They don't stop being people fleeing religious persecution (or faking it) because they get citizenshgip, genius.
Yes they do, moron, are they still fleeing religious persecution in the new place thy got citizenship?
No, you don't get to dodge the question. Are people fleeing religious persecution refugees or not?
There’s no dodging anything, refugees did not become a class until 1951. This is inarguable, you keep pretending that somehow selective immigration is the same as refugees.
Yes they do, moron, are they still fleeing religious persecution in the new place thy got citizenship?
Are they refugees only for so long as they are in the process of fleeing?
There’s no dodging anything, refugees did not become a class until 1951. This is inarguable, you keep pretending that somehow selective immigration is the same as refugees.
I've told you twice. Not sure why you insist on lying about it. Or maybe you don't know what a subset is.
Yes they do, moron, are they still fleeing religious persecution in the new place thy got citizenship?
There’s no dodging anything, refugees did not become a class until 1951. This is inarguable, you keep pretending that somehow selective immigration is the same as refugees.
Are they refugees only for so long as they are in the process of fleeing?
I've told you twice. Not sure why you insist on lying about it. Or maybe you don't know what a subset is.
You mean literally the definition, which is why they seek asylum TEMPORARILY?
You made it up, and were proven wrong. Do I need to bring up the legal definition of immigration again?
Unfortunately, there is nothing TEMPORARY about it.
No, I'd rather that you claim again that without the UN refugee treaty, you need a CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT to allow refugees.