The Church And The Refugee

Not surprised that your comments here fall into the general pattern of your attitude towards immigrants, Jim, which is not very sympathetic. As usual I disagree. <p> I think what you're assuming is that the laws for immigrants and refugees in Canada are fair, and that all deportations are justified. I think that a fairly convincing argument can be made that this is just not true, especially since Sept. 11. <P> Background info on refugees in Canada: <a href="http://www.amnesty.ca/Refugee/history.php">Amnesty International</a><br> In 1976 Canada asked churches and other groups to sponsor refugees directly: <a href="http://www.crcjustice.org/crjs_refugee_cdn.htm">The Justice Site Refugees Canada</a><br> <a href="http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/dec2002/can-d16.shtml">Canada hides behind US to attack refugees</a><br> <a href="http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php?story=20040317133128950&query=deported">Delusions of multiculturalism</a> <P><p>---<br>Now call it extreme if you like, but I propose we hit it hard, and we hit it fast, with a major, and I mean major, leaflet campaign.--Rimmer, Red Dwarf <br />

Our laws regarding refugees are surely not perfect, but better than some other countries.

These people are breaking the law. They get on boats and airplanes, destroy documents, arrive in Canada and then they get lawyers working for them and against them. We pay lawyers to COACH refugees as to what the board wants to hear. I clearly saw this on a TV program that dealt with this problem. If a lawyer coached a person in a court of law, they are themselves breaking the law.

Not so for refugees.

You seem to think I am against refugees and immigrants. That is so not true.

I am for LEGAL immigration and those that break the rules do not get to stay in our (used to be) wonderful country.

This is called queue jumping, and many immigrants themselves are not happy that they came here through the proper channels, only to see others break all the rules and jump ahead of legal immigrants, who wait months and years to get the call that they are welcome here.

A person who breaks the law and then is proved guilty is a criminal if they flee into hiding.

That is the truth.

You may not like it, but that's the way it is.


---
"Arrogance in Politics is unacceptable"
Jim Callaghan
Minden, Ontario
705-286-1860
www.misterc.ca

I think you're dead wrong here man.<p> <i>A person who breaks the law and then is proved guilty is a criminal if they flee into hiding.</i><p> Refused refugees don't always have to do with breaking the law. Those are classic lines of dictators everywhere - "If you run and hide, you must be guilty", "You have nothing to hide, right?"<p> There was a case here in Edmonton about a Phillpino Nanny who's employer found they didn't have enough work for her, so the nanny took a second job. Her visa stated she was to only work one job, so she was ordered deported.<p> So - she wanted to work HARDER, and she was deported. She's since returned to the phillipines, and emigrated to Canada again. Do you see the logic there? Why should she have been deported for working harder? Should she not have had the benefit of a refuge while she pleaded her case and used the system the way it was meant to be used?<p> Yes, our laws are not perfect when convicted felons remain in this country, and hard working people are deported. Until the laws are perfect, there should be a place where people can go until the laws are perfect. Churches will not grant refuge to people they think unworthy of it.<p> <p>---<br>"History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme" Mark Twain <br />
"The greatest price of not participating in politics is being governed by your inferiors." Plato

Accepting refugees only perpetuates the original problems that created refugees in the first place. If no countries took in refugees, then problems would have to be resolved within the refugee producing areas one way or another. Perhaps refugees showing up here in Canada should be given a book about the French revolution or American revolution or a Canadian history book on how to establish 'Peace, Order and Good Government' and be sent back to where they came from. The refugee industry is not a solution to the world's problems, it is only creating bigger problems.

Canada, land of welcome ? <p>What if America falls into fascism and totalitarianism and American refugees start flooding our borders ? Will we turn them back also ? Is anyone aware that the US is presently building dozens of camps such as the one in use is Guantanamo Bay ? Who are those camps intended for ? So much for political refugees (unless you have the right color of skin maybe and speak the language perhaps ?)</p> <p>What about climatic refugees ? Global climate may go haywire anytime, anywhere and both Québec and Ontario came real close to having a few million refugees on their hands during 1998's ice storm.</p> I've always wondered why it is that those who have the most also have the most difficulty with sharing. Canada falls into that category. We are a nation of 'have much' and we should be more lenient and understanding towards the 'have-nots'.

If you're guilty of having too much - give it away.

