Is a religious ceremony always a legal marriage?

[techmedic 8]

This will throw a wrench into the gears....What if you do it after the interview.... but before they come back??

[kehills 217]

The reason I think you are wrong about this is because I have heard it from ordained ministers multiple times, and I believe they know what their rights and obligations are. I did a whole research project on this issue.

Mike&Lin are correct. For example, my aunt and uncle had: a Buddhist ceremony led by a monk, a Catholic ceremony led by a priest a few days after the Buddhist one, and were officially married (a few days after the Catholic ceremony) by a justice of the peace.

A religious ceremony is not always a legal ceremony in the United States. But because this is variable around the world, it's best not to take the chance that a petition will be denied because the IO believes you are already married.

[IDeciam 3]

Mike&Lin are correct. For example, my aunt and uncle had: a Buddhist ceremony led by a monk, a Catholic ceremony led by a priest a few days after the Buddhist one, and were officially married (a few days after the Catholic ceremony) by a justice of the peace.

A religious ceremony is not always a legal ceremony in the United States. But because this is variable around the world, it's best not to take the chance that a petition will be denied because the IO believes you are already married.

Hmmm....these answers really make me question and wonder about conversations I've had over the years.

I knew a couple in Colorado who were immigrants in some kind of process, living here for years. They finally went and got married in the Catholic Church, but because they could not register it, it was all done in secret. Even I remember them saying the priest could have got in trouble by the state for that. So I always had that idea that the priest was taking a risk. And it was not the only case I've heard of, and no one publicizes them. Why the need to keep it a secret then?

I'm wondering if there is more to the story. I am going to ask someone.

[kehills 217]

It sounds like there are other issues being conflated; perhaps the people you're talking to don't understand the concept of separation of church and state, here, if they're immigrants. (Goodness knows enough citizens don't understand the difference.) Possibly there is also something going on with their immigration that requires them to be single, and they don't want to give anything that even looks like the appearance of marriage to immigration officials. Hard to say without details.

Keep in mind, as well, the numerous people who have a JoP "courthouse" wedding when their fiancé(e) arrives in the United States, and then later on have a religious ceremony with all the bells and whistles. Big, separate things.

[IDeciam 3]

This will throw a wrench into the gears....What if you do it after the interview.... but before they come back??

Uh, my guess is, it would be the same thing. If you say you are coming 'to get married' and someone thinks you are 'already married', I guess you could be denied entry at the airport. Because, what I'm seeing is, the decision is based on whoever makes the decision.

What bothers me is that this all creates a very big burden on people who have strong beliefs that you should not live together (etc) before marriage, at least a religious marriage. Whereas a couple without religious beliefs will not be affected. A religious couple is forced to live separately no matter how long (1-2 years, etc) the visa process ends up taking, even if location, finances, or any other factor does not demand this. Or, in the case of my friends, they had to choose between YEARS apart or going against their religious beliefs.

[kehills 217]

Uh, my guess is, it would be the same thing. If you say you are coming 'to get married' and someone thinks you are 'already married', I guess you could be denied entry at the airport. Because, what I'm seeing is, the decision is based on whoever makes the decision.

What bothers me is that this all creates a very big burden on people who have strong beliefs that you should not live together (etc) before marriage, at least a religious marriage. Whereas a couple without religious beliefs will not be affected. A religious couple is forced to live separately no matter how long (1-2 years, etc) the visa process ends up taking, even if location, finances, or any other factor does not demand this. Or, in the case of my friends, they had to choose between YEARS apart or going against their religious beliefs.

How is this a big burden on people who believe in not living together before marriage, as opposed to everyone else who is kept apart while VISA documents are processing?

(Also, do keep in mind that you're not talking about "religious marriage." You're talking about one rather narrow religious focus, generally from one narrow interpretation of one of 42,000 religions. There are lots of people who have religious weddings who have different beliefs than ones about not sharing a bed before marriage.)

Edited July 16, 2014 by kehills

[IDeciam 3]

How is this a big burden on people who believe in not living together before marriage, as opposed to everyone else who is kept apart while VISA documents are processing?

(Also, do keep in mind that you're not talking about "religious marriage." You're talking about one rather narrow religious focus, generally from one narrow interpretation of one of 42,000 religions. There are lots of people who have religious weddings who have different beliefs than ones about not sharing a bed before marriage.)

It isn't narrow, it is the majority interpretation for most of history and for most religions.

And, anybody who is kept apart has a burden. But it's a different situation, because some people can be geographically in the same place but still can't be together, because of the religious ceremony issue, which is irrelevant to another person.

[kehills 217]

It isn't narrow, it is the majority interpretation for most of history and for most religions.

42,000 religions.

It's not even an accurate description of Protestant Christianity or Catholicism for much of its history. (And do you really want a lecture on historical wedding dress design, or the change to a fitted bodice from empire waist and why?)

If a couple really does not want to live together before marriage, but they have managed to satisfy the rules of meeting one another (or satisfy USCIS about not being able to meet before the marriage because of the rules of their religion), they don't have to. Friends and hotel rooms exist, and getting married quickly off the plane is also an option. Even something as simple as having a chaperone stay with them for the period of time between deplaning and marriage would satisfy strict religious beliefs. It might not be the lavish religious ceremony they want, but with the planning allowed once a K-1 VISA is granted, almost anyone should be able to have at least a small religious ceremony basically right off the plane.

