args

The LGBT community fulfills the basic principles and purposes of asylum

The LGBT community fulfills the most basic principles and purposes of the concept of asylum. Asylum was created as a direct protection of Article 14 of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights (UNDHR) 1948[1] which states that “Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.”[2] This article was created in order to protect the third article of the declaration “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.”[3]  This concept of asylum was created to develop a separate category of migration that would allow its applicants to breach normal immigration protocol and application procedures[4] on the basis that these people were in immediate danger and that without creating a specific bypass for them, they would endure great harm or death. The point of asylum as a specific and emergency measure and, indeed a moral necessity, was two-fold: 1)      The immediate nature of the threat/danger to their person 2)      That this threat was persecutory in nature What is important to note is that “persecution” is fundamentally different than prosecution. The difference lay in the acceptability and justice of the punishment someone may or will endure. Persecution is a term used for a punishment that is unjust or morally abhorrent. Asylum has emerged as a category of protection we grant to people who we believe that we are morally obligated to help, because if we do not, they will receive a punishment they do not deserve and will severely harmed for something they deserve no harm for. We, the proposition, believe that both of these criteria are filled by those fleeing persecution for sexual orientation and thus we are morally-obligated to grant them asylum. First, it is clear that they are facing immediate danger. Whether it is death penalties in places like Uganda[5] or vigilante justice against homosexuals such as the murder of David Kato[6]. In places like Uganda, local tabloids often publishes “Gay Lists” of individuals they believe are gay so that the community can track them down and kill them for their sexual orientation, which is how and why David Kato was murdered[7].  It is clear that whether by the state or by their neighbour, there is a clear and immediate danger to many LGBT people across the world. The second criteria of the unacceptability of this persecution is also clear. We as Western Liberal democracies have in recent years become increasingly accepting of the LGBT community with the granting of gay marriage, application of anti-discrimination laws and even allowing of gay-adoption in many countries. The sexual orientation of an individual is in no indicative of one’s worth as a human being in the eyes of the Western Liberal Democracy and can never possible be a death sentence. It is inconceivable for us to consider sexual orientation a reason to not allow a person to raise a child, never mind view it as an acceptable reason for death. [1] United Nations. Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees. [2] United Nations. Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 1948. [3] United Nations. Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 1948.  [4] United Nations. Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees.  [5] Dougherty, Jill. "U.S. State Department condemns 'odious' Ugandan anti-gay bill." CNN International. 12 May 2011. [6] "Uganda gay activist Kasha Jacqueline Nabagesera hailed." BBC News. 04 May 2011, Print. [7] "Uganda gay activist Kasha Jacqueline Nabagesera hailed." BBC News. 04 May 2011, Print.