Thai wedding on a K1

[Stephen + Elisha 92]

To add some clarification to the issue:

K-1 fiance visas are for those who are not legally married. The definition of 'legal' may vary from country to country. Some countries recognize only a civil marriage as being legal. Some recognize the religious ceremony as being legal. Some recognize both together as being legal. It is up to the Consulate of the countries involved to determine what is or is not a legal marriage in that country. Unfortunately, some of the Consulate staff are not as knowledgeable as they should be and there have definitely been instances on VJ where members have had a religious ceremony that is not considered legal in their country, but the Consulate has determined that they are married and denied the K-1 Visa. The individuals have had to go and have a legal marriage in that country and re-apply for a spousal visa. Interpretation is everything with Immigration and you don't want to leave anything open to 'speculative' interpretation. Ideally, a marriage ceremony recognized as legal in the foreign country is recognized as legal for US immigration purposes; a marriage ceremony that is not recognized as legal in the foreign country is not recognized as legal for US immigration purposes - HOWEVER - that does not always happen and some US immigration officials decide that if it looks like a wedding, it is a wedding.

So, this is why there appears to be such a conflict of information given in the answers here. If you have a religious ceremony that is not legally recognized as married, then you are not married and you can truthfully answer you are not married. Due to the incomplete understanding of local customs by DOS officials (Consulate staff) people are advised not to mention a religious, non-legally binding ceremony as it appears to present conflicting information. The important thing to remember is if the marriage ceremony is legally binding in the country in which it takes place, it is legally binding in the US and the K-1 is not the right visa. If the marriage ceremony is not legally binding in the country in which it takes place, then the applicants are still not married in the eyes of US immigration and the K-1 is a valid visa. You just don't want to confuse the immigration officials who are often looking for any viable reason they can find to deny the visa by giving them information that may make them doubt the non-legal nature of a marriage ceremony.

Ning, stop trolling. Your insistence that not mentioning a non-legally-binding ceremony is lying is wrong and offensive. The above was written by one of the site moderators. It sums up the situation quite well. Case closed.

[*Robert* 2]

So, this is why there appears to be such a conflict of information given in the answers here. If you have a religious ceremony that is not legally recognized as married, then you are not married and you can truthfully answer you are not married. Due to the incomplete understanding of local customs by DOS officials (Consulate staff) people are advised not to mention a religious, non-legally binding ceremony as it appears to present conflicting information. The important thing to remember is if the marriage ceremony is legally binding in the country in which it takes place, it is legally binding in the US and the K-1 is not the right visa. If the marriage ceremony is not legally binding in the country in which it takes place, then the applicants are still not married in the eyes of US immigration and the K-1 is a valid visa. You just don't want to confuse the immigration officials who are often looking for any viable reason they can find to deny the visa by giving them information that may make them doubt the non-legal nature of a marriage ceremony.

Ning, stop trolling. Your insistence that not mentioning a non-legally-binding ceremony is lying is wrong and offensive. The above was written by one of the site moderators. It sums up the situation quite well. Case closed.

Excellent job finding Kathryn's post on this topic, which is very clear and consice.

Aditionally, I concur with your recommendation for Ning to quit trolling. She really needs to cease from giving bad (aka noOb) advice.

[bigcasino75 0]

Wow my first post to go 3 pages long, Thanks for making it happen Ning and Thank you everyone for all the help

[Ning 619]

Wow my first post to go 3 pages long, Thanks for making it happen Ning and Thank you everyone for all the help

Here is a quote from the mods post.

"HOWEVER - that does not always happen and some US immigration officials decide that if it looks like a wedding, it is a wedding".

When I read her info it seems to me it says if you tell the truth that you were married in Thailand they may look at it as a couple that now needs a different visa.

The O P asked what people thought about what he is going to do. I gave a responce. It isnt trolling to have a different opinion. In fact we can see by the mods info that the immigration officers sometimes deny visas when the truth is disclosed.

Leave it up to a trained, paid, immigration officer & the case will then be closed.

You are welcome.

[Stephen + Elisha 92]

Wow my first post to go 3 pages long, Thanks for making it happen Ning and Thank you everyone for all the help

Here is a quote from the mods post.

"HOWEVER - that does not always happen and some US immigration officials decide that if it looks like a wedding, it is a wedding".

When I read her info it seems to me it says if you tell the truth that you were married in Thailand they may look at it as a couple that now needs a different visa.

