New constitution--HR for all humans, or just ROC citizens?

Legal Human Rights
21

If universal human rights is a “foreign” concept to Chinese/Taiwanese, then they must be learning very quickly when they emigrate !!

One of the places they emmigrate to is Canada. Toronto now has 600,000 “Chinese” making it the largest Chinese community outside Asia.

There they enjoy rights they don’t even have here and that foreigners in Taiwan will never have.

For example:

Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms (included in the 1982 Consitution) says that all Canadians enjoy the following rights:

equality rights: equal treatment before and under the law, and equal protection and benefit of the law without discrimination

democratic rights: such as the right to participate in political activities, to vote and to be elected to political office

legal rights: such as the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, the right to retain a lawyer and to be informed of that right, and the right to an interpreter in a court proceeding.

It also says that All Canadians enjoy fundamental freedoms of religion, thought, expression, peaceful assembly, and association.

The interesting thing here is that while the Charter itself says that these rights apply to “Canadians,” the Supreme Court ruled very early that these rights should apply to all living on Canadian soil.

So even a murderer/fugitive such as Charles Ng or a shipload of illegal immigrants from Fujan province, or suspected/accused Sikh terrorists and their kin are entitled to the protections afforded by the Charter.

Now, I’m not saying that this is ideal or even that it is right. I’m just saying that Canadian society has (in the last 20 years anyway) decided that human rights should apply to everyone – male or female, Jew or Gentile, slave or free.

And I don’t think this idea is inherently “foreign” to Chinese because they seem to get really good at the game once they’ve arrived in Canada.

Charles Ng, who was arrested in Canada on a shop lifting charge, tried to argue that his deportation to the US to face murder charges was “unconstitutional” and violated the Charter.

And lawyers from the “Chinese community” in Canada used the Charter very effectively during the immigration hearings for the Fujan “refugees.”

(BTW, while the “refugees” were in Canada, they ALL got free medicare – which at the time was an “inalienable right” Canadians felt they were being alienated from)

So the idea of human rights, even universal human rights, is not alien to to the “Chinese/Taiwanese” mind.

What may be alien to many Chinese/Taiwanese (esp those in the foreign police and the ancien regime) is:

a) the idea that anyone else is really equal or even human

eg. Marriage laws still have built-in prejudices against foreigners

b) that foreigners really belong here.
eg. Did you know that you can be arrested/fined/imprisoned/deported for the crime of not carrying your ARC or passport with you?

The police like to pick on Filipina maids because they are easy targets, but the law applies equally to all foreigners in Taiwan.

In short:

While many foreigners risked their lives and livelihood to work for democracy and human rights in Taiwan, it seems no human-rights advocates – not even “champions” such as President Chen Shui-bian – are willing to to risk their reputations or careers by championing human rights for people who can’t vote.

So you have choices:

  1. You can go home and thank God that you live in a society where (despite post 9-11 hysteria) people still value human rights and where freedom means more than being able to run red lights and get away with it.

  2. You can try to change it, as Richard suggests, by getting involved. This is not completely futile and Mr. H and his friends have had some successes.

Women, foreign spouses, and children of mixed marriages now have some rights in Taiwan that they did not enjoy five years ago. In fact, many rights enjoyed by Taiwanese are the result of hard work by foreign human-rights advocates.

  1. You can stop trying to save the world.
    You can decide that you really don’t like banging your head against the wall just because you will feel better when you stop.

Trying to change attitudes toward just about anything here is like banging your head against a wall. (Heck, anywhere… but especially here) You may make a dent in the wall… but your head will hurt and you’re likely to damage something.

For my part, I’ve realised that you can’t save people who don’t want to be saved.

So, I’ve pretty much decided to leave it alone as long as they leave me alone.

I feel that getting involved here is like getting involved in a domestic dispute between a man and his woman. It’s not wrong to try and protect the woman from violence; but often as not you’re the one who gets hurt and the woman ends up back with the man anyway.

You have saved someone for now, but nothing has really changed.

[b]Whatever you decide to do, remember this:

Right now, you really have no rights here.[/b]

So, unless you’re really spoling for trouble:

Carry your passport/ARC at all times; don’t take part in any marches or protests; don’t get involved in local disputes; don’t wish the president good luck in the election; and for Pete’s sake don’t sing in public!

22

To Steve Zodiac:

I congratulate you on an excellent post. We should have tea and danish sometime . . . . . I am in Nei Hu District, Taipei. Give me an email.

