| I think that everyone should have an inherent right to seek a better life for themselves elsewhere, and therefore, I think immigration isn't a problem as long as the immigrants follow the laws of the country in which they reside.
Related to this, I think the definision of the term "refugee" in the 1951 Refugee Convention is too narrow - not only does it exclude people persecuted for their sexual orientation, it also completely negates the many-faceted reasons people usually have to seek asylum elsewhere, and it's sometimes difficult to discern between people who flee their country due to a "well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion" and those who leave because they want a better life - the latter group isn't to be regarded as refugees, even if they sometimes are just as much in need of help as the first group. So the criteria for being able to recieve the status of an asylum seeker and given protection under the 1951 Convention, is too restrictive.
Hmm, I probably didn't answer the question. [img]smilies/look.gif[/img] __________________ I’ve looked in the mirror, and the world's getting clearer
I’ll take what you give me, please know that I’m learning
So wait for me this time |