The O P asked what people thought about what he is going to do. I gave a responce. It isnt trolling to have a different opinion. In fact we can see by the mods info that the immigration officers sometimes deny visas when the truth additional unnecessary information that confuses the issue is disclosed.

Leave it up to a trained, paid, immigration officer & the case will then be closed.

You are welcome.

If you are not legally married, then the truth is that you are not married. US law does not care—in fact, by virtue of the First Amendment, it cannot care—about your religious wedding unless that wedding was also legally binding. If you are not legally married, it is not lying to answer "no" when the immigration officer asks if you are married. Hence, there is no need and no good reason to mention a non-binding religious ceremony to an immigration or consular official—not because there is any reason to hide it, but because immigration and consular officials don't always understand US and foreign laws well enough to know that a non-legally-binding ceremony does not affect eligibility for the K-1. That was the thrust of kathryn's post.

You are once again misinterpreting and misrepresenting facts to support your demonstrably false opinion. Keep up the "good" work.

[scandal 951]

I'd like to just echo what Robert, Stephen, Aaron have said.

I had the exact same question bigcasino had, one year ago when I was just learning the ropes.

I posed the question here on VJ, and got answers similar to what ning has been writing. Misleading and incorrect answers.

The fact is bigcasino - that what you want to do is perfectly legal and proper. It is also exactly what we did.

We had our Thai Buddhist "marriage" in Bangkok last year, did NOT register at amphur, and filed for K1.

My fiancee had her interview and was processed through POE. She did not volunteer information that was not asked for. On the other hand, she would not have lied and would have factually stated what we did, if we were asked. She was not asked.

We got married legally on US soil last week, and she is now my wife. We'll be putting the AOS papers in the mail shortly.

Here is the thread in which I asked my question a year ago

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...t&p=2021000

And here is a post from that thread, in which I put in the text of an email I received from the US Consulate in Bangkok, definitely confirming that this is perfectly legal and acceptable. It couldn't be any more clear. Ning - you want an "official" response ? Here it is:

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...t&p=2026665

RE:General Question: K1 visa filing with NO REGISTRATION at Amphur?

Friday, July 18, 2008 11:16 AM

From:

"Bangkok Auto Replies (Not for Public Use)" <visasbkk2@state.gov>

To:xxxxxxxx@yahoo.com

Cc:"Suttirak, Sutaree" <Sutaree@state.gov>

Dear Ron,

Thank you for your inquiry regarding the Thai Buddhist marriage ceremony without registration in regards to the K-1 versus CR1/K-3 question. Since the Thai Buddhist marriage ceremony is not officially registered with a civil authority in Thailand it is not considered an officially recognized marriage by either Thai authorities or U.S. authorities. Thus, if you choose you can go ahead and have the Thai Buddhist marriage in Thailand it will have no negative effective on the K-1 visa status, so you will be free to marry the applicant civilly in the U.S. after she is issued the K-1 visa.

Best Regards,

Visas Unit

U.S. Embassy Bangkok

From: Ron [mailto:xxxxxxxx@yahoo.com]

Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 3:35 PM

To: Bangkok ACS

Subject: General Question: K1 visa filing with NO REGISTRATION at Amphur?

Hello,

I am a US citizen who is considering a K1 visa filing for my Thai fiancee - I have not begun any filing yet.

I am aware that a legal marriage in Thailand requires registration at local Amphur, and if we have such registration we MUST file K3 spousal visa rather than K1 finacee visae.

What I would like to CONFIRM is whether having a traditional Buddhist ceremony WITHOUT an Amphur registration could prejudice in any way a K1 fiancee visa filing? If we perform such a ceremony (we have not yet done so) but do not have it registered at Amphur, could this in any way lead to denial of eligibility for K1 visa - either at the initial I-129F filing, or at the consulate interview in Bangkok, or at POE?

Thanks for any assistance you can offer,

Ron

[Stephen + Elisha 92]

Thanks for posting, scandal. I don't think it gets any clearer than that.

[Ning 619]

I'd like to just echo what Robert, Stephen, Aaron have said.

I had the exact same question bigcasino had, one year ago when I was just learning the ropes.

I posed the question here on VJ, and got answers similar to what ning has been writing. Misleading and incorrect answers.

The fact is bigcasino - that what you want to do is perfectly legal and proper. It is also exactly what we did.

