Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

HIV RefugeesFollow

#1 Jul 23 2004 at 11:41 AM Rating: Good
YAY! Canaduhian
*****
10,293 posts
Immigration minister, Judy Sgro, has defended and will allow hundreds of HIV positive refugees into Canada, despite public resistance. Her response to public outcry is: "[To deny them access] is not the Canadian way."

What do you think? Should we be providing a safe haven for HIV infected refugees? Should they be treated differently than any other refugee claim?

____________________________
What's bred in the bone will not out of the flesh.
#2 Jul 23 2004 at 11:44 AM Rating: Decent
**
764 posts
Do you perhaps have a link on this so we could gather more information about it?
#3 Jul 23 2004 at 11:45 AM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Better you than us Smiley: wink
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#4 Jul 23 2004 at 11:46 AM Rating: Good
YAY! Canaduhian
*****
10,293 posts
There likely is a link to it at CBC.ca but I just read it in the newspaper so I paraphrased it for you.

Joph, you silly boob.

____________________________
What's bred in the bone will not out of the flesh.
#5 Jul 23 2004 at 11:56 AM Rating: Decent
**
862 posts
I didn't know there was a "Canadian way."

I guess it's only fair to allow them in. Just because they have HIV doesn't mean they will spread it throughout the country. Although I suppose I can understand the viewpoint of those who do not want them in.

The only thing is this: it's not as if there is some HIV-proof barrier at the U.S./Canadian border, and if you let these people in, then there is a breach in the clean zone or something. Is Canada AIDS-proof?

Apparently, my brain thinks in complete sentences, while my hands seem to prefer broken Pidgeon English. :P

Edited, Fri Jul 23 12:57:37 2004 by Deathfromtheskies
#6 Jul 23 2004 at 11:58 AM Rating: Good
YAY! Canaduhian
*****
10,293 posts
Deathfromtheskies wrote:
I didn't know there was a "Canadian way."


Well, you wouldn't Mr. Bama. Haha!

Quote:
The only thing is this: it's not as if there is some HIV-proof barrier at the U.S./Canadian border, and if you let these people in, then there is a breach in the clean zone or something. Is Canada AIDS-proof?


I'm not sure what you're saying here? Are you worried that the refugees will get into the states? Or infect Canadians?

____________________________
What's bred in the bone will not out of the flesh.
#7 Jul 23 2004 at 12:01 PM Rating: Decent
**
764 posts
Just from reading the intitial post alone and not the article I see no problem with letting them in. The virus already exists and maybe those refugees can find the medical attention they need that they can't find anywhere else.
#8 Jul 23 2004 at 12:07 PM Rating: Default
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

What do you think? Should we be providing a safe haven for HIV infected refugees? Should they be treated differently than any other refugee claim?


What would the potential downside be again? Or are Canadians in the habit of attacking refugees and injecting their blood and ***** into their orifices?
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#9 Jul 23 2004 at 12:07 PM Rating: Decent
**
862 posts
My apologies Tare, I misunderstood the original post. I took it as saying that these HIV-infected people were from the U.S., and going into Canada. After re-reading the post, I understand, and feel a bit like a horse's patoot. :)

Mr. Bama huh? I kinda like that.
Nothing wrong with a Southern man.
#10 Jul 23 2004 at 12:08 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,923 posts
Ive always wonderd, what is the Canadian way exactly?
#11 Jul 23 2004 at 12:11 PM Rating: Good
YAY! Canaduhian
*****
10,293 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
What would the potential downside be again? Or are Canadians in the habit of attacking refugees and injecting their blood and ***** into their orifices?


Let me be clear, I think it's fine for HIV positive refugees to come in, so long as they go through the same refugee claim as everyone else. I'm wondering why anyone would be alarmed at this proposal.

The people that are "outraged" at the idea may be in the habit of doing this, Smash, who can say?


____________________________
What's bred in the bone will not out of the flesh.
#12 Jul 23 2004 at 12:11 PM Rating: Good
YAY! Canaduhian
*****
10,293 posts
Invisible the Braindead wrote:
Ive always wonderd, what is the Canadian way exactly?


Be nice to everyone and no one will notice.

Yay!
____________________________
What's bred in the bone will not out of the flesh.
#13 Jul 23 2004 at 12:42 PM Rating: Good
Drama Nerdvana
******
20,674 posts
Dunno, the warm fuzzy humanitarian in me would want to say that of course we should let them in and welcome them with open arms. But the small petty part of me is like dont let em the fack in. Really i know its small and petty but your letting in a health risk, a burden for the healthcare system, etc.

