Refugee Status

[Coyote]

So...who merits refugee status?

According to the political Right, this family's "travails" galvanized vociferous actions to grant them refugee status. And for what reason? They weren't politically or economically oppressed. They weren't persecuted for religious reasons. Their lives weren't in danger. Their home country had a law against home schooling. That was it.

German home-school family can stay in U.S. indefinitely - Washington Times


Then, you have the plight of thousands of children fleeing atrocities in Central America: murder, gangs, human trafficking and child rape.

The awful reason tens of thousands of children are seeking refuge in the United States - Vox

Children are uniquely vulnerable to gang violence. The street gangs known as "maras" — M-18 and Mara Salvatrucha, or MS-13 — target kids for forced recruitment, usually in their early teenage years, but sometimes as young as kindergarten. They also forcibly recruit girls as "girlfriends," a euphemistic term for a non-consensual relationship that involves rape by one or more gang members.

These are the people that the Republicans want to alter our laws so that we can more quickly deport them back to the violence from which they fled.

It's crazy.

Immigration poll reveals partisan rift over Central American refugees | World news | theguardian.com
70% of Republicans believe these children should NOT be treated as refugees and granted assylum. But this home-schooling family should. WHY?

 

[Rikurzhen]

In the case of the Germans, it is the State who is the oppressor. In the case of the Latin Americans, the State is not causing the hardship, there are locales within the state which bypass the hardships you list.

Incidentally, the hardships you list are also facing children in Detroit and Chicago and Los Angeles. Taking a kid from Honduras and plunking him down into an LA barrio doesn't change anything.

 

[Coyote]

In the case of the Germans, it is the State who is the oppressor. In the case of the Latin Americans, the State is not causing the hardship, there are locales within the state which bypass the hardships you list.

The state is not oppressing. It's not different than the state setting minimum criteria for education. In the case of those countries in central America the state IS causing the hardship by it's inability to maintain law and order or protect it's citizens.

Incidentally, the hardships you list are also facing children in Detroit and Chicago and Los Angeles. Taking a kid from Honduras and plunking him down into an LA barrio doesn't change anything.

Children in Detroit and Los Angeles are protected under the law and by law enforcement - it may not get reported always - but the laws are there and usually enforced. That's a key difference.

 

[1776]

Uh, nothing has changed in Central America since the 1970s....they are now invading our country since Obama is promising them amnesty and all kinds of free shit paid for by people like me.

 

[Coyote]

Uh, nothing has changed in Central America since the 1970s....they are now invading our country since Obama is promising them amnesty and all kinds of free shit paid for by people like me.

umh...well...so is this German family. What gives? Why the hypocrisy?

 

[Rikurzhen]

The state is not oppressing. It's not different than the state setting minimum criteria for education.

The cause of claim focused on the state's actions. The compulsory inculcation of state sanctioned propaganda overriding the parent's wishes to teach their children otherwise.

Let's pick a topic you may find objectionable - say state sanctioned racial superiority and now your kids are forced to be taught this in public schools. Granted, that's an extreme example but it illustrates the principle in play.

The German issue was focused on philosophic issues, not skills (language mastery, math mastery, etc)

In the case of those countries in central America the state IS causing the hardship by it's inability to maintain law and order or protect it's citizens.

Does this mean that every resident in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California can apply for refugee status in Canada because Obama is unwilling to enforce border security?

The unavoidable issue here is that there are SAFE locales within each country, and more importantly from an International Refugee Law perspective, there are SAFE locales BETWEEN the origin country and the US. A refugee is supposed to seek refuge in the FIRST country they enter, not shop around for the best and most generous environment. The point, after all, is to find immediate refuge of a temporary nature and then return back to the nation once the crisis has passed. This is why adjacent countries which can provide safe harbor are ideal and mandated by law.

 

[1776]

Uhhhh, they were religious refugees from their country.

Also, I highly doubt they are living on welfare in this country and they speak ENGLISH.

So let's compare them to ILLEGALS that didn't come here through legal avenues, are here to take our welfare benefits and can't speak English.

Uh, nothing has changed in Central America since the 1970s....they are now invading our country since Obama is promising them amnesty and all kinds of free shit paid for by people like me.

umh...well...so is this German family. What gives? Why the hypocrisy?

 

[Coyote]

Uhhhh, they were religious refugees from their country.

They weren't persecuted for religion.

And, come to think of it - why is religious persecution (presumably only upperclass European origin white Christians) more of a reason than violence, sex trafficking and being put to death?

Also, I highly doubt they are living on welfare in this country and they speak ENGLISH.

That's an unknown, and a non-starter. The vast majority of immigrants do not live on welfare, particularly illegals who are prevented by law.