We had our Thai Buddhist "marriage" in Bangkok last year, did NOT register at amphur, and filed for K1.

My fiancee had her interview and was processed through POE. She did not volunteer information that was not asked for. On the other hand, she would not have lied and would have factually stated what we did, if we were asked. She was not asked.

We got married legally on US soil last week, and she is now my wife. We'll be putting the AOS papers in the mail shortly.

Here is the thread in which I asked my question a year ago

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...t&p=2021000

And here is a post from that thread, in which I put in the text of an email I received from the US Consulate in Bangkok, definitely confirming that this is perfectly legal and acceptable. It couldn't be any more clear. Ning - you want an "official" response ? Here it is:

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...t&p=2026665

RE:General Question: K1 visa filing with NO REGISTRATION at Amphur?

Friday, July 18, 2008 11:16 AM

From:

"Bangkok Auto Replies (Not for Public Use)" <visasbkk2@state.gov>

To:xxxxxxxx@yahoo.com

Cc:"Suttirak, Sutaree" <Sutaree@state.gov>

Dear Ron,

Thank you for your inquiry regarding the Thai Buddhist marriage ceremony without registration in regards to the K-1 versus CR1/K-3 question. Since the Thai Buddhist marriage ceremony is not officially registered with a civil authority in Thailand it is not considered an officially recognized marriage by either Thai authorities or U.S. authorities. Thus, if you choose you can go ahead and have the Thai Buddhist marriage in Thailand it will have no negative effective on the K-1 visa status, so you will be free to marry the applicant civilly in the U.S. after she is issued the K-1 visa.

Best Regards,

Visas Unit

U.S. Embassy Bangkok

From: Ron [mailto:xxxxxxxx@yahoo.com]

Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 3:35 PM

To: Bangkok ACS

Subject: General Question: K1 visa filing with NO REGISTRATION at Amphur?

Hello,

I am a US citizen who is considering a K1 visa filing for my Thai fiancee - I have not begun any filing yet.

I am aware that a legal marriage in Thailand requires registration at local Amphur, and if we have such registration we MUST file K3 spousal visa rather than K1 finacee visae.

What I would like to CONFIRM is whether having a traditional Buddhist ceremony WITHOUT an Amphur registration could prejudice in any way a K1 fiancee visa filing? If we perform such a ceremony (we have not yet done so) but do not have it registered at Amphur, could this in any way lead to denial of eligibility for K1 visa - either at the initial I-129F filing, or at the consulate interview in Bangkok, or at POE?

Thanks for any assistance you can offer,

Ron

The thrust of the mods post is that it can go either way

This just proves that Scandal was concerned enough about the situation to do the right thing & ask them directly.

Quite a bit different than the approach bigcasino wanted to take by having his fiance change the wedding to an " engagement party" .

.

[Stephen + Elisha 92]

Wrong, ning. ONCE AGAIN you misrepresent the facts.

The thrust of the mod's post is that a non-legally-binding religious ceremony does not make one ineligible for the K-1, but because immigration and consular officials don't always understand that, it's better not to mention any such ceremony to them in order to avoid unnecessary problems.

Scandal has provided proof positive that the Bangkok consulate has no problem with a religious wedding ceremony as long as it is not registered with the Amphur.

No one should lie to an immigration or consular officer, and if asked directly about a religious ceremony, should answer truthfully. But since a non-legally-binding religious ceremony is immaterial to immigration status, there is no obligation to volunteer information about such a ceremony.

[Ning 619]

Wrong, ning. ONCE AGAIN you misrepresent the facts.

The thrust of the mod's post is that a non-legally-binding religious ceremony does not make one ineligible for the K-1, but because immigration and consular officials don't always understand that, it's better not to mention any such ceremony to them in order to avoid unnecessary problems.

Scandal has provided proof positive that the Bangkok consulate has no problem with a religious wedding ceremony as long as it is not registered with the Amphur.

No one should lie to an immigration or consular officer, and if asked directly about a religious ceremony, should answer truthfully. But since a non-legally-binding religious ceremony is immaterial to immigration status, there is no obligation to volunteer information about such a ceremony.

" No one should lie" bla bla bla.

Here is the quote from the O P. What do you call this statement? Read carefully where it says " IF THEY ASK TELL THEM" ect.

"I already explained toy fiencee that we can not tell the embassy that we will have a Thai marrage if they ask to tell them that6 we will have a engagement party with her family and get married in the US so I think I got it covered Thank again".

