why are K1 being approved

[notime4haterz 0]

rebecca, I didnt talk about value. priority yes, value,no.

But, I will say that "piece of paper" makes it legal, it makes the spouse a member of the family. I also said that i have no problems with the k-1'ers personally..i have a problem that USCIS doesnt give family presendence over soon to be/intend to be family.

Sweetie, you don't have to justify your opinion. I for one DO think that those who are married should receive equal or faster processing than those who are not. That doesn't mean I have a problem with K-1 people. Just means that I think the system is unfair. If anyone doesn't like it, too bad!

[rebeccajo 14]

Lisa -

Ok.

Perhaps you don't interpret what you wrote as others do.

There's no need for us to argue about it.

I've been reading VJ a pretty long while. The topic of this thread has been raised a lot - why do K1's take precedence over already married, committed couples. And your comment - no matter how you meant it or how we are reading it - has been stated often. The ensuing discussion usually doesn't turn out well.

But.........because the topic has been discussed so much, there's something I've gotten really curious about. And I'm going to put it out there. I hope we can have a good discussion about it.

If SPEED of reunification is/was so important, why didn't you (not you personally, Lisa, but collectively 'you' - K3 applicants) decide to do a K3 rather than a K1? It's been known for a long time that the spousal visas take longer. Why did you elect to marry rather than file a fiance' visa?

Edited January 28, 2009 by rebeccajo

[notime4haterz 0]

Lisa -

Ok.

Perhaps you don't interpret what you wrote as others do.

There's no need for us to argue about it.

I've been reading VJ a pretty long while. The topic of this thread has been raised a lot - why do K1's take precedence over already married, committed couples. And your comment - no matter how you meant it or how we are reading it - has been stated often. The ensuing discussion usually doesn't turn out well.

But.........because the topic has been discussed so much, there's something I've gotten really curious about. And I'm going to put it out there. I hope we can have a good discussion about it.

If SPEED of reunification is/was so important, why didn't you (not you personally, Lisa, but collectively 'you' - K3 applicants) decide to do a K1 rather than a K3? It's been known for a long time that the spousal visas take longer. Why did you elect to marry rather than file a fiance' visa?

I was told by my lawyer that the K-3 was the fastest way to get him here. I asked about the K-1 and was told that a lot of things could go wrong with the K-1 and that the K-3 was faster and safer. I took his word for it and just got married and did the K-3.

[rebeccajo 14]

Lisa -

Ok.

Perhaps you don't interpret what you wrote as others do.

There's no need for us to argue about it.

I've been reading VJ a pretty long while. The topic of this thread has been raised a lot - why do K1's take precedence over already married, committed couples. And your comment - no matter how you meant it or how we are reading it - has been stated often. The ensuing discussion usually doesn't turn out well.

But.........because the topic has been discussed so much, there's something I've gotten really curious about. And I'm going to put it out there. I hope we can have a good discussion about it.

If SPEED of reunification is/was so important, why didn't you (not you personally, Lisa, but collectively 'you' - K3 applicants) decide to do a K1 rather than a K3? It's been known for a long time that the spousal visas take longer. Why did you elect to marry rather than file a fiance' visa?

I was told by my lawyer that the K-3 was the fastest way to get him here. I asked about the K-1 and was told that a lot of things could go wrong with the K-1 and that the K-3 was faster and safer. I took his word for it and just got married and did the K-3.

Ok.

Did you think about researching this?

Or did you just trust the lawyers advice?

[Y's_habibitk 2]

Lisa -

Ok.

Perhaps you don't interpret what you wrote as others do.

There's no need for us to argue about it.

I've been reading VJ a pretty long while. The topic of this thread has been raised a lot - why do K1's take precedence over already married, committed couples. And your comment - no matter how you meant it or how we are reading it - has been stated often. The ensuing discussion usually doesn't turn out well.

But.........because the topic has been discussed so much, there's something I've gotten really curious about. And I'm going to put it out there. I hope we can have a good discussion about it.