<P>The thought that this is part of a much larger issue keeps nagging me. <P>The tradition of the church as sanctuary is rooted in a practice of social justice that pre-dates liberal democracy and even the development of the modern nation state by several centuries. It has had its ups and downs. The assassination of Thomas a Beckett and the ravaging of the monasteries by Henry VIII were certainly downs. <P>The sanctuary tradition is not just about immigration or asylum seekers or refugees--not just about outsiders. It is an offer of protection to those in need. It entails a concept of the church as more than just holy ground. It sees the church as a place of personal transformation which becomes possible when the law of the jungle, represented in our time by the rule of the marketplace, is suspended. <P>The alternative may be less palatable than it seems. Should the folks who betrayed Maher Arar so that he could be sent to Syria for torture be turned loose in Canadian churches as well? Every jurisdiction and level of government, from Ipperwash and Walkerton to Donald Marshall, is fallible. The church as sanctuary introduces a little restraint and balance. <P>The church is fallible too, so when I read, "Churches will not grant refuge to people they think unworthy of it," I thought it was overstated. But the more I think about it, the more I think it's not overstated at all. <P>My own experience with a sanctuary situation in Vancouver was more open and detailed and intimate than anything a bureaucracy could even contemplate. This woman lived in the church for months. Everyone knew her--not just the members of the church, but the neighbors, the support groups, the reporters, the musicians and actors who performed at benefits for her, her lawyer and her lawyer's colleagues. She lived in a public space; her life during that time was a book open to everyone. She still could have been a terrorist I guess, in theory anyway. But the people in the church knew her and would not have let her live there if they had thought her unworthy of their commitment. <P>Just one more point is a bit of history. Wnen the Nazis were slaughtering Jews in the late 30s and 40s, the US and Canada refused to increase their immigration quotas to let in refugees. Big, racist mistake. Let's hope it doesn't have to be repeated.

Very well said.

It appears the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration believes that the operation under her control is flawless. Logically, she can afford to occupy her spare time with pointing her finger at the tradition of Sanctuary.

Doc, I had a little trouble with the sentence you refer to.

"A person who breaks the law and then is proved guilty is a criminal if they flee into hiding."

It did not come out right.

What I meant to say was if a person comes here as a refugee and is turned down, then goes into hiding, that makes the refugee a criminal. They are breaking the law.

Again, our system is not perfect.

Let me give you an example. This should curl your hair.

A few weeks ago I was watching a program on CBC or CTV, I forget which. The main theme was about refugees.

It started out by a young lady telling a story about her family, including aunts, uncles, mother and father, siblings, etc., being literally shot to death by a gang of thugs, in a country I forget the name of. I don't write everything down, but I digress.

She herself was shot 16 times.

She survived, which was a miracle. Apparently she came to Canada and saw one of the men that shot her, and she also found out that he was applying for refugee status.

Here he was, on camera, driving a Mercedes Benz, running free in our country, so this lady took her case to the refugee board, and they said something to the effect that there was nothing they could do.

I am going by memory here, so if anyone else saw this program, let me know if I have the details right.

This is another example of our refugee system, and it has let many people into this country that should not be here.

My saying the church should stop hiding these people from deportation is only to point out that this idea has its roots in the middle ages.

In those days, people were routinely drawn and quartered.

Doc, when is the last time you saw anyone drawn and quartered in Canada ??



---
"Arrogance in Politics is unacceptable"
Jim Callaghan
Minden, Ontario
705-286-1860
www.misterc.ca

<i>Perhaps refugees showing up here in Canada should be given a book about the French revolution or American revolution or a Canadian history book on how to establish 'Peace, Order and Good Government' and be sent back to where they came from.</i> <p>Pheeww ! Thank goodness the French and British who settled and conquered this land were not refugees and the 'savages' had not yet discovered how to print books yet, eh ?</p> People movement has existed for as long as there has been people. Better get used to it.

<blockquote> Apparently she came to Canada and saw one of the men that shot her, and she also found out that he was applying for refugee status. </blockquote> <P>The point in this particular discussion is that she did not see her assailant living in a church basement.

Yea Jim, I kinda thought that was what you meant with that sentence. I mentioned that Philipino nanny thing because she did seek refuge in a church for a month or so before surrendering for deportation. It was an example of our screwed up system, and how refuge should be granted by the church. <p> As Earthling points out, that Sauerkraut eating lunk who can't shoot would not be granted asylum, but the Nanny or the lady who was shot would. I think it's a stopgap measure that the church should be allowed to have until the system is fixed and good people get to stay in Canada, and the bad ones get weeded out. True, ignoring a legal order to be deported is a crime, but deporting a good person for failings of the system is a bigger crime. Keeping murderers and criminals who take refuge in Canada behind our badly constructed immigration policy is a worse crime. Bad laws should be changed, and the only way to get them changed is to break them and challenge them.<p> I ran into a friend who is a pastor of the local Lutheran Church yesterday, and I asked him what he'd do in such situations (the church has basically a 10 bedroom house out back for visiting missionaries etc that could be used for asylum seekers). He said if the person commited a crime against the spirit of the 10 commandments, he'd council the person into doing the right thing and turn themself in, but would not grant asylum. If they were deserving and decent people who's only crime was inadvertantly breaking the immigration laws and he felt that their treatment was unjust, he'd grant aslyum and work towards justice for them.<p> <blockquote>Doc, when is the last time you saw anyone drawn and quartered in Canada ??</blockquote><p> Jim, now you've got me all excited! Drawing and quartering should be reserved for a third offence. Keelhauling for a second offence. But I guess Canadian Justice is stuck at the first offence level of shaking the finger sternly and saying "Bad Doggie!".<p> <p>---<br>"History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme" Mark Twain <br />
"The greatest price of not participating in politics is being governed by your inferiors." Plato

If you want a good example of a law that I think needs to be changed, check this out.

This is clearly not the way things should work.

Link:

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Conten ... 8793972154

---
"Arrogance in Politics is unacceptable"
Jim Callaghan
Minden, Ontario
705-286-1860
www.misterc.ca