Scandal has provided proof positive in his case after questioning what would be allowed that in his case they granted a visa. Instead of following your method of leaving out the facts Scandal chose to ask them directly. I understand the responce he got.

However the mod you wanted to use as a sounding board clearly stated that they MAY NOT. I believe she is right.

Your own disertation indicates your view that the officers dont know what they are doing when it comes to determining the legal status of a Thai marrige. If you are so sure of that why not argue the point with them? After all you " are good at it & are paid well to do it".

Those are the facts Steve.

[Stephen + Elisha 92]

I should know better than to argue with trolls. You can't go a single post without misrepresenting what others have said, ning. Have fun, you've got the sandbox to yourself now—I'm done here.

YAAFM

[scandal 951]

Wrong, ning. ONCE AGAIN you misrepresent the facts.

The thrust of the mod's post is that a non-legally-binding religious ceremony does not make one ineligible for the K-1, but because immigration and consular officials don't always understand that, it's better not to mention any such ceremony to them in order to avoid unnecessary problems.

Scandal has provided proof positive that the Bangkok consulate has no problem with a religious wedding ceremony as long as it is not registered with the Amphur.

No one should lie to an immigration or consular officer, and if asked directly about a religious ceremony, should answer truthfully. But since a non-legally-binding religious ceremony is immaterial to immigration status, there is no obligation to volunteer information about such a ceremony.

" No one should lie" bla bla bla.

Here is the quote from the O P. What do you call this statement? Read carefully where it says " IF THEY ASK TELL THEM" ect.

"I already explained toy fiencee that we can not tell the embassy that we will have a Thai marrage if they ask to tell them that6 we will have a engagement party with her family and get married in the US so I think I got it covered Thank again".

Scandal has provided proof positive in his case after questioning what would be allowed that in his case they granted a visa. Instead of following your method of leaving out the facts Scandal chose to ask them directly. I understand the responce he got.

However the mod you wanted to use as a sounding board clearly stated that they MAY NOT. I believe she is right.

Your own disertation indicates your view that the officers dont know what they are doing when it comes to determining the legal status of a Thai marrige. If you are so sure of that why not argue the point with them? After all you " are good at it & are paid well to do it".

Those are the facts Steve.

Ning -

1. If you skim this thread, you'll find yourself arguing with just about everyone on it. Reflect upon that. Why do you think that is? I understand that you are honestly trying to help the OP to avoid grief with his visa filing. I don't believe you are a troll, I think you are taking the knowledge you have in your situation and applying it to Thailand. Keep in mind that many of us who have gone through K1 journeys in Thailand (Robert, Aaron, Ray, myself) are consistenly giving the OP the same advice. Why do you suppose that is? Do you really think we want to lead a fellow brother astray and lead him to trouble? Hardly!

2. In an earlier post you suggested that the OPs plan is "visa fraud". The "visa fraud" accusation gets used quite a lot on VJ, in my experience. Sometimes correctly (and sometimes I've used it!!), such as people who want to enter the US on a non-immigrant visa, marry and adjust status, when their intent to marry was known all along. In other cases, I've seen people destroy threads where an OP asks a legitimate question and people just pile on the "fraud! fraud!" accusations. I think that's what you've done here. No matter whether you want to argue with the rest of us, the correct thing for you to do is withdraw your accusation of "visa fraud" - the OP has not committed fraud, and has expressed no such intent.

3. Whether someone is a mod or not doesn't impress me one whit in the context of an immigration discussion. Being a mod on this site means only one thing: the power to treat the rest of us like little children. Mods are no smarter, or more experienced in immigration matters, than the average member on VJ. In fact, it was a mod (Kim+Russ) who last year when I asked my questions here about Buddhist ceremonies in Thailand, advised against it. I think Kim+Russ was wrong then, just as I think you are wrong now.

4. The common wisdom expressed here by everyone that it's best not to advertise the fact of the ceremonial wedding at interview and at POE I think of as a bit of an urban legend situation. I do note that we (my wife and I) stuck with this wisdom - we did not bring it up. For example, we did not provide any ceremony photos as part of our Evidence of Relationship, only photos of the 2 of us together in other settings. We did that because that's what everyone suggested. In fact, I think that if a couple were to proudly display such photos at the interview, and mention the ceremony, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING BAD WOULD HAPPEN. It's just that because we are all bending over backward to make sure everything goes smoothly that we have this common-wisdom in circulation.

