Gay refugees given priority to enter Canada

[Tyrianth]

They're in temporary housing, and seeking permanent asylum.

Canada's granting that permanent asylum. That's the whole process. All our refugees are being selected from existing refugee camps outside of Syria. They've already escaped before they start our screening process. They're not seeking refugee status, they've already been granted that, before we start our own process.

Well that's a bit better but the fact of the matter remains that single, straight males are being treated differently than other refugees. And that's all my original post was trying to make.

Gay people are not getting priority treatment as OPs sensationalist title claims, they're simply being included with women, children, and families. It's the straight males who are getting special special treatment based on the definition of special being "or otherwise different from what is usual," i.e. special does not always mean better.

[Endus]

Well that's a bit better but the fact of the matter remains that single, straight males are being treated differently than other refugees. And that's all my original post was trying to make.

Because they're not facing the same challenges.

Equal treatment only makes sense if their context is equal, which it clearly is not.

[Tyrianth]

Because they're not facing the same challenges.

Equal treatment only makes sense if their context is equal, which it clearly is not.

Again, I didn't come here to debate the issue. Merely point out that the OPs title was sensationalist and I knew there would be a bunch of posts bitching about how gays are getting priority over others.

[Gaebryel Quintyne]

No irony. Just you completely failing to grasp reality.

If a group isn't being treated equally, and wants to be treated equally, they're going to need support to reach that point. Otherwise, you aren't supporting an outcome of equality, you're explicitly trying to maintain their current marginalization and oppression.

Now I get the whole equity and equality thing =).

[Juvencus]

It has nothing to do with sexual equality.

The reality is that gay men face severe punishments if they are discovered, maybe even worse than women that break their laws. Therefore they are included in the "increased vulnerability" category along with women and children.

Not everything has an agenda behind it.

[Gaebryel Quintyne]

It actually makes a lot of sense to get the homosexuals out of refugee camps if they are being killed by fellow refugees. It's a horrible situation though because if we get them out, the refugees that would have otherwise been open to killing fellow refugees are now not killing eachother, which is good, but are now going to end up in some civilized country where it is accepted to walk down the street openly gay, which is a recipe for disaster.

What? The last part doesn't make any sense to me. Care to clarify please? Why would it be a disaster? It would be freeing for them to do what they are instead of being persecuted for it in their home country.

[Gib Lover]

What? The last part doesn't make any sense to me. Care to clarify please? Why would it be a disaster? It would be freeing for them to do what they are instead of being persecuted for it in their home country.

Sorry, I can see I formatted that weird. I meant the people that are willing to kill fellow refugees for being gay, not the gay refugees.

[Lorelei]

I think this is easily beaten. Just claim to be closeted for fear of being killed. It's not like the people are going to take the chance of asking around and risking outing someone just to leave their ass there to be killed.

So ripe for abuse.

That's just not how it works. In fact, one chief complaints made by LGBT asylum seekers is that their claims are considered "unsubstantiated" unless they can provide details to interviewers, some of which may be highly intrusive. Moreover, if you are LGBT and in the closet, you usually fail the "threat of persecution" test. The reasoning is that, if no one actually knows you are gay, then no one is going to kill you for being gay.

Asylum based on sexual orientation persecution typically is granted to gay *activists* or other people who have been threatened with death or other harm for their sexuality. You can't just say, "I'm totally into dudes but I never told anybody because I was afraid somebody might kill me" and get a free pass to another country.

[Gaebryel Quintyne]

I thought it was okay to lie to infidels and non-believers?

You are indeed right. I retracted my statement after a bit after your post.
I asked my mother (devout Muslim) about a situation where a Muslim is going to get killed if they say they are Muslim in a non-believer estate, they can say they are not Muslim even if they are Muslim. They are Muslim in their hearts, just not outside. A Muslim can indeed lie when their lives are threatened.

- - - Updated - - -

No, but it is prioritizing, you know like if you are at the ER, they generally take the person who is at more of an immediate chance of death first. If you apply to be a refugee to another country, and it is found out you are gay, in some countries that means death period.

I agree. Hospitals have that system and no one complains about that.

- - - Updated - - -

A millionaire is not being discriminated against based on their sexual orientation or gender.

You should read the next sentence he said.

- - - Updated - - -

Sorry, I can see I formatted that weird. I meant the people that are willing to kill fellow refugees for being gay, not the gay refugees.

Ah ok, makes sense. But that is true about gay refugees being targeted by fellow refuges... Someone pointed it out in the thread with a source but I don't know where exactly.

[Daethz]

i love how everyone throws equality out the window and calls it great nowadays.
21st century is the century of reverse-racism

[Deleted]

You got caught lying, I don't know why you are still trying to justify it.

In response to me saying its kinda offensive to say they aren't being oppressed, remember at this point in your original post you didn't specify oppressed based on sexual orientation, you said:


You THEN clarify that they are not oppressed based on sexual preference. So after directly responding to me saying they are oppressed for other reasons, you simply say



Do you not see what's wrong here? Do you not see all the other people that jumped on you for saying they aren't oppressed simply because they are straight?

You're the only one commenting chuck