REASON FOR IMBRA ???

[milestogo 0]

"Imbra2005" is is obviously either a paid lackey or a graduate student in woman's studies with too much time on her (or his) hands. This is feel good legislation with feel good intent but discriminatory consequences. That the psupposed oor helpless immigrant woman is in need protection is a discrimnation of low expectations. We would be better off if the discriminatory aspects of this law were removed and that it was made universal - all those marrying US or foreign must submit to background checks. After all abuse exists across all types of marriages in all categories of people. The outcry on such a law would get a lot of politicians like Maria Cantwell fired.

It may suprise folks that I am a lifelong Democrat and a supporter of all things egalitarian (woman's rights, gay rights, etc) but on this law I am a liberatarian - the government should not be mucking in these areas particularly in ways that clearly discriminate against one class of poeple unfairly (those marrying foreign as opposed to those marrying US). I have no doubt eventually this law will be struck down. I am liberal but liberal elitists who refer to endless research and studies in support of poor policy give us all a bad name.

Keep in mind there is an ignore feature in this forum.

Edited June 20, 2006 by milestogo

[Optimystic 0]

I hate the fact that I have to wait longer to be with Anna. She is in a stressful job that will eventually have an affect on her health, if it has not already. We truly enjoy one anothers company, we are crazy about one another. We miss each other terribly and I want to be with her so badly it hurts.

I am also for any pocess that helps safe guard the person who is coming from another country to be with someone they have come to love. I know the process if not full proof and I know that it might not save everyone but if it saves just one person I will not have waited in vein. Could the process be better yes, but I doubt any of the people writing the law have actually been through what each of us is going through or they would have figured out a way to improve the process without adding time to it.

I personally will set up a checking account as well as a saftey deposit box in Anna's name (and only her name) so that she will have access to enough money and her passport to leave me if things become unbearable for her. I don't want her to ever feel trapped or that she does not have any choices.

Paul/Anna

I personally will set up a checking account as well as a saftey deposit box in Anna's name (and only her name) so that she will have access to enough money and her passport to leave me if things become unbearable for her. I don't want her to ever feel trapped or that she does not have any choices.

Paul/Anna

You are very noble spirited and I admire your rational. I wholeheartedly feel what you are saying. There is nothing worse than feeling trapped in a relationship with no means for escape. Like the saying goes, "If you love someone set them free. If it is meant to be they will come back to you." However, we have all witnessed scenarios in which a mate would rather victimize their sig. other and keep him/her in mental bondage, rather than let them go, which is sad, because it speaks volumes about their character.

[Caladan 19]

I don't think that 'There isn't a law protecting American women!' is a valid argument against IMBRA.

For one, an American woman is in a much better position to ascertain her fiancés character. Yes, you can get to know people well online, and yes, there can always be surprises in real life. But playing the odds? If you can go over to man's neighborhood and meet his family and his college buddies and where he went to school, where he hangs out after work, you'll know a lot more about him than just what he presents.

She's also far less likely to speak English. She also has friends and family in the U.S. who could help her if things turned out to be abusive. She also has a lot more economic options.

And here's the big one. If an American-American relationship sours, one person doesn't hold the 'trump card' of a green card over the other to use as leverage to keep them in an abusive relationship. If I had a husband here who hit me, I could just throw him out without having to leave the U.S.

Not all men would, but the risk is there. It's just not parallel with an American-American case.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

This law DOES not stop a criminal from bringing a foreign spouse to the US, BUT IT DOES presume many people guilty until proven innocent BEFORE THE K1 PROCESS STARTS !!! That is the part I disagree with. I have repeatedly said how adamently I agree with a police check and/or background check for the USC at the time of the K1 filing.

Could you elaborate on this? I'm trying to understand how asking the petitioner some questions about their background is presuming guilt? Are you talking about asking whether the petitioner used a marriage broker or not?

First off, I point you back to the part of my messasges where I explain how I think the police checks are a good idea so that of course I am not talking about the petitioner being asked questsions. When you reach K1 stage you open yourself up to your private life being exposed for the safety of your petitioner and the citizens of the USA who you effect by bringing a spouse to America.

The part I am talking about is where a perfectly law abiding citizen needs to submit criminal background history to obtain someone's contact information. You can say 'those who are innocent need not worry', but that is the only people it effects. Criminals won't use websites like this to find their victims. The unscrouplous websites will just circumvent the law and get away with it. Instead of giving direct contact info they will start charging membership fees and inviting Americans to participate, without really putting any effort into getting them to sign up, thereby becoming legal and not requiring background checks.