[rsn 135]

Wrong, ning. ONCE AGAIN you misrepresent the facts.

The thrust of the mod's post is that a non-legally-binding religious ceremony does not make one ineligible for the K-1, but because immigration and consular officials don't always understand that, it's better not to mention any such ceremony to them in order to avoid unnecessary problems.

Scandal has provided proof positive that the Bangkok consulate has no problem with a religious wedding ceremony as long as it is not registered with the Amphur.

No one should lie to an immigration or consular officer, and if asked directly about a religious ceremony, should answer truthfully. But since a non-legally-binding religious ceremony is immaterial to immigration status, there is no obligation to volunteer information about such a ceremony.

" No one should lie" bla bla bla.

Here is the quote from the O P. What do you call this statement? Read carefully where it says " IF THEY ASK TELL THEM" ect.

"I already explained toy fiencee that we can not tell the embassy that we will have a Thai marrage if they ask to tell them that6 we will have a engagement party with her family and get married in the US so I think I got it covered Thank again".

Scandal has provided proof positive in his case after questioning what would be allowed that in his case they granted a visa. Instead of following your method of leaving out the facts Scandal chose to ask them directly. I understand the responce he got.

However the mod you wanted to use as a sounding board clearly stated that they MAY NOT. I believe she is right.

Your own disertation indicates your view that the officers dont know what they are doing when it comes to determining the legal status of a Thai marrige. If you are so sure of that why not argue the point with them? After all you " are good at it & are paid well to do it".

Those are the facts Steve.

Ning -

1. If you skim this thread, you'll find yourself arguing with just about everyone on it. Reflect upon that. Why do you think that is? I understand that you are honestly trying to help the OP to avoid grief with his visa filing. I don't believe you are a troll, I think you are taking the knowledge you have in your situation and applying it to Thailand. Keep in mind that many of us who have gone through K1 journeys in Thailand (Robert, Aaron, Ray, myself) are consistenly giving the OP the same advice. Why do you suppose that is? Do you really think we want to lead a fellow brother astray and lead him to trouble? Hardly!

2. In an earlier post you suggested that the OPs plan is "visa fraud". The "visa fraud" accusation gets used quite a lot on VJ, in my experience. Sometimes correctly (and sometimes I've used it!!), such as people who want to enter the US on a non-immigrant visa, marry and adjust status, when their intent to marry was known all along. In other cases, I've seen people destroy threads where an OP asks a legitimate question and people just pile on the "fraud! fraud!" accusations. I think that's what you've done here. No matter whether you want to argue with the rest of us, the correct thing for you to do is withdraw your accusation of "visa fraud" - the OP has not committed fraud, and has expressed no such intent.

3. Whether someone is a mod or not doesn't impress me one whit in the context of an immigration discussion. Being a mod on this site means only one thing: the power to treat the rest of us like little children. Mods are no smarter, or more experienced in immigration matters, than the average member on VJ. In fact, it was a mod (Kim+Russ) who last year when I asked my questions here about Buddhist ceremonies in Thailand, advised against it. I think Kim+Russ was wrong then, just as I think you are wrong now.

4. The common wisdom expressed here by everyone that it's best not to advertise the fact of the ceremonial wedding at interview and at POE I think of as a bit of an urban legend situation. I do note that we (my wife and I) stuck with this wisdom - we did not bring it up. For example, we did not provide any ceremony photos as part of our Evidence of Relationship, only photos of the 2 of us together in other settings. We did that because that's what everyone suggested. In fact, I think that if a couple were to proudly display such photos at the interview, and mention the ceremony, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING BAD WOULD HAPPEN. It's just that because we are all bending over backward to make sure everything goes smoothly that we have this common-wisdom in circulation.

[Ning 619]

Wrong, ning. ONCE AGAIN you misrepresent the facts.

The thrust of the mod's post is that a non-legally-binding religious ceremony does not make one ineligible for the K-1, but because immigration and consular officials don't always understand that, it's better not to mention any such ceremony to them in order to avoid unnecessary problems.

Scandal has provided proof positive that the Bangkok consulate has no problem with a religious wedding ceremony as long as it is not registered with the Amphur.

No one should lie to an immigration or consular officer, and if asked directly about a religious ceremony, should answer truthfully. But since a non-legally-binding religious ceremony is immaterial to immigration status, there is no obligation to volunteer information about such a ceremony.

