Polyamory and K-1 visas

[valera 1]

Read the rules before you let your little fingers loose on the keyboard. I could interject my Catholic beliefs on this matter but then I'd be here all day...HOWEVER...the USCIS added moral character as a requirement for a reason. The reason the OP cant find archives on the subject is because its not allowed. Let her find a lawyer...unless that lawyer is willing to lose his or her license she's out of luck. If there were no standards then CIMT wouldnt exist. The difference here is that the OP continues her lifestyle. It IS up to the USCIS to investigate on how a couple chooses to live their lives..why else are we pouring every ounce of evidence into these petitions we send in? Google it...an immigration officer will ask whether the OP practices polygamy at the interview...should she leave the boyfriend out then? Oh...lie to an immigration officer? That goes against everything this board stands for.

As has been said before, polygamy is not the same as polyamory:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/polyamory

and

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=polygamy

Please don't interject your Catholic beliefs on this matter as they are irrelevant. The purpose of K-1 is to be with the person you love. People in a polygamous relationship are not allowed to get K-1. No conflicts here, because OP does want to bring her loved one here, and she isn't in a polygamous relationship.

As you seem to be in a tiny minority with your opinion on this topic, this (topic) doesn't go against everything this board stands for.

[JoeMama 0]

Does it ever end?

[ceriserose 1]

Does it ever end?

I've been here just over 2 years. It doesn't.

[Cassie 8]

Does it ever end?

I've been here just over 2 years. It doesn't.

heheh so true!

[DA BOMB 1]

Read the rules before you let your little fingers loose on the keyboard. I could interject my Catholic beliefs on this matter but then I'd be here all day...HOWEVER...the USCIS added moral character as a requirement for a reason. The reason the OP cant find archives on the subject is because its not allowed. Let her find a lawyer...unless that lawyer is willing to lose his or her license she's out of luck. If there were no standards then CIMT wouldnt exist. The difference here is that the OP continues her lifestyle. It IS up to the USCIS to investigate on how a couple chooses to live their lives..why else are we pouring every ounce of evidence into these petitions we send in? Google it...an immigration officer will ask whether the OP practices polygamy at the interview...should she leave the boyfriend out then? Oh...lie to an immigration officer? That goes against everything this board stands for.

As has been said before, polygamy is not the same as polyamory:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/polyamory

and

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=polygamy

Please don't interject your Catholic beliefs on this matter as they are irrelevant. The purpose of K-1 is to be with the person you love. People in a polygamous relationship are not allowed to get K-1. No conflicts here, because OP does want to bring her loved one here, and she isn't in a polygamous relationship.

As you seem to be in a tiny minority with your opinion on this topic, this (topic) doesn't go against everything this board stands for.

"Oh...lie to an immigration officer? That goes against everything this board stands for."

Lying to an immigration officer does go against what this board stands for (or thats the impression I got when I joined) and I could care less if Im the minority on this subject. Its never stopped me from voicing my opinion before. Tell ya what...its not whether you're all for group love or if the OP doesnt intend on marrying the US boyfriend...its all about what the adjudicator decides. Polyamory by definition itself does not come up in any law...however if mentioned, the adjudicator would absolutely assume polygamy was the intention. If you dont see that you're really blind. The majority of politically correct posters on this thread think its a good idea to "not mention" the third wheel in this triangle. Ok. Let the "boyfriend" continue claiming her on his taxes, sponsor the beneficiary, and they can all live as one big happy family. Gimme a break.

[ceriserose 1]

Does it ever end?

I've been here just over 2 years. It doesn't.

heheh so true!

eh you know it, dollface!

[Caladan 19]

The USCIS counts moral character, but I'm pretty sure that's only with regard to laws. Polyamory may be ill-advised, but it's not illegal. (And adultery is one of the "crimes" that doesn't indicate moral turpitude, either.) They're not here to ensure you have a nice marriage with a nice picket fence and get along well with your neighbors.

Thank goodness USCIS doesn't have to pass judgment on whether our relationships meet with the approval of the Catholic Church. On the other hand, it would probably mean less of a backlog at the consulate. DENIED, DENIED, DENIED. Probably includes anyone who met online or had sex. Plus side, quick processing.