So let's compare them to ILLEGALS that didn't come here through legal avenues, are here to take our welfare benefits and can't speak English.

The German family was here illegally. Anyone can learn English (and most do, certainly by the second generation) What's your point?

 

[Coyote]

The state is not oppressing. It's not different than the state setting minimum criteria for education.

The cause of claim focused on the state's actions. The compulsory inculcation of state sanctioned propaganda overriding the parent's wishes to teach their children otherwise.

Using that - anyone in any country that mandates education can claim potential persecution.

Let's pick a topic you may find objectionable - say state sanctioned racial superiority and now your kids are forced to be taught this in public schools. Granted, that's an extreme example but it illustrates the principle in play.

I see the principle you are talking about - however, I question whether it's a legitimate reason to claim assylum.

The German issue was focused on philosophic issues, not skills (language mastery, math mastery, etc)

In the case of those countries in central America the state IS causing the hardship by it's inability to maintain law and order or protect it's citizens.

Does this mean that every resident in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California can apply for refugee status in Canada because Obama is unwilling to enforce border security?

No. Because their lives are not in danger. One of the the points considered in whether to grant a person assylum is whether their lives would be in danger if they were returned.

The German family was certainly not in danger and, if they did not like what was taught in public schools could have opted for private education or extra-curricular teaching on their own.

The unavoidable issue here is that there are SAFE locales within each country, and more importantly from an International Refugee Law perspective, there are SAFE locales BETWEEN the origin country and the US. A refugee is supposed to seek refuge in the FIRST country they enter, not shop around for the best and most generous environment. The point, after all, is to find immediate refuge of a temporary nature and then return back to the nation once the crisis has passed. This is why adjacent countries which can provide safe harbor are ideal and mandated by law.

How safe? How safe is Mexico? We've all heard about the violence, drug cartels, and human trafficking that occurs. And, if that is a legitimate rationale - the German family certainly had many safe havens prior to the US. What about Cuban refugees? Closest nation is Haiti.

 

[gallantwarrior]

In the case of the Germans, it is the State who is the oppressor. In the case of the Latin Americans, the State is not causing the hardship, there are locales within the state which bypass the hardships you list.

Incidentally, the hardships you list are also facing children in Detroit and Chicago and Los Angeles. Taking a kid from Honduras and plunking him down into an LA barrio doesn't change anything.

It actually makes it pretty unpleasant. If the bario is populated with those of Mexican descent, the Honduran kid...well, it would be like dropping a Sunni muslim into a Shiia neighborhood.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Using that - anyone in any country that mandates education can claim potential persecution.

But Germany seems to be quite unique in their war on homeschooling. If other States are not as totalitarian then claims won't arise from citizens of other states, and to the best of my knowledge, such claims are not common.

I see the principle you are talking about - however, I question whether it's a legitimate reason to claim assylum.

Being forced to think a certain way is a direct assault on liberty. There seems to be a hierarchy of principles at work - protecting liberty is deemed more important than creating convenient lifestyles free of hardship or free of personal violence.

We offer refuge to people who are victims of war or state-sanctioned violence, but we don't offer refuge to people who are victims of the Mafia or local hoods.

No. Because their lives are not in danger. One of the the points considered in whether to grant a person assylum is whether their lives would be in danger if they were returned.

There have been a number of murders and intimidations of Americans who live near the border. Again I ask, having met your condition, does this mean that Canada must offer refugee status to an American rancher from Arizona?

How safe? How safe is Mexico? We've all heard about the violence, drug cartels, and human trafficking that occurs. And, if that is a legitimate rationale - the German family certainly had many safe havens prior to the US. What about Cuban refugees? Closest nation is Haiti.

Safe enough. If Carlos the drug king pin in Managua is threatening your life and you find refuge in a hovel in Mexico, then Carlos is no longer threatening you. The immediate danger has passed. You're still alive. That's all that counts. Giving you a good life is not part of the bargain.

As for crimes in Mexico, again we're talking localized events. This is NOWHERE near what we saw with Sarajevo snipers where just stepping outside of your door subjected you to a very real possibility of a bullet in the head. Life goes on in Mexico. Everyone is not under dire threat of assassination.

A refugee is supposed to apply to their nearest country, not their ideal country.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Uh, nothing has changed in Central America since the 1970s....they are now invading our country since Obama is promising them amnesty and all kinds of free shit paid for by people like me.

umh...well...so is this German family. What gives? Why the hypocrisy?

And the German family is pawing the US taxpayers' pockets for a handout? As I understand their situation, they are not even a burden to our (failing) educational system.

 

[Howey]

So...who merits refugee status?