23

I do think you are required to be a U.S. citizen to work in the civil service (or have a green card - a status which doesn’t exist in Taiwan so it is a moot point, isn’t?), the military requirement is different. Therefore those working for the civil service aren’t Taiwanese they are Americans.
A nation’s first priority is the rights of its citizens, then comes human rights. Taiwan is by no means the only country in the world that acts this way.
As for Canada, that’s a different country isn’t it? The U.S. doesn’t guarantee the rights of all foreigners - just ask those that have been picked up or ‘abused’ under the Patriot Act.
Sorry Steve but I must ask why do you say “Right now, you really have no rights here?” Once again, I ask you and others…what basic human rights am I being denied?? I have been here two years and I don’t feel I am being denied anything.
There is no thing such as the basic human right to become a citizen that’s bs.
You can’t fault the foreigners in Canada for taking advantage of Canadian laws - but who passed those laws? Canadians, not visiting guest workers.

And as for your warning about the ID card, well that’s pretty standard for most countries in the world…just try to be a Mexican-American in a border town during a raid without ID and see how fast you end up in Mexico. :wink:
Taiwan (and most countries in the world) is not going to change until its citizens express a desire to change. Therefore if you, Hartzell, and anyone else wants to change this country then become citizens like Satellite, and some others, then you can have at it.
But until then we are only guests here – and yes, even after 30 years if you upset your host they can and probably will ask you to leave (nice way to say deport you :wink: ).

I do apologize before the flaming begins for repeating myself as usual but the arguments put forth by others are the same ones always presented so I felt compelled to point out the same in return. So many ask me why I keep saying the same thing…well it’s because I keep reading the same things about human rights yet no one has presented any evidence of basic human rights being denied in Taiwan to foreigners.

24

[quote=“vannyel”]The U.S. doesn’t guarantee the rights of all foreigners - just ask those that have been picked up or ‘abused’ under the Patriot Act.
[/quote]
What are you talking about? Please be more specific. Foreigners arrested under the Patriot Act still enjoy the right to have their cases heard before a judge and right of appeal. They also now enjoy right of independent counsel (although I would admit that they were deprived for too long).
Any foreigner in Taiwan can be picked up and deported without the actions of the police being reviewed by a court of law. If you were picked up for jaywalking and the police decided that you should be deported for that, no matter how many times you ask for a hearing before a judge, you can still be denied that right. That simply does not occur in the United States or most of the other countries that posters on this forum are from.

25

[quote=“Jive Turkey”][quote=“vannyel”]The U.S. doesn’t guarantee the rights of all foreigners - just ask those that have been picked up or ‘abused’ under the Patriot Act.
[/quote]
What are you talking about? Please be more specific. Foreigners arrested under the Patriot Act still enjoy the right to have their cases heard before a judge and right of appeal. They also now enjoy right of independent counsel (although I would admit that they were deprived for too long).
Any foreigner in Taiwan can be picked up and deported without the actions of the police being reviewed by a court of law. If you were picked up for jaywalking and the police decided that you should be deported for that, no matter how many times you ask for a hearing before a judge, you can still be denied that right. That simply does not occur in the United States or most of the other countries that posters on this forum are from.[/quote]

Here are some links about the Patriot Act and how it affects rights in the U.S.
patriotwatch.org/
aclu.org/SafeandFree/Safeand … 2126&c=207
epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.html
eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance … lysis.html
hrw.org/reports/2002/us911/

As for your statement about “Any foreigner in Taiwan can be picked up and deported without the actions of the police being reviewed by a court of law. If you were picked up for jaywalking and the police decided that you should be deported for that, no matter how many times you ask for a hearing before a judge, you can still be denied that right.”
Could you be so kind as to explain? To my knowledge this doesn’t happen in Taiwan anymore than “in the United States or most of the other countries that posters on this forum are from.”
Foreigners are deported for breaking immigration laws or employment laws not jaywalking/traffic violations/murder/shoplifting/etc.
As for the right to a hearing before a judge (in immigration matters)…sorry that’s not a basic human right. As you imply, and I acknowledge, it might be a right “in the United States or most of the other countries that posters on this forum are from” but as far as I know it is not a right in Taiwan.
I also believe that INS (or whatever it’s called under the new Homeland Security) is not under judicial review either. The only way an immigrant’s deportation comes to the special attention of a judge is if the immigrant hires a lawyer and files an appeal…OH…let’s see, pretty much the same way it worked for Scott Ezell and D.J. Chocolate (yes, we can argue whether it was an impartial review or not but the fact remains there was a review and not just the action of some overzealous FAP).
Using this definition of abuses…http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Human_rights_abuse based on the not legally binding Universal Declaration of Human Rights (also UDHR) adopted by the United Nations General Assembly (A/RES/217, December 10 1948), I don’t see any human rights abuses that pertain to Taiwan. Granted I admit there might be some isolated cases but I think this are more of an anomaly than a fact of life.
So back to the question…what specific REAL human rights are being denied in Taiwan?