We've all mentioned the third wheel. The fact that you need to denounce I suppose makes you feel better, but if you can't tell the difference between polygamy and polyamory, might be best not to make the pronouncements on moral turpitude while wrapping yourself up in your wee flag of self-righteous, mmkay?

[ceriserose 1]

Read the rules before you let your little fingers loose on the keyboard. I could interject my Catholic beliefs on this matter but then I'd be here all day...HOWEVER...the USCIS added moral character as a requirement for a reason. The reason the OP cant find archives on the subject is because its not allowed. Let her find a lawyer...unless that lawyer is willing to lose his or her license she's out of luck. If there were no standards then CIMT wouldnt exist. The difference here is that the OP continues her lifestyle. It IS up to the USCIS to investigate on how a couple chooses to live their lives..why else are we pouring every ounce of evidence into these petitions we send in? Google it...an immigration officer will ask whether the OP practices polygamy at the interview...should she leave the boyfriend out then? Oh...lie to an immigration officer? That goes against everything this board stands for.

As has been said before, polygamy is not the same as polyamory:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/polyamory

and

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=polygamy

Please don't interject your Catholic beliefs on this matter as they are irrelevant. The purpose of K-1 is to be with the person you love. People in a polygamous relationship are not allowed to get K-1. No conflicts here, because OP does want to bring her loved one here, and she isn't in a polygamous relationship.

As you seem to be in a tiny minority with your opinion on this topic, this (topic) doesn't go against everything this board stands for.

"Oh...lie to an immigration officer? That goes against everything this board stands for."

Lying to an immigration officer does go against what this board stands for (or thats the impression I got when I joined) and I could care less if Im the minority on this subject. Its never stopped me from voicing my opinion before. Tell ya what...its not whether you're all for group love or if the OP doesnt intend on marrying the US boyfriend...its all about what the adjudicator decides. Polyamory by definition itself does not come up in any law...however if mentioned, the adjudicator would absolutely assume polygamy was the intention. If you dont see that you're really blind. The majority of politically correct posters on this thread think its a good idea to "not mention" the third wheel in this triangle. Ok. Let the "boyfriend" continue claiming her on his taxes, sponsor the beneficiary, and they can all live as one big happy family. Gimme a break.

Unless you're an AO you have no reason to make such an absolute statement. It is merely your opinion. And if I may be so blunt, it is more than obvious that you don't understand the culture of a polyamorous relationship and therefore don't know that for the majority of them, "marriage" is not a goal. I daresay if there was a way for this situation to be resolved (i.e. a non-marriage visa) that would be the preferred solution. Of course, that's just my guess.

I also haven't seen anyone suggest they outright lie to an AO. I haven't seen anyone come back and confirm that they are a dependent on the taxes. So your post here is full of suppositions based on your own perceptions and bias.

Give the rest of us a break and maybe leave the judgment at the door. Of course, that's just my opinion. *shrug* To be taken or left.

[vorpalswrd 0]

Might I note that the OP joined Saturday, made this post & has not made a single one since.

Troll?

Actually by this point I made two posts and was waiting for people to respond, as they obviously have, instead of talking to myself, but thanks anywhos.

[markny 0]

Matt,

I'm failing to see how the situation is fraud. They don't seem to be planning to marry solely for immigration benefits.

Let me get this striat, No Income to support the intended immigant, Already in a long term relationship. I am not questioning your intentions, but the ethics of what you are trying will be brought into question. You sound like a nice person. But i think you will have to prove this one question.... "Where is the Love"?

[aussiewench 9]

Matt,

I'm failing to see how the situation is fraud. They don't seem to be planning to marry solely for immigration benefits.

Let me get this striat, No Income to support the intended immigant, Already in a long term relationship. I am not questioning your intentions, but the ethics of what you are trying will be brought into question. You sound like a nice person. But i think you will have to prove this one question.... "Where is the Love"?

Love does not have to be proven. Only that one has a bona fide relationship, is eligible, that one intends to marry within 90 days, and that the applicant wont become a public charge. The marriage itself must not be entered into for immigration purposes. Marriages can be based on other things besides love. Not my cup of tea for a marriage, but from what the OP states this marriage is for love.......she just happens to love another as well.

