YESTERDAY MY HONEY SHOULD ARRIVE, but he did not!!!!

[diadromous mermaid 36]

It just seems that the obvious is being ignored. The religious ceremony was addressed with the I-129F and it was approved. The POE turned him away for something that was already approved. So basically, one said its allowed, one said it isn't. Shouldn't our immigration laws remain consistent?

The religious cermony is not the issue. The laws are not inconsistent. His claim to be married, on this turf, and in immigration jurisdiction contraverted the very document he was using to enter the country. Period. It has nothing to do with islam, religion, or anything else.

As far as those of you offering help, thats great! Maybe just soften the tone a bit. Rather than say "He's not eligible". Say "the POE viewed him as ineligible". Rather than say "lesson learned" say it was a tragic miscommunication, hopefully others can read what happened to you and learn.

Oh, come on! On the one hand you are shouting to be treated equally, and then you are asking for extra special consideration. How much farther is this going to go? Your are making an issue of semantics. This is a lesson learned, not only for the couple involved, but for many here now and many to come. Even goldenheart admitted in her post that this is why she shared the information. Are we to ignore her own wishes?

Edited June 3, 2006 by diadromous mermaid

[pax 0]

It just seems that the obvious is being ignored. The religious ceremony was addressed with the I-129F and it was approved. The POE turned him away for something that was already approved. So basically, one said its allowed, one said it isn't. Shouldn't our immigration laws remain consistent?

Similar things have happened to VJers, and it is sad and unfortunate when they happen. You might or might not be familiar with a UKer named Liam who was told at his interview that his criminal convictions in the fairly distant past did not require waivers, but then was denied entry at the PFI because the POE officers felt that he did. GH and her sweetie are fortunate that with a good lawyer and the right paperwork, they might be able to get this straightened out fairly quickly; Liam and his fiancee had to wait a few more months. Point being, the officers at the POE ALWAYS have the final say. Maybe that's a good thing and maybe it's not, but it is the way it is and it certainly is highly unlikely to change. We may as well live with that.

To GH, again, I do apologize for not making it clear that I DO NOT believe you and your sweetie did anything morally or legally wrong. You did what you believed to be right in your particular set of circumstances and I don't wish to judge you for that, nor would I ever. I am unfamiliar with much of Muslim custom and I am sure you are not. I simply don't wish to see the good names of others dragged through the mud due to the truly unfortunate circumstance in which you and your sweetie find yourselves.

But again, I am certain that neither you nor your sweetie meant anything wrong or misleading in what you did. And I do apologize, again, for not making that clear.

Believe me when I say that I don't like to see anyone suffer and I hope you and your sweetie can be reunited happily soon.

Edited June 3, 2006 by pax

[babybunny 2]

zyggy & pax,

Thanks for reiterating much of what I shared yesterday on this thread. While I can understand the temptation of some of the regular members of this forum to want to find a reason why this is so unfair, it may *seem* unfair, but that's not necessarily true, nor is it productive. To suggest that anything can be reversed would be to suggest that the regulations should be rewritten. That's not practical, nor is it likely to occur.

I wish others could refrain from suggesting that the very land they wish their beloved partners to live in is a hostile, heartless place, and rife with prejudice. Our borders are as secure as they are so that we can retain the freedoms we all so dearly respect here. Is it the result of the acts of a few that have taken advantage of us? Yes, but were all living with both the consequences and the benefits.

Unfortunately, there's no use crying over spillt milk, no matter how tragic it is for the parties involved, the damage is done, and now it's time to get proactive and be focused on solutions to the problem.

I hope that goldenheart will reconsider her choice to participate on VJ. Her tragedy has opened a lot of eyes, that might otherwise have stumbled into a similar complication. She has work to do to resolve this nightmare, and I suspect that this board will provide her with support, couple that with the information she receives from a qualified immigration attorney that has experience in these matters, it will make the road ahead more navigable.

It's people like you that make America bad>>>>>

<<<<hostile, heartless place, and rife with prejudice>>>>

<<<<there's no use crying over spillt milk>>>>

<<<<She has work to do to resolve this nightmare>>>>

chiquita,

Of course, you're entitled to your opinion, and not much of what you are saying here is

a. going to alter my point of view, or my focus

b. going to correct any wrong that has happened

If you wish to be a source of support and compassion, as evidently you claim I am not, then "do something"! There's a man who is right now in Germany 4600 miles or more away from his fiancée, with whom he expected to be reunited two days ago. Do you really think he'd feel better if he reads only outpouring of excuses, or do you think he would feel much more relieved to know that there are folks here trying to assist goldenheart in understanding the issue, addressing it with her attorney and moving towards a resolution?

