UK Grants Asylum to Gay Iranian
The Netherlands said no. The UK took 18 months to say yes. How can Western nations refuse asylum to a group of individuals from a country with known laws of the death penalty for being a practicing homosexual? It is a bit baffling that the Netherlands refused asylum, being that they allow so many other things to exist in their country. Furthermore, persecution of gays in a nation should be considered a form of genocide. European countries, of all Western countries, should be particularly open to protecting people who are victims of this as they have seen it within their continent more than a few times in their past.
As an American, I don’t expect our country to have open arms to Iranian gays. Though the Statue of Liberty has a fabulous costume that only a gay could have designed, I don’t see her bright light welcoming gays, whose lives may be risked by living as a homosexual.
I am not an expert on Middle Eastern cultures and laws, but the only argument I can see for Western nations refusing asylum to gays may be that women in these same cultures may then also qualify, if they are in pursuit of a more liberated lifestyle. Additionally, as tensions between Middle Eastern nations and the West continue to go back and forth, taking in Middle Eastern “rejects” so to speak may not fair well. However, it should be a move that Western nations make to affirm its position as a place of open societies.
(Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7411706.stm)
Unfortunately western governments do not see the life of a non-citizen very important, taking someone in under asylum can cause political tensions between the two nations and preventing this tension is more important than protecting the life of an individual.
Disentangle says : I absolutely agree with this !
Somehow i missed the point. Probably lost in translation
Anyway … nice blog to visit.
cheers, Intrinsic.