Leicester Tigers Vs Bristol Bears - Is...
Sport0 min ago
'Human Rights' rears it's ugly head once again.
87 Answers
http://www.express.co...sh-after-eight-years-
Should this failed asylum seeker be allowed to stay?
Her first excuse was she would be persecuted back home in China because she was a member of the Falun Gong religious minority.
Now she is saying that her family would be taken from her because she would face persecution under China's one-child rule.
Should this failed asylum seeker be allowed to stay?
Her first excuse was she would be persecuted back home in China because she was a member of the Falun Gong religious minority.
Now she is saying that her family would be taken from her because she would face persecution under China's one-child rule.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Ankou no one knows that will happen, and Britain opens its doors to more, where do they go. The country is already under the cosh with space, we have approaching 70 million people here, perhaps it shouldn't matter, what's one more, but when do you say enough is enough. Britain is just a dumping ground for the disaffected of the world.
This is my last post -- hold me to it :)
Yes, it appears she should stay. Under UN rules there would be no question. on 3 counts :
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 10 December 1948,
Article 12.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
Article 16.
(1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
(2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
Yes, it appears she should stay. Under UN rules there would be no question. on 3 counts :
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 10 December 1948,
Article 12.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
Article 16.
(1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
(2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
>Let them get whipped, tortured and murdered.
Do you really believe all these people when they say that.
They have just been told to say it by their immigration lawyer.
I cant beleve every person we sent back would be tortured or whatever.
How about that Russian guy who tripped a looter up during the riots.
He was here after claiming asylum saying if he went home he would be attacked as he had fought in Chechneya. He was also on incapacity benefit over here.
Yet his Facebook page showed he had been back home at least 4 times to see his family (and never been attacked).
And he was able bodied enough to trip up a big burly looter.
We are just the scroungers paradise of the world.
Do you really believe all these people when they say that.
They have just been told to say it by their immigration lawyer.
I cant beleve every person we sent back would be tortured or whatever.
How about that Russian guy who tripped a looter up during the riots.
He was here after claiming asylum saying if he went home he would be attacked as he had fought in Chechneya. He was also on incapacity benefit over here.
Yet his Facebook page showed he had been back home at least 4 times to see his family (and never been attacked).
And he was able bodied enough to trip up a big burly looter.
We are just the scroungers paradise of the world.
-- answer removed --
Em, there are plenty of other countries we can move to if we feel it's getting too much for us!
Each of these is an individual who has come here to seek a better life for themselves and their family, do you blame them? I'd do exactly the same and thousands do by emigrating every year, the world's big enough for all of us
Each of these is an individual who has come here to seek a better life for themselves and their family, do you blame them? I'd do exactly the same and thousands do by emigrating every year, the world's big enough for all of us
-- answer removed --
Must agree with doc, we can't keep accepting every Tom, Dick or Harry into the country, just because they come up with some hard luck story.
I wonder if all these 'Liberal Thinkers' would still be only be too pleased to offer the hand of friendship to these economic refugees, if in the future they couldn't get to see a doctor, wait for months to get hospital treatment, witness overcrowded maternity wards, overcrowded school class rooms, and lack of houses etc, etc.
We are only a small Island, with limited resources while we are in the middle of an economic recession, therefore we should now be making sure our own people are taken care of before we take care of others.
I wonder if all these 'Liberal Thinkers' would still be only be too pleased to offer the hand of friendship to these economic refugees, if in the future they couldn't get to see a doctor, wait for months to get hospital treatment, witness overcrowded maternity wards, overcrowded school class rooms, and lack of houses etc, etc.
We are only a small Island, with limited resources while we are in the middle of an economic recession, therefore we should now be making sure our own people are taken care of before we take care of others.
-- answer removed --
Among her protestations:
“We have no family in China, if we were sent there we’d have no money and nowhere to stay.”
Probably exactly the same circumstances as when she arrived in the UK (with the added problem of not speaking a word of English). But that did not put her off and she seems to have managed perfectly well for at least the last eight years.
“In China our family would be destroyed.We could lose our children.”
Only about 40% of China’s population is subject to the “one child” rule (pity we don’t have it here). The rule applies mainly in urban areas and (most importantly) children born in overseas countries are not counted under the policy if they do not obtain Chinese citizenship. As far as I know (though no doubt there will be examples to hand) I do not believe the Chinese Authorities take children away from families in such circumstances. The usual penalty for transgression is deductions from pay for those with numerous children (again, pity we don’t have it here).
Of course, with the ever present threat of deportation back to China hanging over her she should have thought about the consequences before she went ahead and knocked out four children. But then (cynic that I am) I have just a tiny suspicion that she did indeed do so, and her four offspring provide perfect support for her “Human Rights” case.
Of course, she’ll be allowed to stay and once again the law of the land is trumped by HR legislation. Just when will we wake up?
“We have no family in China, if we were sent there we’d have no money and nowhere to stay.”
Probably exactly the same circumstances as when she arrived in the UK (with the added problem of not speaking a word of English). But that did not put her off and she seems to have managed perfectly well for at least the last eight years.
“In China our family would be destroyed.We could lose our children.”
Only about 40% of China’s population is subject to the “one child” rule (pity we don’t have it here). The rule applies mainly in urban areas and (most importantly) children born in overseas countries are not counted under the policy if they do not obtain Chinese citizenship. As far as I know (though no doubt there will be examples to hand) I do not believe the Chinese Authorities take children away from families in such circumstances. The usual penalty for transgression is deductions from pay for those with numerous children (again, pity we don’t have it here).
Of course, with the ever present threat of deportation back to China hanging over her she should have thought about the consequences before she went ahead and knocked out four children. But then (cynic that I am) I have just a tiny suspicion that she did indeed do so, and her four offspring provide perfect support for her “Human Rights” case.
Of course, she’ll be allowed to stay and once again the law of the land is trumped by HR legislation. Just when will we wake up?
Ankou, how so. If the oldies are we keep being referred to paid their way, tax insurance etc, then how on earth would it be our fault that you can't get
a doctor, hospital appointment, or a child into a school. We don't make the laws, rules, the politicians do, they are the ones holding the purse strings, so what they say goes.
It's only when election time rolls around do we have any choice, and even then it's doesn't make a lot of difference.
a doctor, hospital appointment, or a child into a school. We don't make the laws, rules, the politicians do, they are the ones holding the purse strings, so what they say goes.
It's only when election time rolls around do we have any choice, and even then it's doesn't make a lot of difference.
pa___ul3
/// I'd do exactly the same and thousands do by emigrating every year, the world's big enough for all of us ///
Yes but where could you go in this great big world of yours, if you hadn't got a penny but where you went didn't bother about that, but would welcome you with open arms and house you, give you free health care, and educate your children, all for free.
Tell me what country in the world would do that pa___ul3?
Before you bother to answer, there isn't one, is there?
/// I'd do exactly the same and thousands do by emigrating every year, the world's big enough for all of us ///
Yes but where could you go in this great big world of yours, if you hadn't got a penny but where you went didn't bother about that, but would welcome you with open arms and house you, give you free health care, and educate your children, all for free.
Tell me what country in the world would do that pa___ul3?
Before you bother to answer, there isn't one, is there?
Latest Posts
Body & Soul1 min ago
ChatterBank8 mins ago
Is Labour Starting To Abolish Democracy...
News12 mins ago
Crosswords13 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.