Basically the law has done nothing but sour the well-meaning person from looking into international dating. I know people will be put off by that term international dating, but it happens and its legit and it doesn't make someone a pervert to be interested in dating someone from outside the US borders. This law tends to make the public feel that way. (just for the wacko's out there, this is not how I met my fiance so stop that post you are making right now, I just believe in freedoms for everyone)

As far as the Anastasia King case, she knew what she was doing. Her well meaning and naive parents did not. I agree whole-heartedly these women can be vunrable and deserve some protection from predetory sex criminals, but IMBRA does not solve this problem. It is a social problem that cannot change overnight with one mis-guided law. Anastasia King and her husband both broke the law by entering into marriage for the sole reason of Anastasia gaining US residence to go to a western medical school and to obtain US citizenship. When Anastasia 'broke' the contract by refusing Mr. King and deciding she wanted to go out on her own, Mr. King, A DELUSIONAL SICK TWISTED MAN, killed her. My point is, they BOTH BROKE THE LAW WHEN THEY USED A K1 VISA FOR THE SOLE PERPOSE OF HER RECIEVING CITIZENSHIP. If this law had been properly enforced then she would be alive today OR she would have gone to Europe or Australia and RAN THE SAME RISK OR MORE STATISTICALLY SPEAKING of marrying a wierdo murderer.

Speaking of which, your wife is Phillipino. Ask her about how horribly women who try to get out of the phillipines get treated by taiwanese men? Talk about an issue with abuse!! If people continue to make it harder for US citizens to met people abroad, abuse of foreign women may actually rise significantly.

As far as the statistics you quote, nearly 8000 of those were revoked immeditely leaving about 23000 cases over the last 10 years, or 2300 cases a year. How many of those were thrown out in court?? You don't know. Those statistics are not good enough to prove anything. Where are the HARD statistics with the in-depths studies devoted to this issue?

At the end of the day, IMBRA is law, and I am not completely unhappy about it. It is good that police checks will be happening. But the ####### attached to it AND ESPECIALLY the way it was rolled out is just another reminder that my personal freedoms are being erroded, and most people are caught up in the emotions of the issues to realize this. Soon we will be like... Russia!!

Thanks for elaborating. I can see your point of the stigma associated with international dating agencies and I don't think anyone should be ashamed of using an agency if their intentions are sincere. However, I'm speculating that IMBRA will in fact remove the stigma of those Americans who do seek out foreign spouses through an agency by making the petitioners be more careful and selective with what agencies they use. With more Americans being discreet the agencies that want to attract clientele will quickly change their practices such as being more selective as to who they sponsor (American and Foreigner).

It's an unregulated industry which has kept U.S. Immigration's hands tied. Short of proving a sham relationship, Immigration has granted Visa's to just about anyone. Asking the petitioner if they used a marriage broker and to name that marriage broker gives Immigration a little more muscle in terms of denying Visa's. USCIS will be able to look at an agencie's record now in determining it's legitimacy. However you want to break down those numbers, the point is U.S. Immigration is letting a lot of immigrants over here that shouldn't be here as well as petitioners that shouldn't be marrying a foreigner and that should be a concern to all Americans, especially when it costs us taxpayers money.

As for my situation, I've had to fight the stereotype - Americano seeking young Filipina, even within my own bloody family. My fiancee happens to have a doctorate degree in dentistry and doesn't need a foreign husband should she have wanted to work abroad. But even if that weren't the case I know that there are many sincere, great Filipina's who fall love with American men genuinely. I think there is validity for most of us here that we are attracted to people from different cultures. There shouldn't be any shame in that. The shame is when these agencies reinforce the stereotypes with marketing tactics they use. The end result is they attract a lot of shady characters and that is what I hope IMBRA will all but elmininate - like shining a flashlight behind the refridgerator. The vermon hate exposure.

[milestogo 0]

So a law should be written on the odds? I'm sure if you created enough studies and enough subdivisions you could find a group of american woman who are even more at risk than the average foreign woman. Womane who meet men on Match.com? Woman younger than 20? Woman who didn't go to college? Should we legislate in all cases where the odds are against the woman?

Do we really think IMBRA will have an impact on domestic abuse in this country? The only cases would be men who have a criminal record and woman who choose to heed this information. Having been stopped in this way, what's to stop the man from then looking locally now that his foreign ambitions have been shut down. Or just looking for another until he finds one that will ignore his background and accept his explanations. Perhaps he will just becamoe a sex tourist and kill woman on foreign soil. Murderers can be quite adaptable.

Finally where's the law to protect DV abusers. There are plenty of those coming over so that woman aren't the only victim. Currently many consulates give out pamphlets essentially giving a roadmap to potentially unscrupulous foreign brides on how to use domestic violence as a way to instant green cardship no questions ask. Just search google on Maxx DV to see ho aweful this can be.