If SPEED of reunification is/was so important, why didn't you (not you personally, Lisa, but collectively 'you' - K3 applicants) decide to do a K1 rather than a K3? It's been known for a long time that the spousal visas take longer. Why did you elect to marry rather than file a fiance' visa?

some people are totally against "shacking up" or whatever you wanna call it, thats one answer i can offer.

Rebecca,

No one is arguing.

[notime4haterz 0]

No. I assumed that paying a lawyer would get me off the hook of having to research anything. My bad! I mean, if I wanted to figure it out on my own, I could have filed everything on my own. I assumed that someone with a law degree and decades of experience would know the latest trends and information much better than myself. I assumed wrong.

[notime4haterz 0]

No. I assumed that paying a lawyer would get me off the hook of having to research anything. My bad! I mean, if I wanted to figure it out on my own, I could have filed everything on my own. I assumed that someone with a law degree and decades of experience would know the latest trends and information much better than myself. I assumed wrong.

[rebeccajo 14]

some people are totally against "shacking up" or whatever you wanna call it, thats one answer i can offer.

Rebecca,

No one is arguing.

Well - that's a valid reason, in my opinion.

[rebeccajo 14]

No. I assumed that paying a lawyer would get me off the hook of having to research anything. My bad! I mean, if I wanted to figure it out on my own, I could have filed everything on my own. I assumed that someone with a law degree and decades of experience would know the latest trends and information much better than myself. I assumed wrong.

Well, that's another discussion we have around here often. Who makes a good immigration lawyer and who does not.

A law degree alone sure doesn't. It's a very specialized field and MOST of the lawyers around who do immigration work usually practice the employment based variety. You have to scour around to find one who is an expert in family based.

[Minya's wife 24]

Lisa -

Ok.

Perhaps you don't interpret what you wrote as others do.

There's no need for us to argue about it.

I've been reading VJ a pretty long while. The topic of this thread has been raised a lot - why do K1's take precedence over already married, committed couples. And your comment - no matter how you meant it or how we are reading it - has been stated often. The ensuing discussion usually doesn't turn out well.

But.........because the topic has been discussed so much, there's something I've gotten really curious about. And I'm going to put it out there. I hope we can have a good discussion about it.

If SPEED of reunification is/was so important, why didn't you (not you personally, Lisa, but collectively 'you' - K3 applicants) decide to do a K1 rather than a K3? It's been known for a long time that the spousal visas take longer. Why did you elect to marry rather than file a fiance' visa?

some people are totally against "shacking up" or whatever you wanna call it, thats one answer i can offer.

Rebecca,

No one is arguing.

Why would a K-1 be considered "shacking up"? Once the visa is issued, the 90 days to get married is the maximum a person can take....if one is against shacking up, one can get married the day of, or day after, the beneficiary arrives in the US. (And by shacking up, I understand it to mean physically living together before marriage....do you understand this term any differently?)

-P

Edited January 28, 2009 by Minya's wife

[LaL 418]

Lisa -

Ok.

Perhaps you don't interpret what you wrote as others do.

There's no need for us to argue about it.

I've been reading VJ a pretty long while. The topic of this thread has been raised a lot - why do K1's take precedence over already married, committed couples. And your comment - no matter how you meant it or how we are reading it - has been stated often. The ensuing discussion usually doesn't turn out well.

But.........because the topic has been discussed so much, there's something I've gotten really curious about. And I'm going to put it out there. I hope we can have a good discussion about it.

If SPEED of reunification is/was so important, why didn't you (not you personally, Lisa, but collectively 'you' - K3 applicants) decide to do a K1 rather than a K3? It's been known for a long time that the spousal visas take longer. Why did you elect to marry rather than file a fiance' visa?

some people are totally against "shacking up" or whatever you wanna call it, thats one answer i can offer.

Rebecca,

No one is arguing.

Why would a K-1 be considered "shacking up"? Once the visa is issued, the 90 days to get married is the maximum a person can take....if one is against shacking up, one can get married the day of, or day after, the beneficiary arrives in the US. (And by shacking up, I understand it to mean physically living together before marriage....do you understand this term any differently?)

-P

Having a SO from a muslim country can create obstacles in the culturally acceptable category. IE: get married or possibly have difficulties with local people being aware you are together without being maried. Referring specifically to spending time in the beneficiary's country - not once they arrive in the US.