26

I doubt there has been a Taiwanese deported from the United States without being extended the right of due process. Even with the US in a state of war we guarantee more rights and respect to Taiwanese citizens than Taiwan extends to Americans during peace time.

27

No one is denying or claiming that…you continue to avoid the issue…
Due process in the U.S. is DIFFERENT from due process in Taiwan or ANY OTHER COUNTRY in the world. This is not a basic human right.
So back to the question…what specific REAL human rights are being denied in Taiwan? :notworthy:

added…http://members.aol.com/abtrbng/sdp.htm
you will note due process is based on the U.S. Constitution - something no other country in the world has… :wink:

U.S. justice at work… visalaw.com/02jan2/17jan202.html

28

No one is denying or claiming that…you continue to avoid the issue…
Due process in the U.S. is DIFFERENT from due process in Taiwan or ANY OTHER COUNTRY in the world. This is not a basic human right.[/quote]
Incorrect. Under the US Constitution, the Fifth Amendment rights to life, liberty, property, and due process are fundamental rights, and actually apply even in insular areas . . . . . . .

See Taiwanese should seek US Constitutional Rights atimes.com/atimes/China/FA31Ad05.html

29

[quote]As for Canada, that’s a different country isn’t it? The U.S. doesn’t guarantee the rights of all foreigners - just ask those that have been picked up or ‘abused’ under the Patriot Act.
Sorry Steve but I must ask why do you say “Right now, you really have no rights here?” Once again, I ask you and others…what basic human rights am I being denied?? I have been here two years and I don’t feel I am being denied anything.[/quote]

Yes Canada is a different country. And so is the US, and so is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. But that’s not quite the point here.

[b]Maybe I’m just a disillusioned idealist /b; but the arguments on this and related forums seem to fall into five main categories:

1) I’m all right jack. I.e. Nothing has happened to me, so I don’t believe that human rights are really a problem.

2) I’m an American Citizen. I.e. I don’t have the rights I have in the US, therefore this is an oppressive and unjust regime.

3) Big Brother is watching you. I.e you have very few or no rights, so watch your back because “Just because your paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you.”

4) Abandon hope all who enter here. Chinese/Taiwanese don’t “get” human rights, never mind universal human rights.

5) If you want justice, work for justice. Fight the system, work within the system. If enough people bang their heads against the wall, the wall will come a tumblin’ down.

Richard’s a 5, I think. I’m more of a 3, though I have friends that are 5s, and I wish I were more like them.

Vannyel is sounding a lot like a 1.

With all due respect, foreigners in this country do NOT have freedom of assembly or freedom of speech.
We are explicitly forbidden from participating in political activities such as demonstrations or even expressing public support for a candidate in an election.

But it is not only foreigners that are denied basic human rights in Taiwan… but ALL people who live in this country.

And I don’t just mean that people here don’t have the same rights that we have in Canada or the US or the UK or the Commonwealth or…

I mean that many of those rights considered “universal” are unheard of here.

One need not quote chapter and verse of the United Nations’ declaration on human rights in order to see this.

President Chen Shui-bian has himself, on more than one occassion, promised to enshrine the UN declaration in the law and constitution of Taiwan/ROC.

Regardless of the legal questions this raises
(Can he do it? Will he do it? What will it mean since Taiwan is not actually a UN member?)

Chen’s declaration can only be seen as an admission that:

A) Despite the progress made in the last two decades, basic human rights – such as those in the UN declaration – are absent here.

B) Chen and his ilk feel that such rights must be enshrined in the Constitution. That’s because, if they are not so enshrined, they will be removed by subsequent governments – especially if the ancien regime is returned to power.

