previous marriage.. same sex

[Flames9_RN 358]

Hmmm i have relatives and friends in the Foreign service, guess they slipped by,lol

omg I love flames humor!!!

I'm having a starbucks on my way into work tonight Len, in honor of your bday!!!

[KnJ 0]

Your problem is going to be one of legitimacy. Since you have had a same sex relationship in the past, the presumption is that you will continue that type of relationship. Since one cannot immigrate to the US based on that type of relationship, the presumption by the consular officer would likely be that you're using a male as a proxy to gain entry to the US to have a relationship with a US woman.

And despite comments to the contrary, the consular officers are not dummies. Only the best and brightest are chosen to enter the foreign service. It's one of the toughest jobs to get in the US government.

Tread lightly and be prepared for some difficult questions and perhaps even an investigation on this matter. Be prepared with evidence to refute their presumption. Don't be surprised if they don't make a decision immediately after the interview.

While intelligent people have presumptions, I think it actually is pretty dumb to hold this particular presumption. It may be a legitimate question, but that is different from a presumption. Evidence of a bona fide relationship is evidence of a bona fide relationship.

A consular officer may ask me a question like, 'you were married to a woman before, but now you want to marry a man. How do I know this relationship is a real one and you aren't just trying to get into the US?' This question is requires me to explain my sexuality. So I can. I fall in love with a person, not a gender. I have always been attracted to both sexes. I have known J since 2004 and we started dating in 2006, and have spent hundreds of dollars and countless hours interacting and building a genuine relationship. Because of the nature of sexuality, no one can assert that my love for a man isn't genuine.

The presumption also can't reasonably extend to the question of whether I would ever in the future leave J to be with a woman, that argument holds no weight because really, any marriage-based immigration applicant is more likely to get divorced than I am to suddenly become exclusive to women. I don't see much discussion of people generally getting hassled to prove that because they already had a divorce that they are more likely to fail in this marriage too and therefore shouldn't be admitted to the US. The 50% divorce rate would make this a handy, but ludicrous reason for denying people.

As long as the question stays in the PRESENT and on the validity of the relationship, not a problem. The fact he is coming with me will help. Being prepared makes sense, but being prepared to defend myself against an onslaught of greater scrutiny is probably only going to stack the stress level against being able to calmly and effectively answer their questions.

Same sex marriage became legal in Canada, and that is the only reason this is even something on record. They've let thousands of people by who have had same sex relationships. This is in the documents, yes. But it's not a crime, it was in fact legal, and objectively doesn't have ANYTHING to do with how legitimate my current engagement is.

[KnJ 0]

Hmmm i have relatives and friends in the Foreign service, guess they slipped by,lol

[Krikit 1,164]

Well, objectiveness and reason aren't really synonymous with DHS and some of their officers. (Sorry Zyggy. lol) KnJ, Zyggy is a former CBP Officer, so he has a bit of insight into their way of thinking. And he is right. They will latch onto something and take a leap. There are some pretty heartwrenching stories out there.

Edited September 28, 2009 by Krikit

[Chica Yeyé 41]

Hmmm i have relatives and friends in the Foreign service, guess they slipped by,lol

omg I love flames humor!!!

I'm having a starbucks on my way into work tonight Len, in honor of your bday!!!

pffffft!

[trailmix 77]

Well, objectiveness and reason aren't really synonymous with DHS and some of their officers. (Sorry Zyggy. lol) KnJ, Zyggy is a former CBP Officer, so he has a bit of insight into their way of thinking. And he is right. They will latch onto something and take a leap. There are some pretty heartwrenching stories out there.

Yes, unfortunate but true.

[zyggy 9]

Your problem is going to be one of legitimacy. Since you have had a same sex relationship in the past, the presumption is that you will continue that type of relationship. Since one cannot immigrate to the US based on that type of relationship, the presumption by the consular officer would likely be that you're using a male as a proxy to gain entry to the US to have a relationship with a US woman.

And despite comments to the contrary, the consular officers are not dummies. Only the best and brightest are chosen to enter the foreign service. It's one of the toughest jobs to get in the US government.

Tread lightly and be prepared for some difficult questions and perhaps even an investigation on this matter. Be prepared with evidence to refute their presumption. Don't be surprised if they don't make a decision immediately after the interview.