I am so angry over how critical a few have been to GH. Unless it happens to you, there are those who will never know the pain and heartache of such misfortunes in life.

You have no idea what level of compassion, attention or encouragement I have offered goldenheart in private. A person I had never had the occasion to speak with or even post with prior to this incident. In fact, FYI, I had an important project that deadlined yesterday, that I put aside to answer her PMS and offer whatever aid I could.

My anger is towards those who are self-rightous bigots.

This whole matter arose out of a POE agent responding to something said, inadvertantly, and presuming something that was, apparently, not the case. A mere "mistake", as you'd want to call it. Well, in view of that, there was this outpouring of outrage, was there not? How could they do this? Now, you are inclined to consider people who are actively assisting as "self-righteous bigots", without knowledge of any other communication or details about me as a person. You are seeing something that simply does not exist. Can you not then consider you are just as wrong as the very POE agent that mischaracterised goldenheart's fiancé?

You will never know the nightmare since it didn't happen to you. If you had any compassion at all you would at least soften your responses. You are exactly what makes our great country foul.

You have absolutely no idea of the nightmares, pain, heartache and misfortune that I have faced, not that I'd care to share them here, anyway. And I believe that compassion is something I offer at all times, as a result of that pain and misfortune. Why even in my response to your comment, I am affording you more respect than you did to me. That's OK, if you need to find a scapegoat for your misplaced anger, then by all means choose me.

WOWOW * HATS OFF *

It just seems that the obvious is being ignored. The religious ceremony was addressed with the I-129F and it was approved. The POE turned him away for something that was already approved. So basically, one said its allowed, one said it isn't. Shouldn't our immigration laws remain consistent?

The religious cermony is not the issue. The laws are not inconsistent. His claim to be married, on this turf, and in immigration jurisdiction contraverted the very document he was using to enter the country. Period. It has nothing to do with islam, religion, or anything else.

As far as those of you offering help, thats great! Maybe just soften the tone a bit. Rather than say "He's not eligible". Say "the POE viewed him as ineligible". Rather than say "lesson learned" say it was a tragic miscommunication, hopefully others can read what happened to you and learn.

Oh, come on! On the one hand you are shouting to be treated equally, and then you are asking for extra special consideration. How much farther is this going to go? Your are making an issue of semantics. This is a lesson learned, not only for the couple involved, but for many here now and many to come. Even goldenheart admitted in her post that this is why she shared the information. Are we to ignore her own wishes?

I have seen couples on Vj facing with NOIR/ NOID because, the CO suspect that maybe the

couple is perhaps married. it was not based on " claiming to be married" but the CO place that

couple on NOID / NOIR because the couple is showing signs possible marriage- sometimes reflected in the engagement photos.

[Veiled Princess 1]

I'll be sure to tell my husband not to refer to me as his wife while traveling here. It figures that they would prefer him to be coming here to shack up with a woman he's not married to instead of being married religiously first. That is the "American way" after all.

As far as being allowed to fraternize with a man you're not married to in Islam... NO way! You can talk to him with your dad (or other male family member) present during an engagement period but there is no dating in Islam.

I'm sorry. Please help me to understand. On the one hand you are snubbing the "American Way" of your fiancé coming here and shacking up with a woman before marriage and how against your religious beliefs that is, and yet you are the petitioner, correct? So, why did you choose the fiancé visa, as opposed to an immigrant visa or a K-3, where you would not have to compro,mise your values?

It just seems to me, that if some activity, some "American" activity goes against all that one honours in one's religion, that you have other options.

It would be my expectation that if anyone has been exposed to or been the victim of bigoted views and treatment, that the last thing they'd be inclined to do would be to actually engage in it themselves. Unfortunately, several posts in this thread prove otherwise.

I think that the immediate reaction would be to lash out at whoever acted in a way you felt was prejudiced against you. I also think it is natural to feel that whoever agrees with the actions of someone you perceive to be bigoted is bigoted themselves. Not saying that it's right, but I think it's just an emotional response.

It may be Jenn, although it's not my style and I would think that it does sort of fall into the "pot calling the kettle black" category. If it's so reprehensible that it would evoke such outcry, it's unthinkable, right?

As I stated already, because it was too much of a pain to get the marriage certificate from overseas... we have had a religious ceremony and so he is NOT my fiance he is my HUSBAND. I will NOT be shacking up with a man I'm not married to thank you very much.

I'm not quite sure what you meant by the last part... I'm assuming that is your way to tell me if I don't like it here I can leave?

[diadromous mermaid 36]

I'll be sure to tell my husband not to refer to me as his wife while traveling here. It figures that they would prefer him to be coming here to shack up with a woman he's not married to instead of being married religiously first. That is the "American way" after all.

