Guest opinion: Right to asylum prevents the US from being complicit in genocide

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • jimbo10 Logan, UT
    May 6, 2019 3:33 p.m.

    You guys are seriously trying to compare Jews in WWII with people from Guatemala? That is not even close to the same circumstances. Also you are ignoring the first safe country rule. People are not allowed to cherry pick destinations. We cannot help everyone. That is unfortunate but the truth.

  • RiDal Sandy, UT
    May 5, 2019 3:04 p.m.

    Just wanting a better job and an American lifestyle is not a legitimate reason to claim refugee status.

  • Fullypresent Salt Lake City, UT
    May 5, 2019 12:58 p.m.

    The question, in part, is how much can you involuntarily stick it to U.S. taxpayers without a revolt to pay for everyone trying to get in the U.S.?

    We have spent billions and billions of dollars at the border and on immigrants. How many realistically can we afford to take in? Our immigration system is at the breaking point as it is.

    We should be a compassionate nation but we must balance this with reality. We are not the only nation on earth who can take in Central and South American immigrants.

    As Washintion discusses how we can pay for 2+ trillion in critical infrastructure repairs/needs in our own country, some are discussing higher taxes which would likely come on the backs of the middle class or in cuts to services for U.S. citizens. At the same time we have just spent 7 trillion dollars in the Middle East the past 19 yrs.

    Tired of the U.S. taxpayer being the answer to everyone's problems. Let's focus on affordable housing, heath care, education, and infrastructure needs of our own people. Let's make sure our elderly, vets, disabled, and children are looked after. Let's lower taxes for the middle and lower middle class.

  • DN Subscriber Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 4, 2019 10:55 p.m.

    Lying about the reasons asylum is being applied for should be automatic rejection.
    Coaching migrants to lie about their reasons should be a crime.
    Nations which facilitate the movement of illegal immigrants to the U.S. border should have all aid from the U.S. terminated.

    We have an excessively generous legal immigration system, but its rules are fair and should be followed. Illegal immigration, including false "genocide" claims cannot be tolerated and any one making them should be punished harshly and deported immediately.

  • reriding Salt Lake City, UT
    May 4, 2019 6:26 p.m.

    There is no bar for asylum not sought in a neighboring country. There is a discretionary bar if an opportunity to live permanently in a third country has been refused, application for asylum is submitted after more than a year in country, or previous denial of asylum. There are some mandatory bars such as for felony conviction and terrorism.

    Most applications for asylum are eventually denied. More immigration judges would thus move more seekers out of the country faster.

  • SLars Provo, UT
    May 4, 2019 6:08 p.m.

    genocide? That's hyperbole.

    The majority of asylum seekers to the US and and the EU are people coveting another persons way of life. Let them apply in the first country, and block those who attempt to enter ours after passing through another country.

  • GaryO Virginia Beach, VA
    May 4, 2019 5:05 p.m.

    Re: "Right to asylum prevents the US from being complicit in genocide"

    True. But some people don't care if the U.S. is complicit in genocide. Trump is apparently one of them. And he panders to the very people who would love to see America commit racial genocide.

    “Hail Trump! Hail our people! Hail victory!” – Richard Spencer, leader of the Alt Right

  • GaryO Virginia Beach, VA
    May 4, 2019 3:39 p.m.

    Re: "Right to asylum prevents the US from being complicit in genocide"

    True. But some people don't care if the U.S. is complicit in genocide. Trump is apparently one of them. And he panders to the very people who would love to see America commit racial genocide.

    “Hail Trump! Hail our people! Hail victory!” – Richard Spencer, leader of the Alt Right

  • Eponymous Eggplant Salt Lake City, UT
    May 4, 2019 1:59 p.m.

    And from Mosiah 4:
    16 And also, ye yourselves will succor those that stand in need of your succor

    There's a massive difference between "ye yourselves" acting voluntarily and taxpayers who are coerced by the force of government under threat of incarceration. Please share a reference in the standard works that implies it's ethical to force someone else to "succor those that stand in need of your succor."

    The scriptures tell us to be personally generous. However, when we force others to do what we want, that's called tyranny. It is unethical to conflate those concepts in order to pursue a partisan political agenda.

  • Spoc Ogden, UT
    May 4, 2019 1:00 p.m.

    A reader posting on a previous article claimed that this international agreement about asylum requires that asylum be sought at the border with their country of origin. Thus Guatemalans could seek protection in Mexico, Belize, Honduras, or El Salvador. Does anyone have a reference for this protocol?

    If that is the case, the Guatemalans who were offered asylum by Mexico and refused it because the U.S. was their desired destination, would lack authority twice; once for not having a common border, and once for refusing the legitimate offer.

    If the common boarder requirement is to be met, it would be reasonable once they cross that border to make all applicants from south of Mexico to make their application at the US Consulate in Mexico where they can wait in Mexico to be processed.

    Cuba, on the other hand, has a common border at Guantanamo Bay where the Cubans could seek asylum with the U.S. They probably could not travel to Mexico and make the same claim as they are not crossing at the US border without first crossing the border into Mexico.

  • Eponymous Eggplant Salt Lake City, UT
    May 4, 2019 12:58 p.m.

    With respect to the southern border, following the first country of asylum principle, I guess the article is talking about Mexican refugees? Are there really that many of them? And isn't the term "genocide" a little inflammatory for a group that claims to care about ethics?

    If the subject is central American migrants, then the comments ought to be directed at Mexico. As a signatory to the U.N. Convention, Mexico has an affirmative obligation to accept and make a judgment about central Americans' asylum claims.