According to the political Right, this family's "travails" galvanized vociferous actions to grant them refugee status. And for what reason? They weren't politically or economically oppressed. They weren't persecuted for religious reasons. Their lives weren't in danger. Their home country had a law against home schooling. That was it.

German home-school family can stay in U.S. indefinitely - Washington Times


Then, you have the plight of thousands of children fleeing atrocities in Central America: murder, gangs, human trafficking and child rape.

The awful reason tens of thousands of children are seeking refuge in the United States - Vox

Children are uniquely vulnerable to gang violence. The street gangs known as "maras" — M-18 and Mara Salvatrucha, or MS-13 — target kids for forced recruitment, usually in their early teenage years, but sometimes as young as kindergarten. They also forcibly recruit girls as "girlfriends," a euphemistic term for a non-consensual relationship that involves rape by one or more gang members.

These are the people that the Republicans want to alter our laws so that we can more quickly deport them back to the violence from which they fled.

It's crazy.

Immigration poll reveals partisan rift over Central American refugees | World news | theguardian.com
70% of Republicans believe these children should NOT be treated as refugees and granted assylum. But this home-schooling family should. WHY?

I've been following this story for a while...It's not that Germany bans home schooling (their public schools are among the best in the world btw), it's that this family wasn't allowed to teach their children an evangelical lying extremist curriculum in Germany.

 

[Jughead]

So...who merits refugee status?

According to the political Right, this family's "travails" galvanized vociferous actions to grant them refugee status. And for what reason? They weren't politically or economically oppressed. They weren't persecuted for religious reasons. Their lives weren't in danger. Their home country had a law against home schooling. That was it.

German home-school family can stay in U.S. indefinitely - Washington Times


Then, you have the plight of thousands of children fleeing atrocities in Central America: murder, gangs, human trafficking and child rape.

The awful reason tens of thousands of children are seeking refuge in the United States - Vox

Children are uniquely vulnerable to gang violence. The street gangs known as "maras" — M-18 and Mara Salvatrucha, or MS-13 — target kids for forced recruitment, usually in their early teenage years, but sometimes as young as kindergarten. They also forcibly recruit girls as "girlfriends," a euphemistic term for a non-consensual relationship that involves rape by one or more gang members.

These are the people that the Republicans want to alter our laws so that we can more quickly deport them back to the violence from which they fled.

It's crazy.

Immigration poll reveals partisan rift over Central American refugees | World news | theguardian.com
70% of Republicans believe these children should NOT be treated as refugees and granted assylum. But this home-schooling family should. WHY?

Good for the Romeike family. They went through the process, and obtained asylum.

However, they had to demonstrate the following...

1. Was the punishment that the Romeikes would have faced upon being deported back to Germany sufficiently severe enough to count as persecution?

2. Was the motive of the German government marked, at least in part, by a desire to repress the family’s exercise of their religious beliefs?

For the first question, it was agreed that if the family returned to Germany and continued to homeschool their kids, they would face the threat of losing custody of their children and going to jail. As a parent, you can't get anymore severe punishment than losing your child.

In regards to the second question, a government should not be permitted to force a parent to have their children attend a school that violates their religious beliefs. Everyone has a right to religious freedoms. They made the choice to homeschool because of teaching in public schools on homosexuality, abortion and other issues that violated the family’s Christian faith.

The illegals that are currently showing up in huge numbers at the border, for the most part do not satisfy the above two criteria for asylum.

 

[Coyote]

Uh, nothing has changed in Central America since the 1970s....they are now invading our country since Obama is promising them amnesty and all kinds of free shit paid for by people like me.

umh...well...so is this German family. What gives? Why the hypocrisy?

And the German family is pawing the US taxpayers' pockets for a handout? As I understand their situation, they are not even a burden to our (failing) educational system.

No one is pawing for a handout - kids are a special category. Most immigrants come here to work and they work hard - legal or illegal. They are no different from this German family.

So why the hypocrisy? Why grant assylum to a family that has no real need but refuse it to children fleeing real violence and persecution?

 

[Coyote]

So...who merits refugee status?

According to the political Right, this family's "travails" galvanized vociferous actions to grant them refugee status. And for what reason? They weren't politically or economically oppressed. They weren't persecuted for religious reasons. Their lives weren't in danger. Their home country had a law against home schooling. That was it.

German home-school family can stay in U.S. indefinitely - Washington Times


Then, you have the plight of thousands of children fleeing atrocities in Central America: murder, gangs, human trafficking and child rape.

