The decision puts gay asylum-seekers fleeing sexual persecution on a par with people fleeing religious or political persecution.
I wonder if the US would accept me as a refugee. After all, as an Aussie Conservative I face political persecution every bloody day.
1 posted on
12/09/2003 7:04:01 AM PST by
Dundee
To: Dundee
....well, if you sneak in here illegally, we have all kinds of people that will hire you, and we have this great welfare system that will support you and you can even get free health care. It's kinda like DON'T ASK AND DON'T TELL, and you will be way better off.
2 posted on
12/09/2003 7:28:02 AM PST by
GrandMoM
("Without prayer, the hand of GOD stops, BUT, with prayer the hand of GOD moves !!!)
To: Dundee
I wonder if the US would accept me as a refugee. Only if you come in illegally from south of the border and speak Spanish, otherwise you'll be sent back.
To: Dundee
refugees from uranus?
4 posted on
12/09/2003 8:11:23 AM PST by
joesnuffy
(Moderate Islam Is For Dilettantes)
To: Dundee
Why do they make a distinction between discreet and flamboyant homosexuals? They permit the flamboyant drag queens and S&M leather freaks to openly hold parades.
There is even some tourist trade that encourages "non-discreet" homosexuals to visit Australia.
Are the public supposed to "accept" the refuge status of persons who choose to violate local law to engage in a sexual fetish? Private practice is good while public display is bad? Or just bad PR???
6 posted on
12/09/2003 10:28:57 AM PST by
weegee
(No blood for ratings! This means YOU AOL-Time-Warner-Turner-CNN)
To: Dundee
Private sexual behavior is a grounds for a public benefit.
To: Dundee
This just in. Murderers being allowed asylum in Australia because they'd be persecuted in their countries of origin.
9 posted on
12/09/2003 12:46:37 PM PST by
John O
(God Save America (Please))
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson