Australian Politics Forum - Would you change your views of

FriYAY Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 7395	Re: Would you change your views of Reply #30 - Apr 30^th, 2013 at 11:00am No. People smuggling still needs to be stopped. Australia MUST decide, who comes into this country, when and where from.
Back to top	IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 137785
Gender: male

Re: Would you change your views of
Reply #31 - Apr 30^th, 2013 at 11:06am

Karnal wrote on Apr 30^th, 2013 at 10:07am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Apr 26^th, 2013 at 8:43pm:

woof woof wrote on Apr 26^th, 2013 at 8:24pm:

thats interesting.

becuase all of you quote the UN this the UN that.

But it shows that regardless what the situation is, IE we are not party to the UN and the legalaties that go with it, and that would exclude anyone from claiming asylum, you ppl still think we should take them in.'

Very interesting, so yours acceptance of these has nothing to do with us being in the UN. Yet you quote the UN as it is convenient, but when it taken away, you'd still take these bludgers in??

Why?

You seem to have no understanding of what an asylum seeker actually is.

I'll help you: "a person who, from fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, social group, or political opinion, has crossed an international frontier into a country in which he or she hopes to be granted refugee status".

Why would you call those people "bludgers"?

Because they sit around all day languishing in detention. They accept all that free food and don't offer to do any chores in return.

Not even the dishes? Shocked

How about the floors?

Back to top

IP Logged

The_Barnacle

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6205
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Would you change your views of
Reply #32 - Apr 30^th, 2013 at 10:49pm

woof woof wrote on Apr 26^th, 2013 at 8:24pm:

thats interesting.

becuase all of you quote the UN this the UN that.

But it shows that regardless what the situation is, IE we are not party to the UN and the legalaties that go with it, and that would exclude anyone from claiming asylum, you ppl still think we should take them in.'

Very interesting, so yours acceptance of these has nothing to do with us being in the UN. Yet you quote the UN as it is convenient, but when it taken away, you'd still take these bludgers in??

Why?

The reason is that many people feel that we have a moral and ethical obligation to provide sanctuary for people who are fleeing persecution in there own countries.

Clearly there is no point appealing to the morals and ethics of people who describe asylum seekers as "bludgers", "scum" etc so instead it is pointed out that we also have obligations under UN conventions and human rights laws.

I think that answers your question.

Back to top

The Right Wing only believe in free speech when they agree with what is being said.

IP Logged

John Smith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 74644
Gender: male

Re: Would you change your views of
Reply #33 - Apr 30^th, 2013 at 10:51pm

The_Barnacle wrote on Apr 30^th, 2013 at 10:49pm:

woof woof wrote on Apr 26^th, 2013 at 8:24pm:

thats interesting.

becuase all of you quote the UN this the UN that.

But it shows that regardless what the situation is, IE we are not party to the UN and the legalaties that go with it, and that would exclude anyone from claiming asylum, you ppl still think we should take them in.'

Very interesting, so yours acceptance of these has nothing to do with us being in the UN. Yet you quote the UN as it is convenient, but when it taken away, you'd still take these bludgers in??

Why?

The reason is that many people feel that we have a moral and ethical obligation to provide sanctuary for people who are fleeing persecution in there own countries.

Clearly there is no point appealing to the morals and ethics of people who describe asylum seekers as "bludgers", "scum" etc so instead it is pointed out that we also have obligations under UN conventions and human rights laws.

I think that answers your question.

that about sums it up beautifully Oh Yeah ...

Back to top

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg

Gold Member

Offline

WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26509
Australia

Re: Would you change your views of
Reply #34 - May 1^st, 2013 at 4:22am

The_Barnacle wrote on Apr 30^th, 2013 at 10:49pm:

woof woof wrote on Apr 26^th, 2013 at 8:24pm:

thats interesting.

becuase all of you quote the UN this the UN that.

But it shows that regardless what the situation is, IE we are not party to the UN and the legalaties that go with it, and that would exclude anyone from claiming asylum, you ppl still think we should take them in.'

Very interesting, so yours acceptance of these has nothing to do with us being in the UN. Yet you quote the UN as it is convenient, but when it taken away, you'd still take these bludgers in??

Why?

The reason is that many people feel that we have a moral and ethical obligation to provide sanctuary for people who are fleeing persecution in there own countries.

Clearly there is no point appealing to the morals and ethics of people who describe asylum seekers as "bludgers", "scum" etc so instead it is pointed out that we also have obligations under UN conventions and human rights laws.

I think that answers your question.

Now a new thread will be started so they can ignore that answer.

SOB

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope

IP Logged