While intelligent people have presumptions, I think it actually is pretty dumb to hold this particular presumption. It may be a legitimate question, but that is different from a presumption. Evidence of a bona fide relationship is evidence of a bona fide relationship.

A consular officer may ask me a question like, 'you were married to a woman before, but now you want to marry a man. How do I know this relationship is a real one and you aren't just trying to get into the US?' This question is requires me to explain my sexuality. So I can. I fall in love with a person, not a gender. I have always been attracted to both sexes. I have known J since 2004 and we started dating in 2006, and have spent hundreds of dollars and countless hours interacting and building a genuine relationship. Because of the nature of sexuality, no one can assert that my love for a man isn't genuine.

Good start. The point of my post was not to question you, but to give you awareness on the line of questioning they may go down and for you to be prepared with an answer that will satisfy them. The more written evidence you can provide, the better your chances of success. THe above is very factual and to the point.

The presumption also can't reasonably extend to the question of whether I would ever in the future leave J to be with a woman, that argument holds no weight because really, any marriage-based immigration applicant is more likely to get divorced than I am to suddenly become exclusive to women. I don't see much discussion of people generally getting hassled to prove that because they already had a divorce that they are more likely to fail in this marriage too and therefore shouldn't be admitted to the US. The 50% divorce rate would make this a handy, but ludicrous reason for denying people.

As long as the question stays in the PRESENT and on the validity of the relationship, not a problem. The fact he is coming with me will help. Being prepared makes sense, but being prepared to defend myself against an onslaught of greater scrutiny is probably only going to stack the stress level against being able to calmly and effectively answer their questions.

Same sex marriage became legal in Canada, and that is the only reason this is even something on record. They've let thousands of people by who have had same sex relationships. This is in the documents, yes. But it's not a crime, it was in fact legal, and objectively doesn't have ANYTHING to do with how legitimate my current engagement is.

THis is not to the point and is a red herring. You are trying to misdirect them by tying the success of relationship whether they are same sex or not. This line of thinking will not help your case. It will most likely hinder it. Just to let you know, one of the worst things you can do is be defensive. It shows you may have something to hide. It is extremely important to be objective and factual when faced with pointed questions on the very personal nature of your relationship. Stay calm, factual and to the point and you will be rewarded. Be emotional and defensive and you will be dissapointed. I know that's harder than it sounds but it's important to check your feelings at the door.

The Consular Officer is not interested on the moral validity of marriage whether it is same sex or not. They are interested in whether or not you are entering into marriage to circumvent the immigration laws. The fact that your previous marriage was a same sex marriage which is not valid for immigration purposes in the US and you are now entering into one that is not brings the validity of that marriage into question in terms of immigration. Focusing your potential response on that fact will increase your chances for success.

Always remember that the burden of proof is on you to show that you are eligible to receive the benefit of an immigration visa. The consular officer doesn't have to prove anything. THe INA is written to keep aliens out.

I'm just laying it plain based on my experience. CBP officers and Consular Officers receive much of the same training. Best of luck.

Edited September 28, 2009 by zyggy

[Chica Yeyé 41]

I would listen to zyggy. He knows what he talks about ...... although his wife differs, but that's another story

[Krikit 1,164]

Excellent information there, Zyggy. Thank you.

[KnJ 0]

Good start. The point of my post was not to question you, but to give you awareness on the line of questioning they may go down and for you to be prepared with an answer that will satisfy them. The more written evidence you can provide, the better your chances of success. THe above is very factual and to the point.

I appreciate the perspective, and what I need is very much talking out where I should and should not go when faced with this.

Some of the things I said were not things I think I would actually say to a CO, but they came out here because it is emotionally charged, of course a lot is at stake, and I wrote the topic precisely to get perspective on how I might handle this if it comes up.

THis is not to the point and is a red herring. You are trying to misdirect them by tying the success of relationship whether they are same sex or not. This line of thinking will not help your case. It will most likely hinder it. Just to let you know, one of the worst things you can do is be defensive. It shows you may have something to hide. It is extremely important to be objective and factual when faced with pointed questions on the very personal nature of your relationship. Stay calm, factual and to the point and you will be rewarded. Be emotional and defensive and you will be dissapointed. I know that's harder than it sounds but it's important to check your feelings at the door.

