Give Us Your Tired, Your Poor ...

Oh, and give us the masses that huddle with individuals of the same sex ... because being Gay is now a basis for political asylum, you see. I suppose transvestites get to go to the front of the line.

God Bless the Queen ... er, I mean America, sorry. ; )

LOS ANGELES (AP) -- An immigration judge who previously denied a gay man's asylum bid on the grounds that he could conceal his sexual orientation if he returned to his native Mexico reversed the decision Tuesday.

In allowing Jorge Sota Vega to remain in the United States, Judge John D. Taylor said that gays should not be required to dress or act a certain way to avoid persecution and that Vega's lawyers proved he would be at risk if he were deported to Mexico.

Vega's case attracted attention from national gay rights groups when Taylor denied his application and said that Vega could live safely in Mexico because he did not look gay and could hide the fact that he was.

"It seemed to us this is a real double standard," said Jon W. Davidson, legal director of Lambda Legal. "Courts don't deny asylum to someone based on their political beliefs by saying, 'If you just didn't tell other people what you believed, you would be fine.'"

Comments

[Legalize]

Read your own article and brush up on your asylum law, Riehl. He isn't being granted asylum because he is gay; he is being granted asylum because he was able to prove that if he is forced to return to Mexico, that he was "more likely than not" to be killed or tortured because he is gay. This is not a new basis for political asylum; it's the same basis applied to a person in this guy's situation. This isn't even the first time a homosexual has been granted asylum in the U.S. on the basis of political persecution. See the Toboso-Alfonso case from 1980.

[Carl]

Please do not confuse these cons with facts. They believe in flag-waving, terror-alert tickers and yellow ribbon magnets. These things keep them safe from the evil-doers.

[Dan Riehl]

So, if someone beats him up, I suppose he'll run to Canada next? What BS.

[Cindi]

I would beat his ass regardless, simply for being fucking stupid enough to use the excuse that he did.

[Rob Kaufman]

No Dan, if someone beats him up you throw the wingnut who beat him up in jail, and then sue his sorry but for all 2 cents that he has to his name.

[Purple Avenger]

Every illegal will be gay now I suppose now they know there's an angle that will work.

[Legalize]

"So, if someone beats him up, I suppose he'll run to Canada next? What BS." - Riehl

"I would beat his ass regardless, simply for being fucking stupid enough to use the excuse that he did." - Cindi

"Every illegal will be gay now I suppose now they know there's an angle that will work." - P.A.

You detectives really have no qualms about demonstrating your ignorance on any number of topics? You do know the difference between a random wingnut beating up a gay guy and government policy that systematically targets homosexuals for persecution, right? Because that's what asylum law addresses, geniuses. Did you even read the Court's opinion? Very doubtful given that you didn't even read the article.

[Chuck]

I have been following the refugee claim for the guy up here in Canada who writes this blog: http://isaacschrodinger.typepad.com. He was here under a student visa and then applied for refugee status. He writes about the government's lawyer using a similar argument to try to deny him refugee status. He is not gay but is an apostate from Islam. The lawyer said hey, your blog is under a pseudonym and you used to be a Muslim so you can easily fake it. You are not necessarily in any danger.

His argument was that once you come clean with yourself about something like that you really can not live faking it anymore. The judge agreed. Since being an apostate is far more of a choice than homosexuality is, should he have not been allowed to be a refugee?

Back to this case, can compassion not extend to those one considers immoral? Or is it "hate the sin; send the sinner to their potential death?"

[TheSpartan]

Easy Chuck, you're asking Dan to show compassion for his fellow man...that might make him queer or sumthin'.

Post after post I've been reading here of complete non-issue B.S. Can you actually make a sustainable point Dan? Replace Gay with Catholic/Protestant/Jewish whatever, would you have a problem giving him asylum then as long as he could prove he would be in danger from his government?

[Artie]

I wonder what Condi thinks about all this?

[tally]

Mexico City made civil unions legal, plus they have a huge gay pride parade every June. Sounds like the judge needs to travel down there for a look/see.

[Cindi]

Spartan........are you by chance a homo?

[TheSpartan]

No I am not (but if you were the only female option I'd take it under consideration)...are you by chance a human?

[Legalize]

"Mexico City made civil unions legal, plus they have a huge gay pride parade every June. Sounds like the judge needs to travel down there for a look/see."

Sounds like you need to read the article - especially the part that describes that the man didn't live in Mexico City, or in the State of Coahuila.

[tally]

"Mexico City made civil unions legal, plus they have a huge gay pride parade every June. Sounds like the judge needs to travel down there for a look/see."

"Sounds like you need to read the article - especially the part that describes that the man didn't live in Mexico City, or in the State of Coahuila."

Sounds like you could be right, or perhaps I was pointing out "advances" made by gays in Mexico. Why can't the guy just move within his own country? To me, it's the same as if a guy from "antigaycityusa" was seeking asylum in Canada. The guy could move to San Fran.