The rights of immigrants
Immigrants
without citizenship should NOT have the same rights as citizens.
According to
the British sociologist T. H Marshall’s essay “Citizenship and Social Class”
issued in 1950, citizenship roughly divides into three areas of civil rights
like freedom, political rights like voting, taking public examinations and
holding public offices, and finally social rights like welfare payment. These
three parts involve the nation and her people’s citizenship. Furthermore,
according to “The Constitution of the Public of China ”
Article 2: The sovereignty of the Republic of China
The status
of immigrants is classified into four types: having nationality, getting on the
household register, settling down and just staying a short period of time. Only
having nationality one is a citizen and has all the rights of a citizen in
accordance with law.
There are some
other reasons supporting my opinion, that immigrates should not have the same
rights as citizens, let me explain more specifically.
The first
reason is that immigrants haven’t the same obligation as citizens. Immigrants have
lived in the country less than natives. Natives have more responsibilities than
immigrants. Suppose the environment changes, immigrants have the chance to
choose to return home or to go elsewhere which offers more advantage to them. No
matter whether it is about the economy or is the war. Yet the natives have no
choices. They can only stay with the country through thick and thin.
In addition,
for those immigrants who have committed crime, they are charged by different
law depending on how their original countries deal with the native country. This
might affect the feelings of native people.
Yet, when
immigrants have got official citizenship, their rights and the obligations are
the same as natives. Under these circumstances, their status should be equal to
natives.
Unless they
have Taiwanese nationality, I think, immigrants without citizenship should NOT
have the same rights as citizens.
沒有留言:
張貼留言