Edited March 27, 2007 by aussiewench

[vorpalswrd 0]

Everyone has given me lots to think about and consider and 99% of you have been very helpful and I thank you all so much. I will try to go through and answer each question as they come up tonight as last night there was 6 replies and today there were *looks* 7 billion or so. I will, in the meantime clarify a few general things I saw over and over. Yes I live in Pennsylvania but the rules for common law marriage are very specific and I am NOT in one. Avoiding preachy-ness, polyamory is not for everyone and this is not and will not ever be a "marriage of convienence." I wish to avoid lying, covering-up, withholding information, or any fradualant word you chose, to anyone. I do not want to have a legal situation with the US government for any reason. I do not file my own taxes as I do not make over $4,000.00 a year.

(I believe that is the limit but I'm not even close to it.) Any specific questions anyone has that they need me to clarify they can private message or email me. I have only started my visa journey as I have not even filled out the first form completely so any specific question numbers that some feel are obvious stumbling blocks I probably have not come across yet or am still questioning my answers myself. Again thank you to all of you so far and I honestly did not foresee such a firestorm but at least it has made for interesting conversation for many of you.

--*--Angelique

P.S. I am not and have never been a troll, I was born and continue to live my life as a human being.

[no name 1]

Love does not have to be proven. Only that one has a bona fide relationship, is eligible, that one intends to marry within 90 days, and that the applicant wont become a public charge. The marriage itself must not be entered into for immigration purposes.

HI Aussie!

Which begs the question - what is the difference between love and a bona fide relationship?? Is there one?

She already has lover #1 here already & does not want to marry him. She wants to bring lover #2 to America and the only way she can do it is to have him marry/immigrate?

Fine lines here...

I'm not judging except that she wants 2 lovers & the only way she can do it is a marriage of convenience...which could get into tricky immigration legality stuff.

Edited March 27, 2007 by devilette

[markny 0]

Everyone has given me lots to think about and consider and 99% of you have been very helpful and I thank you all so much. I will try to go through and answer each question as they come up tonight as last night there was 6 replies and today there were *looks* 7 billion or so. I will, in the meantime clarify a few general things I saw over and over. Yes I live in Pennsylvania but the rules for common law marriage are very specific and I am NOT in one. Avoiding preachy-ness, polyamory is not for everyone and this is not and will not ever be a "marriage of convienence." I wish to avoid lying, covering-up, withholding information, or any fradualant word you chose, to anyone. I do not want to have a legal situation with the US government for any reason. I do not file my own taxes as I do not make over $4,000.00 a year.

(I believe that is the limit but I'm not even close to it.) Any specific questions anyone has that they need me to clarify they can private message or email me. I have only started my visa journey as I have not even filled out the first form completely so any specific question numbers that some feel are obvious stumbling blocks I probably have not come across yet or am still questioning my answers myself. Again thank you to all of you so far and I honestly did not foresee such a firestorm but at least it has made for interesting conversation for many of you.

--*--Angelique

P.S. I am not and have never been a troll, I was born and continue to live my life as a human being.

if you think that the interviewer granting the the visa will not look for "LOVE" i think your mistaken. The visa process intended to join those who are in the US with "LOVED ONES" weather married or not, but in a pre-marital relationship, meaning about to be married, Love is one of the things they look for. That in most places is what they look for in a marriage. UMMMMMM LOVE.

[vorpalswrd 0]

In my researching I have also asked myself "Is this the only way?"

Love does not have to be proven. Only that one has a bona fide relationship, is eligible, that one intends to marry within 90 days, and that the applicant wont become a public charge. The marriage itself must not be entered into for immigration purposes.

HI Aussie!

Which begs the question - what is the difference between love and a bona fide relationship?? Is there one?

She already has lover #1 here already & does not want to marry him. She wants to bring lover #2 to America and the only way she can do it is to have him marry/immigrate?

Fine lines here...

I'm not judging except that she wants 2 lovers & the only way she can do it is a marriage of convenience...which could get into tricky immigration legality stuff.