4 ms·

Canada wants to be one of the most progressive country in the world, making fun of us in the US, while denying basic soil rights. /irony

cncrnd 8y ago
Soil rights are not a basic human right... In many countries it is nearly impossible to get citizenship without having citizen parents. I'm not sure why you would want to give the children of those committing treason citizenship, it could be a future risk if said children enter the same path.
- mirimir 8y ago
  > ... those committing treason ... Foreign agents who aren't citizens aren't committing treason. That is, unless they defect.
  - wavefunction 8y ago
    >not citizens Well the problem just clears itself up
  - cncrnd 8y ago
    Actually, you don't have to be a citizen to commit treason. There is a notion of 'temporary allegiance' which allows non citizens to be prosecuted for treason.
- perl4ever 8y ago
  If a "spy" has a child in Canada who would not be a citizen but for where they are born, that implies the parent cannot be guilty of treason against Canada as they are not Canadian. Also, as a counterpoint, applying penalties for crimes to the descendants of an offender has become unfashionable in some circles. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attainder https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attainder "The United States Constitution prohibits corruption of blood as a punishment for treason."
  - rgbrenner 8y ago
    Revoking citizenship is not a penalty. Most countries do not grant jus soli rights, and several grant it only with significant restrictions. This is not a universal human right. Canada has a right to set restrictions on jus soli rights. Canada already does not grant citizenship to children born to foreign diplomats working in Canada. Spies are working for a foreign government, just not declaring it. The defense in this case is not arguing that canada's law is illegal.. just that the law specifically says diplomats, and spies aren't diplomats. It's not clear that simply not declaring your employer makes you immune from the law anymore than not declaring your income makes you immune from taxes.
    - anigbrowl 8y ago
      Let's revoke yours and see whether you think it's a penalty or not.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
    - amaccuish 8y ago
      > Spies are working for a foreign government, just not declaring it. You've changed the wording to fit your narrative. These spies were not diplomats. They had no immunity.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
    - perl4ever 8y ago
      I wasn't using the word "penalty" in a legalistic sense, and I think you are. Something can have multiple causes or effects, so insisting that one of them is the correct one may be beside the point.
    - dragonwriter 8y ago
      > Revoking citizenship is not a penalty. Yes, it obviously is. > Canada already does not grant citizenship to children born to foreign diplomats working in Canada. Essentially no country recognizing jus soli does that for essentially the same reason that diplomatic immunity exists (and affecting the exact same set of people subject to diplomatic immunity)—the presence of diplomats in a country is a convenience for both the sending and receiving country, which, in the interest of relations between the two countries, died not have the legal effect that that presence would otherwise have for the individuals. Non-diplomats who are employed by a foreign government within a country are but tested the same way. > It's not clear that simply not declaring your employer makes you immune from the law Declaration isn't the point. Non-citizens openly working for a foreign country in non-diplomatic roles aren't covered either. The diplomat's unique status as, essentially, a mutually-recognized extension of the foreign state is the point.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > I'm not sure why you would want to give the children of those committing treason citizenship There's a reason that the US Constitutionally prohibited corruption of blood from the establishment of the Constitution and the United Kingdom abolished it in the 19th Century.
zaptheimpaler 8y ago
Yeah I bet all the US does to children of spies is lock them in secret facilities we know nothing about and torture them worse than ICE, no biggie.
- perl4ever 8y ago
  According to Wikipedia, the US did not do any such thing to the sons of the Rosenbergs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Meeropol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Meeropol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Meeropol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Meeropol
  - xenadu02 8y ago
    The Rosenbergs were US Citizens, not foreign spies. There was never any doubt about their citizenship.
    - perl4ever 8y ago
      That doesn't mean whether their sons were tortured or otherwise persecuted is irrelevant as evidence of what the US is like. As we see in this thread the categories of "foreign spies" and "traitors" are associated in peoples' minds.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
paavoova 8y ago
Good to know that if I sneak into your household to give birth, my child is welcome into your household and you're obligated to provide for them. Brood parasitism is in fact good for the victim!
- wavefunction 8y ago
  Generosity is a boon and a strength at least in America we are better for those that have come to make a real contribution >fuck Putin
- uiri 8y ago
  That is, in fact, how the law works in Canada, the US, and many other countries in the Western hemisphere. There is a narrow exception for embassy and consular employees which the government thought should apply to spies but which the court has overturned. It's an edge case that is not clear cut either way. I don't think it is right to punish the children (stripping them of their birthright citizenship) on the basis of the crimes of their parents (espionage), particularly when said children spent most of their childhoods in Canada.
kazinator 8y ago
You're misinformed; Canada is so loose, it actually has a "birth tourism" problem. Pregnant women come from Canada from other countries as mere visitors in order to deliver here, so that it can be Canadian and enjoy perks like much cheaper university tuition down the line. Sometimes these women rack up big hospital bills which are left unpaid. The fact that we are even debating whether the offspring of foreign enemies of the state should be citizens shows you how bad the problem is. "Should not be" means "now actually are". We should clamp down on all this nonsense and retroactively take away these drummed-up citizenships away going back at least 20-30 years.
- DKnoll 8y ago
  There's a country directly south of Canada made for people with views like yours. Feel free to leave at any time. I've never heard of this problem with immigrants coming to Canada just to give their children Canadian citizenship before, I'd love to see some documentation. It sounds suspiciously similar to right wing rhetoric in the United States that claims Mexican women do the same. A founding value of our country is relatively open immigration, as that is how it became populated. My distant anscestors came here and benefited from that, and I suspect yours did as well. Having a child in Canada only benefits the child, the parent gets no benefit. They have to apply for permanent residency and get no special treatment for having a Canadian child. Children of our enemies rejecting their parents culture choosing to live here is something we should encourage. For historical context refer to United Empire Loyalists immigrating from the United States (an enemy at the time) and being given land grants and other privileges.
  - kazinator 8y ago
    > I've never heard of this problem with immigrants coming to Canada just to give their children Canadian citizenship before, I'd love to see some documentation. A good start might be to search "CBC birth tourism". (The CBC isn't some right-wing mouthpiece, but it has reported on the issue. Usually using the perspective like that something is going on that some conservatives (i.e. no, not us) would like to end.) Birth tourism isn't immigration. These mothers have no status in Canada and aren't going through any immigration process to become permanent residents or citizens. They are just sneaking in their kids ahead of the immigration queue by the mere fact that those kids were delivered while on a well-timed vacation in Canada. It's vicious and despicable; like an insect injecting its eggs into a host. > right wing rhetoric in the United States that claims Mexican women do the same Calling something "rhetoric" is a rhetorical device. Is that rhetoric true or false?
dang 8y ago
All of you who perpetuated this hellish flamewar need to re-read the guidelines and go to bed without supper. Commenting like that will get you banned on Hacker News. Please don't do it again. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