But in the end im glad they are doing it, i wouldnt want to be turned away just because i was sick. That would be bad jive, they should look at it on a case by case basis and if someone had the status to claim refugee status they should not be turned away just because they have HIV.
____________________________
Bode - 100 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer
#14 Jul 23 2004 at 12:44 PM Rating: Good
YAY! Canaduhian
*****
10,293 posts
bhodisattva Defender of Justice wrote:
That would be bad jive


And that is most certainly not the Canadian way! Smiley: laugh

____________________________
What's bred in the bone will not out of the flesh.
#15 Jul 23 2004 at 1:01 PM Rating: Decent
**
729 posts
Quote:The only thing is this: it's not as if there is some HIV-proof barrier at the U.S./Canadian border, and if you let these people in, then there is a breach in the clean zone or something. Is Canada AIDS-proof?

Of course there is Death. Its the reason they waste all that money to cut a nice tree line on the US/Canadian border. I wish I had a picture of that to show you. Its got to be one of the stupidist things I have ever seen. LOL!
#16 Jul 23 2004 at 1:05 PM Rating: Good
**
407 posts
Are these people coming from South Africa where, in the news, they were talking about the spreading of AIDS in their country?

...I can see peoples concern. HIV is some scary stuff and if these people are able to get out and freely be with other canadians, with out treatment it could pose a threat to the dating (sexualy active) community. Even though I always ask my sexual partners about their past I've never made them get tested. I always wear protection but I've read studies that say their only 80-90% effective...So I can see why your country is a little upset about this.

...The more Virus carriers there are the more the virus will spread...
#17 Jul 23 2004 at 1:08 PM Rating: Decent
**
764 posts
At the same time you cannot just shun these people away and lock them up in a room somewhere.
#18 Jul 23 2004 at 1:11 PM Rating: Good
**
407 posts
Quote:
At the same time you cannot just shun these people away and lock them up in a room somewhere.



..You are totaly right!...I think this is why the Canadian people are so nervous about it.
#19 Jul 23 2004 at 1:44 PM Rating: Decent
**
862 posts
Quote:
Even though I always ask my sexual partners about their past I've never made them get tested.


I can't help but wonder how many times that situation has gone awry.....
#20 Jul 23 2004 at 1:49 PM Rating: Decent
Quote:
I can't help but wonder how many times that situation has gone awry.....


Do you ever get nose bleeds up on that high horse, Death?

Just askin'.
#21 Jul 23 2004 at 1:52 PM Rating: Decent
**
862 posts
High horse? That wasn't condescension, I was merely wondering how most women would react to being asked about their sexual history.

I swear, it's like you are looking for something to bust me on. You might as well be my boss.
#22 Jul 23 2004 at 1:53 PM Rating: Excellent
****
6,858 posts
Quote:
Do you ever get nose bleeds up on that high horse, Death?

Just askin'.


BAM ^



Edited, Fri Jul 23 14:54:57 2004 by CrimsonMagician
#23 Jul 23 2004 at 2:03 PM Rating: Decent
**
312 posts
Quote:
Really i know its small and petty but your letting in a health risk, a burden for the healthcare system, etc.


Thats made even worse with Canada's socialized healthcare system.. you're agreeing to provide them with free health care they will obviously require. I know the US doesn't want to let in immigrants who just plan on living off of welfare, though thats a little different.

I dunno, I'd agree that they should just be treated like any other refugee.
#24 Jul 24 2004 at 1:24 AM Rating: Default
Thats why drug companies should be goverment controlled.
#25 Jul 25 2004 at 8:53 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,246 posts
The main question these days is *what is a refugee?*

There are so many paying people smugglers to get them somewhere these days, who are not in any actual physical danger in their homelands and can simply be classified as *economic* refugees. In other words they know they'd be better off somewhere else so rather than following the legal process they try to jump the queue by paying the smugglers to get them to another country.

#26 Jul 29 2004 at 6:28 PM Rating: Decent
Quote:
Better you than us


I don't ever remember you offending me joph, this is the first time, i'm probably more offended because its you, and i had you down as pretty low on the ******* scales.

You horrible, disgusting person, your'e better than people with aids? You should have a better chance of getting into canada? You utter ****.
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 285 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (285)