" No one should lie" bla bla bla.

Here is the quote from the O P. What do you call this statement? Read carefully where it says " IF THEY ASK TELL THEM" ect.

"I already explained toy fiencee that we can not tell the embassy that we will have a Thai marrage if they ask to tell them that6 we will have a engagement party with her family and get married in the US so I think I got it covered Thank again".

Scandal has provided proof positive in his case after questioning what would be allowed that in his case they granted a visa. Instead of following your method of leaving out the facts Scandal chose to ask them directly. I understand the responce he got.

However the mod you wanted to use as a sounding board clearly stated that they MAY NOT. I believe she is right.

Your own disertation indicates your view that the officers dont know what they are doing when it comes to determining the legal status of a Thai marrige. If you are so sure of that why not argue the point with them? After all you " are good at it & are paid well to do it".

Those are the facts Steve.

Ning -

1. If you skim this thread, you'll find yourself arguing with just about everyone on it. Reflect upon that. Why do you think that is? I understand that you are honestly trying to help the OP to avoid grief with his visa filing. I don't believe you are a troll, I think you are taking the knowledge you have in your situation and applying it to Thailand. Keep in mind that many of us who have gone through K1 journeys in Thailand (Robert, Aaron, Ray, myself) are consistenly giving the OP the same advice. Why do you suppose that is? Do you really think we want to lead a fellow brother astray and lead him to trouble? Hardly!

2. In an earlier post you suggested that the OPs plan is "visa fraud". The "visa fraud" accusation gets used quite a lot on VJ, in my experience. Sometimes correctly (and sometimes I've used it!!), such as people who want to enter the US on a non-immigrant visa, marry and adjust status, when their intent to marry was known all along. In other cases, I've seen people destroy threads where an OP asks a legitimate question and people just pile on the "fraud! fraud!" accusations. I think that's what you've done here. No matter whether you want to argue with the rest of us, the correct thing for you to do is withdraw your accusation of "visa fraud" - the OP has not committed fraud, and has expressed no such intent.

3. Whether someone is a mod or not doesn't impress me one whit in the context of an immigration discussion. Being a mod on this site means only one thing: the power to treat the rest of us like little children. Mods are no smarter, or more experienced in immigration matters, than the average member on VJ. In fact, it was a mod (Kim+Russ) who last year when I asked my questions here about Buddhist ceremonies in Thailand, advised against it. I think Kim+Russ was wrong then, just as I think you are wrong now.

4. The common wisdom expressed here by everyone that it's best not to advertise the fact of the ceremonial wedding at interview and at POE I think of as a bit of an urban legend situation. I do note that we (my wife and I) stuck with this wisdom - we did not bring it up. For example, we did not provide any ceremony photos as part of our Evidence of Relationship, only photos of the 2 of us together in other settings. We did that because that's what everyone suggested. In fact, I think that if a couple were to proudly display such photos at the interview, and mention the ceremony, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING BAD WOULD HAPPEN. It's just that because we are all bending over backward to make sure everything goes smoothly that we have this common-wisdom in circulation.

#1 No I dont think you want to lead anyone astray. You believe what you say is correct. You also questioned your own belief enough to have sent email to the Embassy to ask.

My opinion is different in some areas than others. Why? Same reason you questioned what Kim & Russ told you.

#2 You are correct here. However you ignore his statement about what his fiance is to do if asked if they are married. Married is to be changed to engagement. That by any definition is a distortion of the truth.

#3 No one is trying to make you change your thinking. The mods arent capable of mind control. They just state an opion based on their own understanding & experiance. Again you became concerned enough about what would happen to cause you to send an email to get a responce. If you were so certian about the outcome why did you do that? Why didnt you listen to common wisdom?

#4 Common wisdom says its best not to let them know people are actualy married because it isnt a legal wedding. Then that changes to " In fact, I think that if a couple were to proudly display such photos at the interview, and mention the ceremony, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING BAD WOULD HAPPEN".

I believe if anyone did that they have a good chance of denial.

You did this the intelligent way by sending the email questioning what might happen in your case. I accept that fact. I understand the responce you got.

That doesnt mean it is allways the decision in every case which is what the mod said & I agree with. I am not asking for anyones approval of my position.

[*Robert* 2]

Where the heck is my :beatingdeadhorse: gif?

With some people its like talking to a wall!!!

As always brother Scandal... well said!!!