cncrnd 8y ago

Soil rights are not a basic human right... In many countries it is nearly impossible to get citizenship without having citizen parents. I'm not sure why you would want to give the children of those committing treason citizenship, it could be a future risk if said children enter the same path.

mirimir 8y ago
> ... those committing treason ... Foreign agents who aren't citizens aren't committing treason. That is, unless they defect.
- wavefunction 8y ago
  >not citizens Well the problem just clears itself up
- cncrnd 8y ago
  Actually, you don't have to be a citizen to commit treason. There is a notion of 'temporary allegiance' which allows non citizens to be prosecuted for treason.
perl4ever 8y ago
If a "spy" has a child in Canada who would not be a citizen but for where they are born, that implies the parent cannot be guilty of treason against Canada as they are not Canadian. Also, as a counterpoint, applying penalties for crimes to the descendants of an offender has become unfashionable in some circles. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attainder https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attainder "The United States Constitution prohibits corruption of blood as a punishment for treason."
- rgbrenner 8y ago
  Revoking citizenship is not a penalty. Most countries do not grant jus soli rights, and several grant it only with significant restrictions. This is not a universal human right. Canada has a right to set restrictions on jus soli rights. Canada already does not grant citizenship to children born to foreign diplomats working in Canada. Spies are working for a foreign government, just not declaring it. The defense in this case is not arguing that canada's law is illegal.. just that the law specifically says diplomats, and spies aren't diplomats. It's not clear that simply not declaring your employer makes you immune from the law anymore than not declaring your income makes you immune from taxes.
  - anigbrowl 8y ago
    Let's revoke yours and see whether you think it's a penalty or not.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
  - amaccuish 8y ago
    > Spies are working for a foreign government, just not declaring it. You've changed the wording to fit your narrative. These spies were not diplomats. They had no immunity.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
  - perl4ever 8y ago
    I wasn't using the word "penalty" in a legalistic sense, and I think you are. Something can have multiple causes or effects, so insisting that one of them is the correct one may be beside the point.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > Revoking citizenship is not a penalty. Yes, it obviously is. > Canada already does not grant citizenship to children born to foreign diplomats working in Canada. Essentially no country recognizing jus soli does that for essentially the same reason that diplomatic immunity exists (and affecting the exact same set of people subject to diplomatic immunity)—the presence of diplomats in a country is a convenience for both the sending and receiving country, which, in the interest of relations between the two countries, died not have the legal effect that that presence would otherwise have for the individuals. Non-diplomats who are employed by a foreign government within a country are but tested the same way. > It's not clear that simply not declaring your employer makes you immune from the law Declaration isn't the point. Non-citizens openly working for a foreign country in non-diplomatic roles aren't covered either. The diplomat's unique status as, essentially, a mutually-recognized extension of the foreign state is the point.
dragonwriter 8y ago
> I'm not sure why you would want to give the children of those committing treason citizenship There's a reason that the US Constitutionally prohibited corruption of blood from the establishment of the Constitution and the United Kingdom abolished it in the 19th Century.