The awful reason tens of thousands of children are seeking refuge in the United States - Vox

Children are uniquely vulnerable to gang violence. The street gangs known as "maras" — M-18 and Mara Salvatrucha, or MS-13 — target kids for forced recruitment, usually in their early teenage years, but sometimes as young as kindergarten. They also forcibly recruit girls as "girlfriends," a euphemistic term for a non-consensual relationship that involves rape by one or more gang members.

These are the people that the Republicans want to alter our laws so that we can more quickly deport them back to the violence from which they fled.

It's crazy.

Immigration poll reveals partisan rift over Central American refugees | World news | theguardian.com
70% of Republicans believe these children should NOT be treated as refugees and granted assylum. But this home-schooling family should. WHY?

Good for the Romeike family. They went through the process, and obtained asylum.

They were here illegally. If they were Mexican or Latin American - people would be clamoring for them to be deported.

However, they had to demonstrate the following...

1. Was the punishment that the Romeikes would have faced upon being deported back to Germany sufficiently severe enough to count as persecution?

2. Was the motive of the German government marked, at least in part, by a desire to repress the family’s exercise of their religious beliefs?

For the first question, it was agreed that if the family returned to Germany and continued to homeschool their kids, they would face the threat of losing custody of their children and going to jail. As a parent, you can't get anymore severe punishment than losing your child.

In regards to the second question, a government should not be permitted to force a parent to have their children attend a school that violates their religious beliefs. Everyone has a right to religious freedoms. They made the choice to homeschool because of teaching in public schools on homosexuality, abortion and other issues that violated the family’s Christian faith.

The illegals that are currently showing up in huge numbers at the border, for the most part do not satisfy the above two criteria for asylum.

How do you know?

AND - if the Republicans change the law to allow more rapid deportation - how will we have a chance to know?

One example I read was a woman who's two young teenaged daughters were demanded by a gang for sex - she fled one city, only to be located by them and fled again until she was finally forced to leave the country to keep her daughters safe. The authorities could not or would not do anything. Talk about losing your children.

 

[gallantwarrior]

umh...well...so is this German family. What gives? Why the hypocrisy?

And the German family is pawing the US taxpayers' pockets for a handout? As I understand their situation, they are not even a burden to our (failing) educational system.

No one is pawing for a handout - kids are a special category. Most immigrants come here to work and they work hard - legal or illegal. They are no different from this German family.

So why the hypocrisy? Why grant assylum to a family that has no real need but refuse it to children fleeing real violence and persecution?

You are advocating child labor? Just which jobs will they be working hard at doing? There is a great difference between them and the Germans.
How are these "unaccompanied minors", many who are in fact accompanied by adults, even more who would not be considered minors under our laws, or would be prosecuted as adults here for the crimes they perpetrated in their previous "employment" in their home countries, even remotely eligible for refugee status? The responsibility for caring for them, for ensuring they have a safe environment and proper supervision belongs to the parents who gave such a shit for their well being that they sent them here in the first place.

 

[Howey]

umh...well...so is this German family. What gives? Why the hypocrisy?

And the German family is pawing the US taxpayers' pockets for a handout? As I understand their situation, they are not even a burden to our (failing) educational system.

No one is pawing for a handout - kids are a special category. Most immigrants come here to work and they work hard - legal or illegal. They are no different from this German family.

So why the hypocrisy? Why grant assylum to a family that has no real need but refuse it to children fleeing real violence and persecution?

Ooh! Ooh!

Mr Kotter! Mr Kotter!

Because the Germans don't have brown skin?????

 

[MACAULAY]

In case you Leftist Pinheads & Loons didn't notice, this new Rikouzhen dude is kicking your ass in this thread.

You should pretend you quit reading....and that means no more responses...you are getting embarrassed anyway.

 

[Coyote]

And the German family is pawing the US taxpayers' pockets for a handout? As I understand their situation, they are not even a burden to our (failing) educational system.

No one is pawing for a handout - kids are a special category. Most immigrants come here to work and they work hard - legal or illegal. They are no different from this German family.

So why the hypocrisy? Why grant assylum to a family that has no real need but refuse it to children fleeing real violence and persecution?

You are advocating child labor? Just which jobs will they be working hard at doing? There is a great difference between them and the Germans.

Where do you get that idea? I said kids are a special category.

How are these "unaccompanied minors", many who are in fact accompanied by adults, even more who would not be considered minors under our laws, or would be prosecuted as adults here for the crimes they perpetrated in their previous "employment" in their home countries, even remotely eligible for refugee status? The responsibility for caring for them, for ensuring they have a safe environment and proper supervision belongs to the parents who gave such a shit for their well being that they sent them here in the first place.

These are unaccompanied children up to 17 years old: Southwest Border Unaccompanied Alien Children | U.S. Customs and Border Protection

They are still considered minors under our laws. So you punish them for having bad parents?