http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-refugee-plan-women-children-families-1.3330185

They know what it's all aboot.

Time to get a sex change or get married, gentlemen.

What's the big deal? They could always reincarnate themselves as female.

Yup! What's the use in being a male in those countries when it seems like males are only good for dying in these STUPID & SENSELESS wars?

Some screening has been done, with more to come. Is it a guarantee? No but it is a step.

Maybe those single guys could try this:http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/H-6/FullText.html

It's a silly measure, but one that only applies to the 25,000 being brought in by year's end.

Why is it silly?

Because we're only taking in refugees that have been certified by the UN and by our own system.

Why wouldn't it be silly to exclude single males?

You haven't answered why it is silly to exclude them. Your answer thus far doesn't provide a reason. Our system apparently isn't vetting them and to rely on the UN system is apparently not acceptable to our government.

Yes, I did answer. Read it again. We are vetting them and even that is only after they've already been vetted.

Noted that you didn't answer my question. Again, why wouldn't it be silly to exclude single males?

I'm guessing its because of the higher risk of them being terrorists.

Some people are more equal than others.

Hopefully that doesn't apply to any gay Syrians.

Why you interested?

No, because they face execution in their homeland.

Male privilege at work. Just like Titanic.

I get to have several responsibilities including some that may require me to die or work for the benefit of others instead of myself, yet I will be denied certain benefits available to others who are not held to those responsibilities?

Patriarchy!

So its pretty much a free way into Canada for female suicide bombers. I mean do people forget that there are also female terrorist.

But in general violence is overwhelmingly done by males. And the female suicide bombers are usually working within an organization that is mostly males.

And what makes you think they wont get orders from back home?

Besides, they should still be RESPONSIBLE for their OWN actions, regardless if a male told them to do it or not.

I never said that they couldn't get orders from home or that they shouldn't be responsible for their own actions.

Isn't that just blatant discrimination, generalization, stereotyping? A male with a family can't be a potential threat?