As far as being allowed to fraternize with a man you're not married to in Islam... NO way! You can talk to him with your dad (or other male family member) present during an engagement period but there is no dating in Islam.

I'm sorry. Please help me to understand. On the one hand you are snubbing the "American Way" of your fiancé coming here and shacking up with a woman before marriage and how against your religious beliefs that is, and yet you are the petitioner, correct? So, why did you choose the fiancé visa, as opposed to an immigrant visa or a K-3, where you would not have to compro,mise your values?

It just seems to me, that if some activity, some "American" activity goes against all that one honours in one's religion, that you have other options.

It would be my expectation that if anyone has been exposed to or been the victim of bigoted views and treatment, that the last thing they'd be inclined to do would be to actually engage in it themselves. Unfortunately, several posts in this thread prove otherwise.

I think that the immediate reaction would be to lash out at whoever acted in a way you felt was prejudiced against you. I also think it is natural to feel that whoever agrees with the actions of someone you perceive to be bigoted is bigoted themselves. Not saying that it's right, but I think it's just an emotional response.

It may be Jenn, although it's not my style and I would think that it does sort of fall into the "pot calling the kettle black" category. If it's so reprehensible that it would evoke such outcry, it's unthinkable, right?

As I stated already, because it was too much of a pain to get the marriage certificate from overseas... we have had a religious ceremony and so he is NOT my fiance he is my HUSBAND. I will NOT be shacking up with a man I'm not married to thank you very much.

I'm not quite sure what you meant by the last part... I'm assuming that is your way to tell me if I don't like it here I can leave?

Your profile say that you are doing a K-1, correct? It would be wise not to assume. What I meant by that (I thought it was clear) was that IF K-1 visas pose problems for those couples that really need to be married in order to avoid compromising their religious beliefs, then why do they not apply for K-3's?

Edited June 3, 2006 by diadromous mermaid

[pax 0]

As I stated already, because it was too much of a pain to get the marriage certificate from overseas... we have had a religious ceremony and so he is NOT my fiance he is my HUSBAND. I will NOT be shacking up with a man I'm not married to thank you very much.

I'm not quite sure what you meant by the last part... I'm assuming that is your way to tell me if I don't like it here I can leave?

VPL, are you aware that USCIS and DOS employees read this site?

No, I think that's DM's way of telling you that the immigration process offers several options to couples who wish to be together, and that couples should choose one that best fits religious and cultural lifestyles, and thus a K-1 is probably not the best visa for persons who would prefer not to live together until they're married.

[Veiled Princess 1]

Your profile say that you are doing a K-1, correct? It would be wise not to assume. What I meant by that (I thought it was clear) was that IF K-1 visas pose problems for those couples that really need to be married in order to avoid compromising their religious beliefs, then why do they not apply for K-3's?

Well we're not compromising our religous beliefs because we're are married religiously. We are not, however, eligible for K-3 since we don't have a marriage license/certificate.

VPL, are you aware that USCIS and DOS employees read this site?

So? Have I said something wrong?

And I already answered why a K-1 is our only option.

[babybunny 2]

I dont get religous marriage not being real. please please explain this. its a hard concept really. why profess your love to god. but call it not real? is it not real because, its not registared? please explain this..

Every couple has a different reason for their visa choices. Our marriage was real in the sense that we committed ourselves in front of God to be husband and wife. But, getting legally married in Egypt was very difficult time wise and parentwise (parents would have basically disowned me if we had done anything legally binding). So, because we couldn't in good concious live together before marriage, we were religiously married, but choice to be legally married in the US to honor my parents.

must be a culture thing.

your parents would have disowned you for your marriage being legal. then you legally married in the US to honor my parents ?

This is a prime example as to those comming here on K-1 saying they are not married!

[pax 0]

VPL, are you aware that USCIS and DOS employees read this site?

So? Have I said something wrong?

And I already answered why a K-1 is our only option.

If you feel the K-1 was the best option for you, that's your decision. I would think, however, that this very thread demonstrated why it's unwise for you to refer to your sweetie as your husband outside your religious community or your family.

[babybunny 2]

Your profile say that you are doing a K-1, correct? It would be wise not to assume. What I meant by that (I thought it was clear) was that IF K-1 visas pose problems for those couples that really need to be married in order to avoid compromising their religious beliefs, then why do they not apply for K-3's?

Well we're not compromising our religous beliefs because we're are married religiously. We are not, however, eligible for K-3 since we don't have a marriage license/certificate.

VPL, are you aware that USCIS and DOS employees read this site?

So? Have I said something wrong?

And I already answered why a K-1 is our only option.

are you actully saying that NO ONE can have a legal marriage in your country?

well better run to the embassy let all the CR1 and K-3 folks know the news.

