Ok, so I found another article. This article discusses the right to protect families under Article 8 of Human Rights law. It stresses somes of the main topics we have discussed in class. A "life sentence" will be placed on this couple and either their family will stay together or be torn apart. I think that keeping families together is important and that some type of system should be made to try to keep families together, whether it is in a host country or an individual's country of origin.
Also, the article discusses past violent abuse on one of the women by her former husband. Will women who have been abused be the next social group under asylum law? What would the consquences of that be?
I think that strict regulations need to be enforced and followed when dealing with asylum cases, but I also feel that it is just not humane to separate families. Some individuals do not have anything to rely on in their lives besides family members. In the end, if we cannot even have enough compassion to keep loved ones together, how can we ever have enough sympathy, morality or compassion to deal with giving human beings international rights or legal protection? I am in no way saying certain people should not be deported, but shouldn't there be some type of way to keep families together if they want to be?
Monday, April 10, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
War against Euphoria
Hate Hope and Human Rights At least that's what the addicts describe it as. In 2020 alone, an estimated 9.5 million Americans, just A...
-
The United States has consistently tiptoed around Chinese human rights issues. An American politician may occasional issue a condemnation ...
-
The UN will celebrate its 60th birthday on October 24th. But as Meg L., suggests below, not many will be celebrating. Chris B, goes a step f...
6 comments:
Uhm……………I just read this article and I’m not sure but I think that they’re talking about lesbians, who have been granted asylum staying together as a family. Is this correct? I can’t imagine that this is the case.
Yes, Madmax -- that is correct -- one can win asylum on the basis of membership in a particular social group -- which includes homosexuality.
You gotta be kidding me. You mean that governments give asylum to people who choose a lifestyle that is unnatural and if you ask me sick. Please don’t argue the point that this is something other than a choice. The gay agenda has tried, time and time again, to prove there is a 'gay gene'. Such attempts have turned out barren. Firstly, it is obviously not 'natural' to be born gay. Take animals for example; when was the last time you say a male zebra mate with another male zebra? You didn't, because it isn't natural. If it isn't natural in ANY other animal on this planet, who's to say we're special and have that gene within us?
I’m a grad student at a university in Philadelphia. I heard about this blog site from a friend of a friend who had taken a class at F & M. Up until now I’ve simply read some of the posting and articles. However, this article on asylum and family life really touched me personally. I wanted to share my own experience on asylum hoping that it would give real meaning to this emotional topic.
First of all I’m a lesbian who happens to be African American. My partner is from Liberia. She received political asylum 2 years ago in Philadelphia based on the persecution she suffered in her home country due to her sexuality. Luckily for us, she had a very, VERY sympathetic judge who listened to her case for three hours and now she is one of the few women in the United States who have been granted political asylum based on their sexual identification-- she is an amazing woman.
I went to the trial with her as a witness where I had to disclose of our sexual activities to prove that she was indeed a lesbian. My testimony, along with her medical records documenting her abuse, and her own testimony persuaded the judge to grant her plea for asylum. The department of homeland security, threatened to file motion of appeal against her, but did not.
For many folks, seeking asylum is seen as a last resort because of the consequences. First of all gaining political asylum, does not automatically guarantee that you will become a U.S. citizen, secondly you are not allowed to travel back to your home country for a period five years, which means you have to leave behind relatives and friends for that extended period of time; and there are little public services that help with the financial aspects of starting a new life here in America, political asylum is unimaginably hard to receive--even more so for people who seek it on the basis of their sexual identity. It’s hard for me to comprehend being tortured because of sexual identity. It’s even harder for me to think that I live in a country where not everyone is open to granting asylum to those who have been tortured because of their sexual orientation. Who the hell are you MadMax to suggest that being gay is a choice? Do you actually think that someone would choose to leave his or her family, be tortured by their government and leave everything that is familiar to them in exchange for a “sick relationship”? Perhaps you’ve heard the saying MadMax; walk a mile in my moccasins and then………………….
Dear Tanisha:
Gays and lesbians disgust me to the bone, and quite frankly, I think it disgusts the vast majority of this nation. No wonder a growing number of nations are beginning to detest the USA.
We are becoming more lawless as the generations progress. These countries scoff at us when they see you people prance around in the streets as if your "alternate" lifestyle is normal. Well it's not.
Now, you filthy people are trying to raise children, and you are failing miserably at it. All you are doing is INFECTING our offspring with the idea that it is acceptable to live with no discipline or morals, and ultimately you will be held accountable for your actions.
I’m a gay student at MU who isn’t “out” yet. I’m afraid that when people find out it will blow them away and change how they feel about, and act toward me. You see I don’t look gay, you know a lipstick lesbian. Anyway I know that our dear President Bush is totally against gay marriage and in fact came up with a list as to why. I thought I’d share that list with you. Check it out!
Top 10 reasons that gays shouldn’t be allowed to marry:
1. Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, liposuction and air conditioning.
2. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.
3. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract. And everyone knows that gay people constitute their own species, not of the homo sapiens nature.
4. Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can't marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.
5. Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Britney Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.
6. Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren't full yet, and the world needs more children.
7. Obviously, gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.
8. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That's why we have only one religion in America.
9. Children can never succeed without both a male and a female role model at home. That's why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.
Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven't adapted to cars, or longer life spans...
Post a Comment