In short, the Taiwanese know they have a long way to go in the area of human rights. And some of them want to do something about it, while others are determined to resist change because they like things “the old way.”

So you can be a 2 and think this is an oppressive regime because it’s not like home.

You can be a 3 and still claim that you’re not paranoid because they really are out to get you.

You can be a 4 and give up even trying to explain the term “human rights” to our hosts.

You can even be a 5, and march around the wall till it falls or until you’re kicked out of the Promised Land.

But please don’t be a 1 and tell me there’s no problem here.

Because clearly, there is.

“The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. Instead of altering their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views… which can be very uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that needs altering.”

:s - Doctor Who

30

No one is denying or claiming that…you continue to avoid the issue…
Due process in the U.S. is DIFFERENT from due process in Taiwan or ANY OTHER COUNTRY in the world. This is not a basic human right.[/quote]
Incorrect. Under the US Constitution, the Fifth Amendment rights to life, liberty, property, and due process are fundamental rights, and actually apply even in insular areas . . . . . . .

See Taiwanese should seek US Constitutional Rights atimes.com/atimes/China/FA31Ad05.html[/quote]
Once again Hartzell, what the hell does how the US Contitution, 5th Amendment definition of anything have to do with any other country in the world? Are you intentionally being dense?? This is Taiwan this is not America. The U.S. Constitution does not apply here. :loco:
Steve
You still didn’t point out one single basic human rights violation in your long, well written response (I don’t care what Chen says in his attempt to gain entrance into the U.N., all I asked for was one concrete case of basic human rights abuse). BTW politicians as you should know will say anything to get a vote.
Yes, I am American but I don’t fall into your category #2…I fall into the ‘I am a foreigner living in Taiwan, enjoying the pleasure of being a guest in this country, respecting the limitations put upon me as being reasonable and lawful, not on a crusade to inform the Taiwanese of all the rights I think they might be in need of nor wanting to change this country in any way shape or form, and perfectly content type of American’ category. :notworthy:

31

In other words: “I’m not affected, so I don’t give a shit.” Which is fine. I know of course that you’d never dream of posting on here to whine if ever you should fall foul of an incompetent or spiteful local official – after all, they were appointed by a government and people that are reasonable and lawful. You’re so much bigger than that, eh? :wink:

32

I PROMISE you …I will be on here posting with 24 hours of the first time I run afoul of an incompetent or spiteful local official - unless I am deported then I will have to post as soon as I can get to a cybercafe… :wink: But until such time, I am satisfied and as you pointed out I have not been affect (yet).

Of course, I am still waiting…So back to the question…what specific REAL human rights are being denied in Taiwan?

33

[quote=“Vannyel”]
Of course, I am still waiting…So back to the question…what specific REAL human rights are being denied in Taiwan?[/quote]

A specific example: One that comes to mind is the policy of summarily deporting a person for a medical condition contracted in the territory. (Note I am not talking about mere refusal of medical treatment, nor a decision not to issue or re-issue a work permit, nor anything occupationally-related.) And everybody knows that’s what they do to people who get HIV here. And what about deporting domestic workers who become pregnant? Are those not violation of human rights?

(In these cases any public health arguments stand up only if the response is proportionate to the public health risk. I suggest that in the HIV case it’s not and in fact besides being a violation of human rights is bad public health policy in that it discourages testing.)

A general point: Of course, there are many places MUCH worse than Taiwan. But if you hope to make a long term home in a society you tend to take a broader view of how secure you can make your life here. And EFFECTIVE PROTECTION from administrative measures which can be arbitrarily enforced, unpredictable and (very occasionally) capricious is a part of that.

Most of the answers that you have been getting go back to ‘due process’ or effective 'judicial oversight of administrative discretion. You seem to be saying that absence of due process or ineffective oversight is not, in itself, an absence of human rights per se. Many of us would say that it is, at least potentially. We would also say that this effective oversight is especially important in a legal culture such as Taiwan where the discretion given to administrative agencies is comparatively wide.

If human rights have any objective reality (and that’s a fair debate) then there must be measures to protect them. It’s just my opinion, but before I invest too much in my life here, I would be asking [color=red]‘what specific REAL human rights (and other lesser ones) are being PROTECTED in Taiwan?’[/color] if you are not a citizen here.

Even the government admits there is no PROTECTION in ROC law for the rights of foreigners. Hell, they’ve argued that point in court often enough and won!