The Consular Officer is not interested on the moral validity of marriage whether it is same sex or not. They are interested in whether or not you are entering into marriage to circumvent the immigration laws. The fact that your previous marriage was a same sex marriage which is not valid for immigration purposes in the US and you are now entering into one that is not brings the validity of that marriage into question in terms of immigration. Focusing your potential response on that fact will increase your chances for success.

Always remember that the burden of proof is on you to show that you are eligible to receive the benefit of an immigration visa. The consular officer doesn't have to prove anything. THe INA is written to keep aliens out.

I'm just laying it plain based on my experience. CBP officers and Consular Officers receive much of the same training. Best of luck.

Thanks zyggy

This clarifies what is in my control to do and that is very helpful

[Road 2 Peace Arch 0]

Good start. The point of my post was not to question you, but to give you awareness on the line of questioning they may go down and for you to be prepared with an answer that will satisfy them. The more written evidence you can provide, the better your chances of success. THe above is very factual and to the point.

I appreciate the perspective, and what I need is very much talking out where I should and should not go when faced with this.

Some of the things I said were not things I think I would actually say to a CO, but they came out here because it is emotionally charged, of course a lot is at stake, and I wrote the topic precisely to get perspective on how I might handle this if it comes up.

THis is not to the point and is a red herring. You are trying to misdirect them by tying the success of relationship whether they are same sex or not. This line of thinking will not help your case. It will most likely hinder it. Just to let you know, one of the worst things you can do is be defensive. It shows you may have something to hide. It is extremely important to be objective and factual when faced with pointed questions on the very personal nature of your relationship. Stay calm, factual and to the point and you will be rewarded. Be emotional and defensive and you will be dissapointed. I know that's harder than it sounds but it's important to check your feelings at the door.

The Consular Officer is not interested on the moral validity of marriage whether it is same sex or not. They are interested in whether or not you are entering into marriage to circumvent the immigration laws. The fact that your previous marriage was a same sex marriage which is not valid for immigration purposes in the US and you are now entering into one that is not brings the validity of that marriage into question in terms of immigration. Focusing your potential response on that fact will increase your chances for success.

Always remember that the burden of proof is on you to show that you are eligible to receive the benefit of an immigration visa. The consular officer doesn't have to prove anything. THe INA is written to keep aliens out.

I'm just laying it plain based on my experience. CBP officers and Consular Officers receive much of the same training. Best of luck.

Thanks zyggy

This clarifies what is in my control to do and that is very helpful

It may also be helpful to not view this through a Canadian prism when dealing with or explaining your reasons to the US CO's and the CBP in general. While I imagine going the other direction, immigration to Canada, can be just as tough I think the US CO's and CBP folks tend to be more black and white so-to-speak. I could go on about why this is but, I think you and most people here understand. All the best.

[Anh map 2,098]

Great input from zyggy on how to handle questions of a personal nature at the interview.

[zyggy 9]

A good way to try to check your emotions is to understand that the nature of personal questions is not a reflection on you, it's a reflection of finding the truth to make an informed decision. They are doing their job which is to determine the eligibility of an individual to receive a benefit.

It's business not personal. That's tough to soak in because getting an immigration visa to be with your family is a very personal issue, but they don't see it that way and neither should you. If you understand their perspective and keep that in mind, you can tailor your responses to meet that perspective. Do that and you're most of the way there.

Edited September 29, 2009 by zyggy

[Anh map 2,098]

So it all boils down to: Think like a CO (who happens to think like Michael Corleone).

Seriously, that does make a lot of sense. But SOOOOOOOOOO hard to do when it's such an emotional issue.

[KnJ 0]

Thanks to another thread, I am going to request a copy of the marriage certificate as well as the divorce certificate.

I'm also going through plenty of evidence.. weeding out what will be acceptable.

A friend who is a Canadian immigration specialist suggested even letters/emails/chats that show J and I fighting.. what more proves evidence of a real relationship

I guess there is proof of a sexual relationship, as well.. which, hrm. Sexy chat transcripts?

Not sure where the line is on that stuff.

Being unemotional about an emotional issue is hard, throw in a mild fear of authority.. but my fiance will be there, and if I have my evidence I'll feel more secure about being prepared.