It is stated clearly throughout the process and even at the last moment at the ceremony that Citizenship is a privilege, not a right. And if that is your attitude then Canada does not want you.
If it were a right then it would be given automatically as soon as one has the residency requirement...but it is not, people have to request it, fill forms, take a test, go through a background screening and take the oath. Regardless of the fact that CIC is currently doing a crappy job with the processing of the citizenship request Canadian citizenship is a privilege not a right.on-hold said:I believe citizenship is a right, if one meets the requirements that Canada sets for it. What else would it be? A gift from CIC that they grant when they feel like it? College admissions where they decide who has the best extracurricular activities?
The simple fact that citizenship CAN be revoked makes it a privilege, as you cannot revoke a right. This of course only applies to those "granted" citizenship and not born to it. Those who have it as a birthright cannot have it revoked.on-hold said:OK, if it is a privilege, then can you give me an example of someone who met the requirements, passed the test, applied, went through the process, and did not receive citizenship? I asked that question earlier, and am being met with bluster, but no examples.
Or another question -- if citizenship is a 'privilege', who decides who receives that 'privilege'? If the CIC officer or the citizenship judge have the right to refuse an applicant who meets all the criteria, then citizenship is indeed a privilege. Do they have that right? Can you give me an example of that right being exercised?
See, here is the thing about what we call 'law'. It applies to all people, equally. It defines what we call 'rights'. Law defines who can become a Canadian citizen, and how they do so. It's not being 'entitled' to insist that the law apply equally to all people.
This is the situation today but simple legislation could be passed requiring for example that you continue to reside in Canada for the following five years or lose your citizenship... The UK for example requires that a naturalization application under 6(1) declares that the applicant will continue to reside in the UK. Laws change...on-hold said:Sorry to reply right away, Zardoz! I'm supposed to be writing a research paper but it's one of those days . . . I don't know if this is correct, since it comes from Wikipedia, but:
Under current law there is no provision for involuntary loss of Canadian citizenship except:
naturalized Canadians can have their citizenship revoked if convicted of fraud in relation to their citizenship application, or their original admission to Canada as an immigrant
That's not quite what you're saying -- it's the same as my losing a house that I paid for with counterfeit money. Technically, I never bought it. According to this, there is nothing I can do, post-reception of citizenship, that would cause me to lose it against my will. I'm not sure how that applies in cases like that nincompoop Conrad Black, but I THINK that he renounced his voluntarily. But I'm not bored enough to look him up.
So apart from using a calculator and adding up your precious 1095 days in Canada, what makes you a Canadian? You can bury your head in the sand and ignore all the information that CIC gives you but if it is that hard to understand then you have a real problem in life in general. You shouldn't need to be told this, but when Citizenship & Immigration tell you that becoming a Canadian is a privilege that must be earned and applied for, it is also being said and naturally felt by the majority that this is a big honour. If you do not understand this, then take some time to think about it if you expect and hope to swear allegiance to Queen Elizabeth II and Canada by becoming a Canadian. Take a closer look at the Oath too.on-hold said:OK, if it is a privilege, then can you give me an example of someone who met the requirements, passed the test, applied, went through the process, and did not receive citizenship? I asked that question earlier, and am being met with bluster, but no examples.
Or another question -- if citizenship is a 'privilege', who decides who receives that 'privilege'? If the CIC officer or the citizenship judge have the right to refuse an applicant who meets all the criteria, then citizenship is indeed a privilege. Do they have that right? Can you give me an example of that right being exercised?
See, here is the thing about what we call 'law'. It applies to all people, equally. It defines what we call 'rights'. Law defines who can become a Canadian citizen, and how they do so. It's not being 'entitled' to insist that the law apply equally to all people.
55.3.1.1 Under s.40 of the 1981 Act, as amended by the
Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002
from 1 April 2003 and by the Immigration, Asylum
and Nationality Act 2006 from 16 June 2006, any
British citizen, British overseas territories citizen,
British Overseas citizen, British National
(Overseas), British protected person or British
subject may, by Order, be deprived of his or her
citizenship or status if the Home Secretary is
satisfied that:
a. it would be conducive to the public good
to deprive the person of his or her British
nationality, and that s/he would not become
stateless as a result of the deprivation
(ss.40(2) and (4));
First of all, there's no "collective we" of PRs and citizens. I am a citizen and you're not. I can vote but you can't. I can leave Canada whenever I want and come back to live whenever I want, but you can't--you can get easily kicked out of Canada even for a minor criminal offense. So don't even go there. We citizens are different from you guys PRs.us2yow said:All the hoity toity PC-ness and appropriateness apart, the fact is they attract truck loads of immigrants who pump in precious $$ into this economy that they need and could not do without.
Do the math and see how much we - the "collective we" of PRs and citizens in waiting - are injecting into this economy. If they get too pricey and holier than thou (especially when there are no real jobs here in ways that many other developed countries have for qualified applicants - and I am not talking of blue collar or trades jobs or engineers having to work in grocery stores or drive cabs), we will see the immense contribution we are making monetarily - and then there are contributions we are making on other dimensions. The longer term respect for Canada will be lost if they get too fundamentalist or narrow-minded. RELATIVE TO better times, they have lost international standing - no one really looks to them for major muscle, we have no presence on the UN Security Council, a short-sighted foreign policy and only much fatigue for the current policies as clearly evidenced in the recent end-of-year polls. Even they must get tired of the way they do business. All things bad must come to an end so regeneration and renewal can happen !
I as a citizen am not waiting for anything!Dejaavu said:Corazon3,
us2yow wrote: "we 'the collective we" of PRs and citizens in waiting.