34

[quote=“kategelan”][quote=“Vannyel”]
Of course, I am still waiting…So back to the question…what specific REAL human rights are being denied in Taiwan?[/quote]

A specific example: One that comes to mind is the policy of summarily deporting a person for a medical condition contracted in the territory. (Note I am not talking about mere refusal of medical treatment, nor a decision not to issue or re-issue a work permit, nor anything occupationally-related.) And everybody knows that’s what they do to people who get HIV here. And what about deporting domestic workers who become pregnant? Are those not violation of human rights?
[/quote]

Ok, which non-working foreigners are being deported for medical conditions? Unless you have a specific ARC entitling you to live here without it being tied to your job then you are required to be able to do the job to stay here. A domestic worker who becomes pregnant most likely can not perform all the duties her contract requires and she will also require medical attention when the baby is born. As for pre-natal care, of course she should be getting that but should the Taiwanese government (or citizens’ taxes) pay for this? I am not familar with the policies in all the countries but I seriously doubt MOST countries in the world would provide these services to a guest worker. I would venture to say most would deport them. Sorry but that is part of being a guest worker - once you cease to be able to fulfill your contract requirements OR your medical expense outweight your contribution to society you are subject to deportation. I don’t see this as a human rights violation. It’s just common sense. If you were a citizen then the situation would be different. I don’t know anyone here that has been deported for high blood pressure, diabetes, etc. all of which require regular medical treatment.

What protection do you need if you are obeying the law? I haven’t heard of anyone being deported for obeying the law. Every person or example mention here or in the news violated their ARC/contract/etc.

I think the public health risk is very large if an individual tests positive and is allowed to stay in Taiwan. What controls are in place to ensure this person doesn’t continue having unsafe sex? How does it discourage testing? There are many testing sites that do not require your name or will accept a alias. Almost all are free. I have voluntarily been tested more times in Taiwan than I EVER was in the U.S.

Well that’s a reasonable thing I guess, but for me, as I mentioned, I don’t consider any of your specific examples to be human rights violations…merely enforcement of contracts. I would venture to guess that a guest worker in the U.S. who became blind wouldn’t be allowed to continue to reside in the U.S. unless they could find another job which didn’t require sight. And they would have to start the visa process over again too. But that is just a guess.

35

You don’t accept my examples… Well, I suppose we have rather different ideas about what a person should become progressively entitled to expect from the society in which he or she lives. And different ideas about the scope of the protections and rights which people as people can legitimately expect wherever in the world they live.

(That they may not get what they can legitimately expect is quite predictable. But to say that they should not expect these is quite different.)

The ‘local citizens paying for foreigner’s services’ argument carries some weight. But only some. Because most of us pay the same taxes and insurance as locals but without receiving the same benefits. And in any case, there will always be a transfer both ways. The equation is not always simple either. The Taiwanese economy has the benefit of the decades of publicly-funded education that I received and they get that for free. This will happen as long as people move from country to country.

You mustn’t have heard about the foreign citizen with HIV who was married to a Taiwanese yet still deported about two years back. I doubt there was any public health risk from allowing that person to stay. (My recollection may be wrong but I believe that it was the Taiwanese spouse that probably passed the virus to the foreigner but that fact was never allowed to be tested at appeal.) In the end they both left Taiwan. Leaving aside any questions of entitlement to treatment. A married foreigner not needing treatment (a non-progressor or whatever) but deported just for having the virus, would that deportation be a violation of human rights? Actually, I think this was pretty close to the facts but I’m most interested in discovering how unjust something has to be before you might think it less than acceptable.

11 Aug 2004 EDIT:
Found some data on this -
december18.net/web/general/uactions8.pdf

The way in which you talk about us all here as ‘guest workers’ seems to use that idea as a self-defining category of people who should enjoy no protection or rights in the ‘host’ society.

Could you suggest what kind of things you would accept as being violations of human rights, and then maybe we could find some for you!

36

Yes. I consider people who come to a country with the primary intention of working and earning money to be guest workers - regardless of whether they are english teachers, scientists, businessmen, or domestics. Thus once their ability to perform this work ceases then they are not entitled to remain in the country (unless they have married, etc.) This is not a welfare program - unlike a lot of western countries.