zaptheimpaler 8y ago

Yeah I bet all the US does to children of spies is lock them in secret facilities we know nothing about and torture them worse than ICE, no biggie.

perl4ever 8y ago
According to Wikipedia, the US did not do any such thing to the sons of the Rosenbergs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Meeropol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Meeropol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Meeropol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Meeropol
- xenadu02 8y ago
  The Rosenbergs were US Citizens, not foreign spies. There was never any doubt about their citizenship.
  - perl4ever 8y ago
    That doesn't mean whether their sons were tortured or otherwise persecuted is irrelevant as evidence of what the US is like. As we see in this thread the categories of "foreign spies" and "traitors" are associated in peoples' minds.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

paavoova 8y ago

Good to know that if I sneak into your household to give birth, my child is welcome into your household and you're obligated to provide for them. Brood parasitism is in fact good for the victim!

wavefunction 8y ago
Generosity is a boon and a strength at least in America we are better for those that have come to make a real contribution >fuck Putin
uiri 8y ago
That is, in fact, how the law works in Canada, the US, and many other countries in the Western hemisphere. There is a narrow exception for embassy and consular employees which the government thought should apply to spies but which the court has overturned. It's an edge case that is not clear cut either way. I don't think it is right to punish the children (stripping them of their birthright citizenship) on the basis of the crimes of their parents (espionage), particularly when said children spent most of their childhoods in Canada.

kazinator 8y ago

You're misinformed; Canada is so loose, it actually has a "birth tourism" problem. Pregnant women come from Canada from other countries as mere visitors in order to deliver here, so that it can be Canadian and enjoy perks like much cheaper university tuition down the line. Sometimes these women rack up big hospital bills which are left unpaid. The fact that we are even debating whether the offspring of foreign enemies of the state should be citizens shows you how bad the problem is. "Should not be" means "now actually are". We should clamp down on all this nonsense and retroactively take away these drummed-up citizenships away going back at least 20-30 years.

DKnoll 8y ago
There's a country directly south of Canada made for people with views like yours. Feel free to leave at any time. I've never heard of this problem with immigrants coming to Canada just to give their children Canadian citizenship before, I'd love to see some documentation. It sounds suspiciously similar to right wing rhetoric in the United States that claims Mexican women do the same. A founding value of our country is relatively open immigration, as that is how it became populated. My distant anscestors came here and benefited from that, and I suspect yours did as well. Having a child in Canada only benefits the child, the parent gets no benefit. They have to apply for permanent residency and get no special treatment for having a Canadian child. Children of our enemies rejecting their parents culture choosing to live here is something we should encourage. For historical context refer to United Empire Loyalists immigrating from the United States (an enemy at the time) and being given land grants and other privileges.
- kazinator 8y ago
  > I've never heard of this problem with immigrants coming to Canada just to give their children Canadian citizenship before, I'd love to see some documentation. A good start might be to search "CBC birth tourism". (The CBC isn't some right-wing mouthpiece, but it has reported on the issue. Usually using the perspective like that something is going on that some conservatives (i.e. no, not us) would like to end.) Birth tourism isn't immigration. These mothers have no status in Canada and aren't going through any immigration process to become permanent residents or citizens. They are just sneaking in their kids ahead of the immigration queue by the mere fact that those kids were delivered while on a well-timed vacation in Canada. It's vicious and despicable; like an insect injecting its eggs into a host. > right wing rhetoric in the United States that claims Mexican women do the same Calling something "rhetoric" is a rhetorical device. Is that rhetoric true or false?

dang 8y ago

All of you who perpetuated this hellish flamewar need to re-read the guidelines and go to bed without supper. Commenting like that will get you banned on Hacker News. Please don't do it again. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html