Jews/women/gays, there really isn't a whole lot we can do about it. Oh, if they get violent we can arrest them. But most of their interaction will, realistically, be non-violent. It will consist of active discrimination against women/gays/jews which they will do their best not to let be proven. Such people simply won't hire, promote or deal with women/gays/jews if they can possibly avoid it. And they will, in politics, support politicians who cater to their values. And of course, there will inevitably be a subset who will perform violence of various kinds, including supporting or even performing terrorist acts. Some will be caught. Many won't be.

This is the reality.

If we're talking about reality let's talk about the answers people will give to any questions you ask. Or would it be just area based?

[Guest]

Nobody is marching them anywhere given they are not Canadians and don't live here.

Sorry, I saw "French".

Still, the Jews had experience of not being let in because of who they were. I doubt they would advocate it for others.

Edited October 1, 2016 by bcsapper

[Argus]

If we're talking about reality let's talk about the answers people will give to any questions you ask. Or would it be just area based?

You don't ask direct questions in these tests. Just like employers doing personality screening don't ask "Are you going to steal from us?" or "Are you lazy?"

[Argus]

Sorry, I saw "French".

Still, the Jews had experience of not being let in because of who they were. I doub't they would advocate it for others.

The Jews weren't let in because of ignorance. No one is making stuff up about Muslims. We can look directly at their countries, at their self-expressed culture and values, and see there is a lot of stuff there which is extremely hostile to the kind of society we want to live in. I would say the same to letting in Hassidim Jews, by the way.

[Guest]

The Jews weren't let in because of ignorance. No one is making stuff up about Muslims. We can look directly at their countries, at their self-expressed culture and values, and see there is a lot of stuff there which is extremely hostile to the kind of society we want to live in. I would say the same to letting in Hassidim Jews, by the way.

Sure. Jews, Muslims, Nazis, Witch Doctors, anyone.

Please don't get the idea that I am somehow defending Islam, or am an advocate of cultural equivalency, or any some such BS. I disagree with you on the methods of protecting western society from the ravages of an insane religion based culture of intolerance, by waiting for someone to actually do something before I become intolerant. I want to be intolerant for a reason.

[Guest]

You don't ask direct questions in these tests. Just like employers doing personality screening don't ask "Are you going to steal from us?" or "Are you lazy?"

I remember filling out a questionnaire when I came in. How would the screening be different?

[Argus]

Sure. Jews, Muslims, Nazis, Witch Doctors, anyone.

by waiting for someone to actually do something before I become intolerant. I want to be intolerant for a reason.

Witch doctors in Africa are known to murder mulattoes to use their body parts in spells. I wonder how you would feel if you were a mullato and your local government was doing its best to bring more witch doctors to come and live in the area. And when you expressed concern they said "Don't worry. If they murder you we'll definitely try to punish them for it."

[Argus]

I remember filling out a questionnaire when I came in. How would the screening be different?

Have you ever taken a personality test as part of a job application? These tests look for how adaptable, flexible your thinking is, how likely you are to be a self-starter, to be obedient to orders, to get along with co-workers, to be honest and take pride in your job. They tend to have scores of questions that are multiple choice, some of them seemingly of no importance. In fact, some of them ARE of no importance but they're leading questions, designed to lead into and around various personality subjects that they know nobody is going to speak openly about. They're not perfect, of course, but as a screening test they do indicate a lot about applicants and can be used for followup interviews.

[Guest]

Witch doctors in Africa are known to murder mulattoes to use their body parts in spells. I wonder how you would feel if you were a mullato and your local government was doing its best to bring more witch doctors to come and live in the area. And when you expressed concern they said "Don't worry. If they murder you we'll definitely try to punish them for it."

Conversely, if a former Witch Doctor was trying to escape from that life I would feel pretty bad about not giving him the chance based on what some of his former colleagues are doing.

[Guest]

Have you ever taken a personality test as part of a job application? These tests look for how adaptable, flexible your thinking is, how likely you are to be a self-starter, to be obedient to orders, to get along with co-workers, to be honest and take pride in your job. They tend to have scores of questions that are multiple choice, some of them seemingly of no importance. In fact, some of them ARE of no importance but they're leading questions, designed to lead into and around various personality subjects that they know nobody is going to speak openly about. They're not perfect, of course, but as a screening test they do indicate a lot about applicants and can be used for followup interviews.

I've done the Briggs Myers. It was bang on.

It would only show what I was capable of doing, though. Not what I will do.

Are you advocating this test for everyone, regardless of where they are coming from?

[CITIZEN_2015]

Certain applicants who have the intend or even potential to come here and impose their backward way of life or change our lives because they think their way is better should be barred from coming here. I don't know exactly how this can be determine maybe left to the interviewing officer to determine. That said I am very much against regional ban as many good progressive deserving hard working people who happened to have been born in certain region out of no fault of their own will be barred to come to Canada and contribute.

Edited October 10, 2016 by CITIZEN_2015

[Machjo]

I absolutely don't trust leaving it up to an immigration officer's judgement. Any such test must be measurably objective by some kind of metric. Imagine the chaos otherwise. One officer would refuse the black man. Another officer would refuse the one who believes gay marriage is wrong, another officer would refuse the one who believes gay marriage should be made legal. Another officer would ban the one who believes human life begins at conception. Another officer would refuse the one who believes a woman should have the right to abort right up to the time the child is born. In short, each officer would be judging based on his own opinion of what he thinks Canadian values are.

Anarchy.

[Machjo]

Given how I believe that human life begins at concepton and that marriage is between a man and a woman, even I would not pass Leitch's test.

[Argus]

Conversely, if a former Witch Doctor was trying to escape from that life I would feel pretty bad about not giving him the chance based on what some of his former colleagues are doing.

No, you actually wouldn't. But it hardly matters. Our immigration system is not a worldwide charity to help foreigners improve their lives and lifestyles. It's supposed to be for the benefit of the people of Canada.

[Guest]

No, you actually wouldn't. But it hardly matters. Our immigration system is not a worldwide charity to help foreigners improve their lives and lifestyles. It's supposed to be for the benefit of the people of Canada.

In that case why take in refugees? Why me? I didn't help. I just married a Canuck.