Men and woman have been lying to each other for ages and the government should not be legislating here.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

It may suprise folks that I am a lifelong Democrat and a supporter of all things egalitarian (woman's rights, gay rights, etc) but on this law I am a liberatarian - the government should not be mucking in these areas particularly in ways that clearly discriminate against one class of poeple unfairly (those marrying foreign as opposed to those marrying US). I have no doubt eventually this law will be struck down. I am liberal but liberal elitists who refer to endless research and studies in support of poor policy give us all a bad name.

Keep in mind there is an ignore feature in this forum.

I'm gonna call you on this. The jest of your argument is that IMBRA discriminates. How does it stop you from marrying a foreigner?

Let me ask you this: If international dating agencies could be enforceably regulated, would you support that?

[milestogo 0]

It doesn't stop you from marrying it just puts discriminatory burden. No worries though I have changed my mind. Having checked at http://www.aardvarc.org/crimebystate.shtml I see that a woman's chance of being abused is several times higher in Alabama as it is in Minnisota. I now support both IMBRA as well as legislation requiring background disclosure for men marrying woman from Alabama.

[jamesfreddyc 0]

Is there even such a thing as "mail order bride"????

The language implies that a "client" pages through a book of personal ads, makes a selection, then places a request for that person to be shipped to them.

...Does this describe something real? or is this just a term/label from many years ago, before the Internet medium came along to be used as a REAL communication tool?

j

[one...two...tree 2,762]

It doesn't stop you from marrying it just puts discriminatory burden.

Discriminatory burden? My understanding of discrimination would be where someone else is given an opportunity to which you are denied, yes? Do you have a different meaning?

[mychelle 1]

What about American brides? There is no such law for americans marrying americans. What if married my ex boyfriend from college and he ended up murdering me because I broke up with him? I also would have never known he had a criminal record. You can't exactly do a google search on someone's background.

Maybe they should create this law for EVERYONE.

I don't think this is about protecting foreigners at all. This is just another way to make it even harder for people to come to the US.

you can't compare it that way. if you're also a USC and living in the US, same as your spouse to be...then the opportunities available to you are a bit different than a foreign spouse. for one, you can actually have a network of people to go to if you need help. you probably have the means to support yourself too if you do find out about your spouse's criminal or abusive past if you would want to leave. mostly, you WILL probably know your spouse-to-be a lot more since you're living in the US rather than someone in another country who only knew their spouse-to-be first person basis and only got to spend a few days or weeks with him/her.

i know this law sucks but it can actually benefit some people...maybe a lot more in the future. maybe when they finally fine tune the law and paperworks...it will be easier to filter out those couples where IMBRA does not apply.

[milestogo 0]

I am not a lawyer but I know that discrimination applies to both opportunity and burden. Both John Roth and Gary have written on their web sites why this may be unconstitutional and I would refer you to their sites.

As for comparison between foreign brides and resources. I know there is a correlation between violent crime and income level. There is also a correlation between income and access to resources (lawyers, internet, etc.). This is why in addtion to IMBRA for Alabama, I support IMBRA for woman making less than $20,000 a year. Further studies of course need to be done but both laws would help protect helpless woman who are either poor and lack access to resources or are unfortunate enough to be born in a high domestic violence state like Alabama.

[*Robert* 2]

Oh goody!!! Another IMBRA thread!!! *clapping wildly*

Now they're throwing them down to OT...

Great!!!

[Imbra2005 0]

Is there even such a thing as "mail order bride"????

The language implies that a "client" pages through a book of personal ads, makes a selection, then places a request for that person to be shipped to them.

...Does this describe something real? or is this just a term/label from many years ago, before the Internet medium came along to be used as a REAL communication tool?

j

Here's a few examples from the Tahirih Justice Center:

Women “sold” like items in a shopping cart (e.g., “Add Marina (68849) to my order”) or implied as goods: http://www.datingdepot.com/women/russia/russia-women.htm

http://www.loveme.com/women/moscow-women/moscow-women.htm

http://www.goodwife.com (“The Mail Order Bride Warehouse”)

http://www.abc.net.au/ra/asiapac/programs/s1074951.htm (re: listing of Vietnamese women on E-bay by marriage broker).

http://www.anastasiaweb.com/top1000.htm

[milestogo 0]

Now I see. So this isn't just IMBRA (which I now support) but the fact that woman are being placed on sites as if they were so much goods. This is deplorable. IMBRA clearly won't solve this since it is not designed to shut down services like loveme.com. We need to work together to shut down international dating services. This will require additional legislation. If you support me on IMBRA for Alabama and Imbra for woman making less than $20K/year, I will help support new legislation shutting down dating services with poor ecommerce asthetics. Should we leave dating sites that use politically correct methods of introducing men or just shut down the whole lot of them. I'm with you either way. Let's go!

[*Robert* 2]