'Forced' to marry

[TracyTN 237]

szsz apparently changed her name.

Oh, ok. Sorry - I missed that somehow!

[no name 1]

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

the length of this thread is highly gross and abnormal. But I love it!

i never thought i'd see the day you said the length of something was gross and abnormal

the length of this thread is highly gross and abnormal. But I love it!

There are certain members who have contributed to this thread that are especially gross and abnormal.

i presume the personal title is in reference to the pic above it?

[Fandango 1,439]

shouldn't it be 'green-eyed woman'?

[mybackpages 0]

szsz apparently changed her name.

Just wanted to add, because it's been running through my head for days as I've been reading this....

"This is the thread that never ends, it just goes on and on my friends! Someone started writing it not knowing what it was......."

now that song is stuck in my head

[Ban Hammer 13,345]

szsz apparently changed her name.

Just wanted to add, because it's been running through my head for days as I've been reading this....

"This is the thread that never ends, it just goes on and on my friends! Someone started writing it not knowing what it was......."

now that song is stuck in my head

this can help

[Thingee 0]

Hee hee hee.

[brnidokiegurl 0]

Hes being bad dont encourage him

[Velvettt 0]

I made ONE post in all of this. Just one, and I ignored the hostility and nastiness that had been prevailing so that I could attempt to answer the original question. I made no reference to szcz or whoever she is now, and yet she felt a need to reply to my post in a less than friendly way.

How very rude and completely unnecessary.

[TracyTN 237]

I didn't see szcz's response to you, Velvett, but I did see your post. It was the best in the thread, honestly.

[Marilyn. 340]

I made ONE post in all of this. Just one, and I ignored the hostility and nastiness that had been prevailing so that I could attempt to answer the original question. I made no reference to szcz or whoever she is now, and yet she felt a need to reply to my post in a less than friendly way.

How very rude and completely unnecessary.

I didn't see her response as unfriendly.... she was stating her opinion.....

[KarenCee 3]

szsz apparently changed her name.

Just wanted to add, because it's been running through my head for days as I've been reading this....

"This is the thread that never ends, it just goes on and on my friends! Someone started writing it not knowing what it was......."

Kinda like that song "Henery the Eighth I am I am"...on and on and on and on....(remember the scene from Ghost where Patrick Swayze sang that to convince Whoopi Goldberg to talk to his gf?)

[MichelleandCraig 1]

szsz apparently changed her name.

Just wanted to add, because it's been running through my head for days as I've been reading this....

"This is the thread that never ends, it just goes on and on my friends! Someone started writing it not knowing what it was......."

Kinda like that song "Henery the Eighth I am I am"...on and on and on and on....(remember the scene from Ghost where Patrick Swayze sang that to convince Whoopi Goldberg to talk to his gf?)

Yeah! :lol:

[Velvettt 0]

My apologies to szcz. I had only a few moments earlier to skim the responses and I did not pay enough attention to who wrote what. The hostile response to which I was referring was actually written by Ionescu.

As for the opinions expressed in that response, I can only say that if anyone is happy with having a second "wedding" at a later time, more power to you. We never considered that because once married, it seemed a cheat to do it again.

My signature contains a line "years of legal problems". That barely skims the surface of what we went through to be together. We wanted our wedding to be a public celebration of true love triumphing over vicious, nasty people, small-minded people, and unsympathetic laws, in the presence of the few people who helped us, sympathized with us, and loved us.

We estimated that our visa process would be completely done and I would be in the US by the end of June of that year, but some minor problems delayed it until July. Most, if not all, corporations require vacation time to be booked in January, and our loved ones booked theirs for the first week of July, to attend our wedding. We missed it by a few weeks and no one was able to reschedule.

If the immigration laws allowed K-1 visa holders 6 or 9 months to marry instead of 3, it would have been a very different wedding for us. We had a lovely, romantic ceremony in a turn-of-the-century mansion B&B, but it was just the two of us. We both loved our wedding and we love being married, but we do miss that we were unable to share it. Hence my opinion that we were "forced" to marry before we wanted to, and without immigration laws and restrictions, we would not have done so at the time.

[Sinergy 3]

My apologies to szcz. I had only a few moments earlier to skim the responses and I did not pay enough attention to who wrote what. The hostile response to which I was referring was actually written by Ionescu.

As for the opinions expressed in that response, I can only say that if anyone is happy with having a second "wedding" at a later time, more power to you. We never considered that because once married, it seemed a cheat to do it again.

My signature contains a line "years of legal problems". That barely skims the surface of what we went through to be together. We wanted our wedding to be a public celebration of true love triumphing over vicious, nasty people, small-minded people, and unsympathetic laws, in the presence of the few people who helped us, sympathized with us, and loved us.

We estimated that our visa process would be completely done and I would be in the US by the end of June of that year, but some minor problems delayed it until July. Most, if not all, corporations require vacation time to be booked in January, and our loved ones booked theirs for the first week of July, to attend our wedding. We missed it by a few weeks and no one was able to reschedule.

If the immigration laws allowed K-1 visa holders 6 or 9 months to marry instead of 3, it would have been a very different wedding for us. We had a lovely, romantic ceremony in a turn-of-the-century mansion B&B, but it was just the two of us. We both loved our wedding and we love being married, but we do miss that we were unable to share it. Hence my opinion that we were "forced" to marry before we wanted to, and without immigration laws and restrictions, we would not have done so at the time.

For the record, i wasnt unfriendly to YOU, i was commenting on the fact of so many ppl are so upset over not having their dream wedding or the ONE wedding they wanted. My point was, no one is taking that away from anyone here, we just have to do one small wedding first for immigration. then we can do the wedding WE want. We cant be too picky about this stuff when we are the ones asking for our men/women to come here.

anyway im sorry if you felt i was unfriendly to you.