A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian!

[HamiltonApplicant]

"A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian" was one of those defining memes of Canadian elections 2015. It was also one of the base principles of Bill C6, which asserted that Canadian citizenship cannot be revoked no matter what!

This forum discussed and continues to discuss C-6 from a procedural and administrative standpoint, and rightly so. However, the discussion on revocation of someone's citizenship thereof deviates sharply from this tradition, more of a quantum leap!

Normally forums like this are meant to discuss procedures, probably not politics, and definitely not propaganda!
One cannot stop Individuals from posting their agenda in this forum, I request forum members not to enable and encourage them. It would be nothing but a continuing Bill C6++ or Bill C6 Lite discussion with a political twist.

A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian, does not matter if he or she is born Canadian or naturalized Canadian or even an honorary one! Let us try and keep it that way....

 

[canuck_in_uk]

A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian, does not matter if he or she is born Canadian or naturalized Canadian or even an honorary one! Let us try and keep it that way....

Note that "honorary Canadian" is nothing more than a symbolic title. They do not have the rights that an actual citizen does.

 

[HamiltonApplicant]

Note that "honorary Canadian" is nothing more than a symbolic title. They do not have the rights that an actual citizen does.

You are absolutely right, "honorary Canadian" is a symbolic title, but it is great propaganda and internet is full of it, which is fine. Unfortunately Propagandists are infiltrating and gaining traction in this forum as well, as evidenced in the thread
http://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/pressure-builds-to-revoke-assks-honourary-citizenship.517511/

If anybody believes in the slogan "A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian", revoking of Canadian citizenship, not matter how hyphenated, should be opposed...

 

[spyfy]

You are contradicting your own request to not be political by making political statements and asking people to adhere to them.

 

[HamiltonApplicant]

You are contradicting your own request to not be political by making political statements and asking people to adhere to them.

And you are confusing propaganda with politics, politics with paranoia, etc, etc, etc...

 

[Natan]

You are absolutely right, "honorary Canadian" is a symbolic title, but it is great propaganda and internet is full of it, which is fine. Unfortunately Propagandists are infiltrating and gaining traction in this forum as well, as evidenced in the thread
http://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/pressure-builds-to-revoke-assks-honourary-citizenship.517511/

If anybody believes in the slogan "A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian", revoking of Canadian citizenship, not matter how hyphenated, should be opposed...

An "honorary" citizen is not a citizen at all. It is not a "hyphenated" citizenship, like "American-Canadian" or "Australian-Canadian" or "Nigerian-Canadian". It is, from a Canadian law perspective, a completely meaningless honorarium.

Let's not confuse honorary citizenship with actual citizenship.

 

[Natan]

Normally forums like this are meant to discuss procedures, probably not politics, and definitely not propaganda!
One cannot stop Individuals from posting their agenda in this forum, I request forum members not to enable and encourage them.

Citizenship is, by its very nature of granting membership to the body politic, political. The naturalization process is, by virtue of its legislative origins, political. Changes to the rules regarding the acquisition and loss of citizenship, occurring as they do in the legislative, judicial and executive branches of government, are political. Honorary citizenship is conferred by politicians, for politically reasons, often on other political celebrities, making it about as political as it gets. Where you have politics, you have propaganda -- they are as inseparable as patience and wisdom.

 

[HamiltonApplicant]

An "honorary" citizen is not a citizen at all. It is not a "hyphenated" citizenship, like "American-Canadian" or "Australian-Canadian" or "Nigerian-Canadian". It is, from a Canadian law perspective, a completely meaningless honorarium. Let's not confuse honorary citizenship with actual citizenship.

Here's a question then, can a "dishonored" citizen be eligible for Canadian PR/Citizenship/Refuge if his/her life is in grave danger?

 

[Natan]

Here's a question then, can a "dishonored" citizen be eligible for Canadian PR/Citizenship/Refuge if his/her life is in grave danger?

If I understand you correctly, you are asking if an "honorary" citizen who has had that "honour" revoked would be eligible to access Canadian immigration products, then the answer is a resounding YES.