Edited January 28, 2009 by LaL

[rebeccajo 14]

Why would a K-1 be considered "shacking up"? Once the visa is issued, the 90 days to get married is the maximum a person can take....if one is against shacking up, one can get married the day of, or day after, the beneficiary arrives in the US. (And by shacking up, I understand it to mean physically living together before marriage....do you understand this term any differently?)

-P

I remember VipulAndJamie and this was really important to them.

I forget how they worked it out. I can't remember if Vipul slept on the sofa till after the wedding or not, but I remember they worked out something................

[Minya's wife 24]

Lisa -

Ok.

Perhaps you don't interpret what you wrote as others do.

There's no need for us to argue about it.

I've been reading VJ a pretty long while. The topic of this thread has been raised a lot - why do K1's take precedence over already married, committed couples. And your comment - no matter how you meant it or how we are reading it - has been stated often. The ensuing discussion usually doesn't turn out well.

But.........because the topic has been discussed so much, there's something I've gotten really curious about. And I'm going to put it out there. I hope we can have a good discussion about it.

If SPEED of reunification is/was so important, why didn't you (not you personally, Lisa, but collectively 'you' - K3 applicants) decide to do a K1 rather than a K3? It's been known for a long time that the spousal visas take longer. Why did you elect to marry rather than file a fiance' visa?

some people are totally against "shacking up" or whatever you wanna call it, thats one answer i can offer.

Rebecca,

No one is arguing.

Why would a K-1 be considered "shacking up"? Once the visa is issued, the 90 days to get married is the maximum a person can take....if one is against shacking up, one can get married the day of, or day after, the beneficiary arrives in the US. (And by shacking up, I understand it to mean physically living together before marriage....do you understand this term any differently?)

-P

Having a SO from a muslim country can create obstacles in the culturally acceptable category. IE: get married or possibly have difficulties with local people being aware you are together without being maried.

But this is the period before the visa is issued...to satisfy the meeting and ongoing relationship requirements, yes? So its a cultural thing, and not that K-1s are quicker than K-3s.

[Y's_habibitk 2]

Lisa -

Ok.

Perhaps you don't interpret what you wrote as others do.

There's no need for us to argue about it.

I've been reading VJ a pretty long while. The topic of this thread has been raised a lot - why do K1's take precedence over already married, committed couples. And your comment - no matter how you meant it or how we are reading it - has been stated often. The ensuing discussion usually doesn't turn out well.

But.........because the topic has been discussed so much, there's something I've gotten really curious about. And I'm going to put it out there. I hope we can have a good discussion about it.

If SPEED of reunification is/was so important, why didn't you (not you personally, Lisa, but collectively 'you' - K3 applicants) decide to do a K1 rather than a K3? It's been known for a long time that the spousal visas take longer. Why did you elect to marry rather than file a fiance' visa?

some people are totally against "shacking up" or whatever you wanna call it, thats one answer i can offer.

Rebecca,

No one is arguing.

Why would a K-1 be considered "shacking up"? Once the visa is issued, the 90 days to get married is the maximum a person can take....if one is against shacking up, one can get married the day of, or day after, the beneficiary arrives in the US. (And by shacking up, I understand it to mean physically living together before marriage....do you understand this term any differently?)

-P

People who are against it, do just that..except, they do it in the others country so there arent weeks of said shacking

[Minya's wife 24]

Why would a K-1 be considered "shacking up"? Once the visa is issued, the 90 days to get married is the maximum a person can take....if one is against shacking up, one can get married the day of, or day after, the beneficiary arrives in the US. (And by shacking up, I understand it to mean physically living together before marriage....do you understand this term any differently?)

-P

I remember VipulAndJamie and this was really important to them.

I forget how they worked it out. I can't remember if Vipul slept on the sofa till after the wedding or not, but I remember they worked out something................

That's what I was thinking too...that something can be worked out if this is an important issue to the couple. But Lal points out that the cultural mores of some muslim societies sometimes make it difficult to meet and have an ongoing relationship with an SO that is muslim.