[IDeciam 3]

42,000 religions.

It's not even an accurate description of Protestant Christianity or Catholicism for much of its history. (And do you really want a lecture on historical wedding dress design, or the change to a fitted bodice from empire waist and why?)

If a couple really does not want to live together before marriage, but they have managed to satisfy the rules of meeting one another (or satisfy USCIS about not being able to meet before the marriage because of the rules of their religion), they don't have to. Friends and hotel rooms exist, and getting married quickly off the plane is also an option. Even something as simple as having a chaperone stay with them for the period of time between deplaning and marriage would satisfy strict religious beliefs. It might not be the lavish religious ceremony they want, but with the planning allowed once a K-1 VISA is granted, almost anyone should be able to have at least a small religious ceremony basically right off the plane.

Hmm....I think you missed my point but it's not something to get into. Prefer not to talk about it.

[IDeciam 3]

42,000 religions.

It's not even an accurate description of Protestant Christianity or Catholicism for much of its history. (And do you really want a lecture on historical wedding dress design, or the change to a fitted bodice from empire waist and why?)

If a couple really does not want to live together before marriage, but they have managed to satisfy the rules of meeting one another (or satisfy USCIS about not being able to meet before the marriage because of the rules of their religion), they don't have to. Friends and hotel rooms exist, and getting married quickly off the plane is also an option. Even something as simple as having a chaperone stay with them for the period of time between deplaning and marriage would satisfy strict religious beliefs. It might not be the lavish religious ceremony they want, but with the planning allowed once a K-1 VISA is granted, almost anyone should be able to have at least a small religious ceremony basically right off the plane.

I will say, thought, that I've learned quite a bit about world religions. If you look at the religious traditions for almost every culture for most of history, you find that is a common theme. There is no moral ideal that people don't fail at, but as far as what people generally believed was right or wrong, that one is pretty standard.

But this is something people have strong opinions about so everyone is free to think what they want.

[kehills 217]

Sigh. No, it's not standard, and if you look outside the Abrahamic religions, you'll see it's a massive toss-up if it's even a part of the religious doctrines. (Again, 42,000 religions. Right now in the world. Are you asserting that you've done significant and in depth research about enough of those 42,000 religions to make such a claim?) For example, bundling was frequently practiced across Christian Europe and early Christian America, and while some societies utilized bundling boards or bags, others encouraged intimacy. (And frequently even when boards or bags were used, they were tied loosely or ceremoniously, in order to give the air of "proper.")

It's very common on VJ for people to assume that "religion" means Christianity (Protestant, Catholic, or Mormon), Judaism, or Islam (Sunni, Shia, Sushi), and that their interpretation is the one true way. But VJ is a worldwide service, and there are more religions worldwide than those. Making broad statements about what religion means when you really mean the Abrahamics, or one particular flavor of one particular Abrahamic following one particular prophet, is nicely Othering and Alienating, and does a nice job of implying that if you're not those religions, you're not religious. It is, in a word, obnoxious.

But you're right; there's certainly little point in discussing this further.

[bob.sansmal 14]

Hmmm....these answers really make me question and wonder about conversations I've had over the years.

I knew a couple in Colorado who were immigrants in some kind of process, living here for years. They finally went and got married in the Catholic Church, but because they could not register it, it was all done in secret. Even I remember them saying the priest could have got in trouble by the state for that. So I always had that idea that the priest was taking a risk. And it was not the only case I've heard of, and no one publicizes them. Why the need to keep it a secret then?

I'm wondering if there is more to the story. I am going to ask someone.

Maybe the priest was running afoul of Canon law, and that is why it had to be kept secret.

I dunno...I'm not Catholic...

[Kolewenoik31 57]

I believe that is incorrect. From my understanding you can be married by an ordained minister of any faith, who is empowered to do legal weddings, but if you do it without a government issued marriage license, it does not count legally. This is correct information. A license can be given by the government to a minster of your choice. There is also an extra charge for you to have your wedding at a different venue. My own experience is that these country will always tact on more money when it is an international marriage. American citizen=money lol But yes you can have a religious wedding that is licensed by their government. In Kenya there is a CAP 150 and I believe the other one is CAP 151 The difference is one is licensed by the govt. and considered legal for immigration and the other one is only for locals and is not recognized because it is a cultural ceremony.

Happens a lot in Utah.....there was even a recent U.S. Federal Court case that...kinda-sorta deals with the issue of whether a marriage without a marriage license counts as a marriage. Brown v. Buhman

From the ruling:

[JIJourney 96]

If you are married than you cannot do k1.

If you are married than you must apply for the other

[raven52 233]

WHY would you take such a chance?

Anything,., more than an engagement "party" can be considered a "ceremony".,.,.,,.and just one person, one picture, one doucment.,.,.,.,,.and you are in serious trouble!

Is it worth it?

Please, no ceremonies, no religious "persons" presiding over the gathering..,.,have seen many "go down" for such ceremonies, an engagement party.,.,,.is the limit,.,.to my thinking, and what I have read, right here on this web-site!