I'll be sure to tell my husband not to refer to me as his wife while traveling here. It figures that they would prefer him to be coming here to shack up with a woman he's not married to instead of being married religiously first. That is the "American way" after all.

As far as being allowed to fraternize with a man you're not married to in Islam... NO way! You can talk to him with your dad (or other male family member) present during an engagement period but there is no dating in Islam.

I'm sorry. Please help me to understand. On the one hand you are snubbing the "American Way" of your fiancé coming here and shacking up with a woman before marriage and how against your religious beliefs that is, and yet you are the petitioner, correct? So, why did you choose the fiancé visa, as opposed to an immigrant visa or a K-3, where you would not have to compro,mise your values?

It just seems to me, that if some activity, some "American" activity goes against all that one honours in one's religion, that you have other options.

It would be my expectation that if anyone has been exposed to or been the victim of bigoted views and treatment, that the last thing they'd be inclined to do would be to actually engage in it themselves. Unfortunately, several posts in this thread prove otherwise.

I think that the immediate reaction would be to lash out at whoever acted in a way you felt was prejudiced against you. I also think it is natural to feel that whoever agrees with the actions of someone you perceive to be bigoted is bigoted themselves. Not saying that it's right, but I think it's just an emotional response.

It may be Jenn, although it's not my style and I would think that it does sort of fall into the "pot calling the kettle black" category. If it's so reprehensible that it would evoke such outcry, it's unthinkable, right?

As I stated already, because it was too much of a pain to get the marriage certificate from overseas... we have had a religious ceremony and so he is NOT my fiance he is my HUSBAND. I will NOT be shacking up with a man I'm not married to thank you very much.

I'm not quite sure what you meant by the last part... I'm assuming that is your way to tell me if I don't like it here I can leave?

Your profile say that you are doing a K-1, correct? It would be wise not to assume. What I meant by that (I thought it was clear) was that IF K-1 visas pose problems for those couples that really need to be married in order to avoid compromising their religious beliefs, then why do they not apply for K-3's?

They think K-1 is faster.

[diadromous mermaid 36]

VPL, are you aware that USCIS and DOS employees read this site?

So? Have I said something wrong?

And I already answered why a K-1 is our only option.

If you feel the K-1 was the best option for you, that's your decision. I would think, however, that this very thread demonstrated why it's unwise for you to refer to your sweetie as your husband outside your religious community or your family.

I think goldenheart's dilemma has really given many more an opportunity to see just how something like this can happen. I hope more people read this thread and understand that there is an inherent risk in choosing some visas over others, when there are specific requirements of the particular couple.

[pax 0]

Amen, DM, and with that, I am retiring for the eve. How about yourself?

[diadromous mermaid 36]

Amen, DM, and with that, I am retiring for the eve. How about yourself?

Indeed.

[babybunny 2]

VPL, are you aware that USCIS and DOS employees read this site?

So? Have I said something wrong?

And I already answered why a K-1 is our only option.

If you feel the K-1 was the best option for you, that's your decision. I would think, however, that this very thread demonstrated why it's unwise for you to refer to your sweetie as your husband outside your religious community or your family.

someone stated on this thead. they avoid using the word " husband" " wife" even though you are religously married. that way you wont have problems at POE ?

this is really not a good idea. this is really a wake up call to those that keep doing this thing.

what it sounds like to me is you are MARRIED and you decided not to registar the marriage in order to

avoid delayed time apart. I will say perhaps alot of people do it -because its not intentional. -I would think it not intentional. just a simple mistake.

VPL, are you aware that USCIS and DOS employees read this site?

So? Have I said something wrong?

And I already answered why a K-1 is our only option.

If you feel the K-1 was the best option for you, that's your decision. I would think, however, that this very thread demonstrated why it's unwise for you to refer to your sweetie as your husband outside your religious community or your family.

adding here.. the Embassy does make random field investigations. happend to me twice.

if one of the neighbours has a slip of the tongue. Ah-Oh.

[Veiled Princess 1]

are you actully saying that NO ONE can have a legal marriage in your country?

well better run to the embassy let all the CR1 and K-3 folks know the news.

They think K-1 is faster.

What? My country is America.

I did not and do not think the K-1 is faster. The K-3 was my first choice and was the plan when we went to Egypt for our wedding but the hassle with the Egyptian government took way too long and neither one of us could stay in Egypt for such a long time to get that taken care of. We were going to get our marriage certificate there and file DCF before I left to come back to America because we were told that would be the fastest way to do it but there was too much red tape to cut through there so I came home without a marriage license and had to file for K-1 since we weren't "legally" married. I don't know where you got that I said that no one in America can have a legal marriage.