[quote]The ‘local citizens paying for foreigner’s services’ argument carries some weight. But only some. Because most of us pay the same taxes and insurance as locals but without receiving the same benefits. And in any case, there will always be a transfer both ways. The equation is not always simple either. The Taiwanese economy has the benefit of the decades of publicly-funded education that I received and they get that for free. This will happen as long as people move from country to country.
[/quote]
Which benefits am I missing? I pay taxes and I use the health care system, public libraries, roads, etc. You live and work in Taiwan - therefore Taiwan benefits from your publicly-funded education, you on the other hand get paid…sounds fair to me. :wink:

Key words being FOREIGN CITIZEN. I am not sure when the law passed but I know it exists - that if a foreigner can PROVE he/she contracted the virus from a Taiwanese citizen then they are entitled to stay and receive treatment (I think) but the burden of proof lies on the victim…not very fair but that’s government for you. As for the public health risk - are you kidding me??? With the high rate of divorce, infidelity, etc., you really believe this??? Look at Chocolate for one example. :wink: If he became a citizen then he wouldn’t have had to leave.

No sure about this, was the foreigner guaranteed never to need treatment…always remain a non-progressor? As for a violation of human rights, well a ‘person’ as the right to ask a ‘guest’ to leave their home anytime for any reason, don’t they? Why shouldn’t a country?

I don’t know…I think we have rights and we are protected, in general, by the same laws that protect the locals. Granted certain employers abuse their employees but then again the same thing happens in the U.S. There are hundreds of rights on the books regarding guest workers. Hartzell can explain them better than I can.
As I mentioned earlier…basically I consider these to be human rights…http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Human_rights_abuse based on the not legally binding Universal Declaration of Human Rights (also UDHR) adopted by the United Nations General Assembly (A/RES/217, December 10 1948).
For me, I consider it a privilege to live and work in another country. If I stay in Taiwan long enough to apply for citizenship then I will either do so or continue living here knowing that I can be deported at the whim of the government. If it becomes legal for foreigners to protest, petition, etc. then I will most likely take up the banner but not before it is legal - unless I am willing to suffer the consequences.

37

Which benefits am I missing? I pay taxes and I use the health care system, public libraries, roads, etc. You live and work in Taiwan - therefore Taiwan benefits from your publicly-funded education, you on the other hand get paid…sounds fair to me. :wink:[/quote]
Give you one example! If a close family member of a Taiwanese citizen dies they get a payout from the National Health Insurance Bureau. You and I pay the same premiums but if a close member of your family or mine died we get nothing! Whether that family member is living in Taiwan or not!

Key words being FOREIGN CITIZEN. I am not sure when the law passed but I know it exists - that if a foreigner can PROVE he/she contracted the virus from a Taiwanese citizen then they are entitled to stay and receive treatment (I think) but the burden of proof lies on the victim…not very fair but that’s government for you.[/quote]
The Law you refer to and the implementing regulations were passed in the early nineties. In the case in question, the foreign citizen was not permitted to rely on that provision in the law because the principle was not put into the implementing regulations.

38

You mean just like Social Security in the U.S.
Everyone is required to pay in but only citizens can receive all the benefits.

Very sad indeed…typical government SNAFU.
Just a little similar to the U.S. giving automatic citizenship to children of illegal aliens born in the U.S. and then deporting the parents but allowing the children to stay. Well at least to me it seems that way. Typical government.

As I mentioned, I consider it a privilege to live and work in another country. If I stay in Taiwan long enough to apply for citizenship then I will either do so or continue living here knowing that I can be deported at the whim of the government.
I know this is an unpopular viewpoint for some of forumosans but it works for me. Most people don’t know what a foreigner (immigrant, or whatever term you chose) goes through to live in our home country. Granted most western nations are more ‘advanced’ (for lack of a better term) in the human rights arena but just because they have chosen this path doesn’t mean other countries are required to. I think most Asian countries welcome ‘guest workers’ but don’t want any new immigrants - unless you are willing to take up citizenship (and forfeit your old citizenship). I have no problem with this restriction…however, I respect the fact that quite a few people posting here do have a problem with this attitude.

39

Then read about [url=Worst accident/spill you've witnessed/been in? - #9 by Dangermouse one[/url] for a start…

40

Exactly, this is the point. For those Taiwanese who immigrate to another country and obtain citizenship there, their Taiwanese citizenship should be automatically cancelled.

After all, if they come back to Taiwan they would just be guest workers. By applying for citizenship in another country, it is obvious that they intend to abandon any long term commitments to Taiwan.

So … the “single nationality” policy should be enforced across the board.