Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site whuxl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!whuxl!orb
From: orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.religion
Subject: Re: Re: It Cant Happen Here
Message-ID: <470@whuxl.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 6-Feb-85 11:35:38 EST
Article-I.D.: whuxl.470
Posted: Wed Feb  6 11:35:38 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 8-Feb-85 00:53:42 EST
References: <7601@brl-tgr.ARPA> <1097@houxm.UUCP> <328@enmasse.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Labs
Lines: 32
Xref: watmath net.politics:7403 net.religion:5517

> 
> There is no law of mankind!  There are scores of countries with
> millions of rules, each which defines the rights of citizens.
> I would hesitate to assemble even the best (and don't ask me what
> that is) of these rules and call them the laws of mankind.
> 
> Individuals make choices and, in cases of smuggling illegal 
> immigrants, know the risks.  Often these people become heroes;
> through their arrests, they publicize their beliefs.  But
> the government, on behalf of all those people who do not break
> the laws and perhaps suffer for it, sets a dangerous precedent
> if it were not to prosecute these people to its fullest extent.

That is true.  However the question is whether the government itself
is not breaking the law passed around 1979 which provided asylum
for refugees from political persecution and human rights abuses.
Is asylum for political refugees *only* to be provided for
those who flee leftist dictatorships?  This is the argument that
some of the religious sanctuary groups are making.
If the government decides that "freedom of the press" only applies to
right wing publications, does that mean that a given Administrations
interpretation of the law is necessarily correct and equivalent to the
law?  It is up to the Courts to decide whether the law which provides
for refuge from political persecution *only* applies to refugees
from leftist countries. Unfortunately with the present Supreme Court
one can never be sure what they will decide.  If they cannot discern
that it was Congress' intent that Title IX would provide for the cutoff
of *all* funds to Colleges that discriminate against women, despite
evidence from Committee hearings and so forth, then one can never be sure
how they will interpret current refugee law.
 
 tim sevener  whuxl!orb