Posted on 11/30/2003 10:09:17 PM PST by Coleus
|
No easy time for gay immigrants |
Martha Donayre came to the United States from Brazil in 1995 on a student visa. After graduating from San Jose State University, she got a job at a high-tech company in Silicon Valley that allowed her to stay in the country legally on a company-sponsored visa. Then the dot-com debacle put many companies in the area out of business, and put Martha out of a job, a visa and a legal reason to stay in the United States.
Losing her job meant that she had to go back to her country even though she was in a relationship with an American citizen, because that person happened to be another woman. Under U.S. immigration law, Americans are allowed to claim a spouse or fiancee from another country. They are called binational couples. But the U.S. government does not recognize same-sex relationships.
Having no legal means for staying together, Martha and her partner considered moving to Canada, one of 15 countries that do recognize same-sex couples for the purpose of immigration.
Instead, they took a drastic step by defying the immigration laws and staying in the United States.
How they got away with it shows the irony and contradictions in immigration laws. I will get to that in a minute.
Donayre and her partner established Love Sees No Borders, a nonprofit organization dedicated to creating awareness of the issue of binational same-sex couples caught in a double dilemma: being immigrants with a few rights, and being gay immigrants with even fewer rights.
Gay-rights activists are hoping to solve the dilemma through the Permanent Partners Immigration Act, a bill pending in Congress that would allow U.S. citizens and permanent residents to sponsor their same-sex partners for immigration to the United States by extending to same-sex couples the same immigration rights currently enjoyed by legal spouses. But the PPIA is not likely to be approved while Republicans are in control and George W. Bush is president.
Bush has no qualms about expressing his opposition to the union of same-sex couples. He reacted strongly to the recent ruling by the Massachusetts Supreme Court recognizing the right for same-sex couples to marry, and he has suggested a constitutional amendment declaring that marriage should be between a man and a woman.
For now, same-sex binational couples have only one hope - political asylum. Becoming an advocate for gay rights made it impossible for Donayre to go back to Brazil, a country she considers highly homophobic.
Although she did not come out of the closet until she was in the United States, her activism got international attention - including in her own country, which would make her a target.
Gay activists estimate that at least one gay person is brutally killed in Brazil per day. So she applied for and obtained political asylum under a provision in the immigration law that, since 1994, recognizes persecution based on sexual orientation as grounds for obtaining asylum.
Even though this provision has benefited many gay and lesbian immigrants, gay activists are fighting a case in California. That case involves a Mexican man whose asylum plea was denied on the grounds that he does not appear to be gay and could probably avoid persecution in his country if he tries to hide his sexual orientation.
It is ironic how immigration laws in the United States recognize that a homosexual person could be persecuted in his or her country because of his or her sexual orientation, to the point of granting political asylum. Yet the law will not recognize the person as a partner in a relationship.
While the debate rages in this country over gay marriages, we need to take a closer look at the rights of gay immigrants.
If two people are in a committed relationship, that relationship should get some type of consideration during the immigration process.
Whether people are gay or not, our immigration laws should not be on the books to separate people or tear apart the bonds of love.
Maria Elena Salinas is anchor of Noticiero Univision. Reach her at msalinas@univision.net
JESUS DEFINES MARRIAGE: "And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore, they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." -from THE BIBLE: Matthew 19:4-6
So if I love my village, then my whole village can move to America?
The poor dears. What a novel solution to their problem. Toss 'em both out!
How convenient for her.
Those who advocate homosexual marriage on this forum do so out of ignorance of what the experts say. That is, environment is the major factor in determining homosexuality. The fact that environment is the major factor in determining homosexuality is strengthened by the fact that thousands have left the homosexual lifestyle.
It makes no sense to base rights on a behavior that results in severe health hazards, hazards that are contagious through the exchange of bodily fluids such as blood, and hazards that are deadly. Hazards that will not change with homosexual marriage because AIDS targets homosexual behavior.
Do supporters of homosexual marriage hate homosexuals to the point that they want to kill them off by encouraging a contagious and deadly lifestyle? I would hope not.
Apparently those who apppose the homosexual lifestyle are the only true friends homosexuals have.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.