Being an honorary citizen, or having had honorary citizenship revoked, is 100% irrelevant, under the law, in terms of immigrating to Canada. But, politics being what they are, an ex-honorary citizen might expect their application to undergo heightened scrutiny as bureaucrats and politicians scurry from dark corner to dark corner trying to avoid the bright light of negative publicity that might result from approving such an application.

 

[HamiltonApplicant]

Citizenship is, by its very nature of granting membership to the body politic, political...

My bad! I thought immigration policies, apart from political considerations, also had economical, humanitarian, and security considerations....

 

[Natan]

My bad! I thought immigration policies, apart from political considerations, also had economical, humanitarian, and security considerations....

I fail to see how one can neatly separate the economic, humanitarian and security issues from the political considerations -- they are so intertwined and interdependent upon each other, in this context, to lack any clear dividing lines.

For example, Canada's policies to allow, or deny, immigration into Canada based on economic, humanitarian or security considerations are political decisions made by Parliament, approved by the Prime Minister, assented to by the Crown, enforced by IRCC, and reviewed by the Judiciary.

 

[HamiltonApplicant]

Canada's policies to allow, or deny, immigration into Canada based on economic, humanitarian or security considerations are political decisions made by Parliament, approved by the Prime Minister, assented to by the Crown, enforced by IRCC, and reviewed by the Judiciary.

I agree with you. Canada's can and should allow, or deny, immigration into Canada based on economic, humanitarian or security considerations. They are political decisions made by Parliament, approved by the Prime Minister, assented to by the Crown, enforced by IRCC, and reviewed by the Judiciary!

What I am talking about is delaying, if not denying, immigration into Canada based on "moral considerations" is a looming danger! As in the case of the Nobel laureate who is getting hammered for, guess what, not saying what was expected by some self appointed moral police! One can always morality and politics cannot be separated...

PS. Recently a motion was passed in Canadian parliament against intolerance, not based on any reliable or official data, but by presenting some forum posts here or a tweet there...

 

[Natan]

I agree with you. Canada's can and should allow, or deny, immigration into Canada based on economic, humanitarian or security considerations. They are political decisions made by Parliament, approved by the Prime Minister, assented to by the Crown, enforced by IRCC, and reviewed by the Judiciary!

What I am talking about is delaying, if not denying, immigration into Canada based on "moral considerations" is a looming danger! As in the case of the Nobel laureate who is getting hammered for, guess what, not saying what was expected by some self appointed moral police! One can always morality and politics cannot be separated...

PS. Recently a motion was passed in Canadian parliament against intolerance, not based on any reliable or official data, but by presenting some forum posts here or a tweet there...

I supported that recent motion in Parliament against intolerance. There's no question, to those who are paying attention to the situation, that Muslims have been experiencing growing intolerance in North America, including here in Canada. Whether it is true or not, Parliament's stand against such intolerance is welcome, may do some good and will do no harm (it's not often that Parliamentary legislation achieves that).

It is in contravention of law for IRCC to deny applications based on unlawful rationale. The only legal "moral considerations" are the ones spelt out in the laws authorizing immigration. If an applicant feels they are being unlawfully prejudiced against, they may petition for leave to redress their perceived wrongs in the Canadian courts.

 

[HamiltonApplicant]

Message #6

It is, from a Canadian law perspective, a completely meaningless honorarium.

Suggestion: No legal consequences, nothing to see here, now move it!
Message #13

I supported that recent motion in Parliament against intolerance

Suggestion: Rejoice! Some good is going to come!
Breaking news/New flash: Like honorarium, from a Canadian law perspective, a motion also has no legal binding....

 

[Natan]

...from a Canadian law perspective, a motion also has no legal binding....

How politicians speak about minorities, and how they act toward them as legislators and executives, can play a contributing rôle in how minorities are treated by the population at large. Convincing statistical correlations and anecdotal evidence to support this hypothesis can be found not only throughout the historic record, but in the world around us today.