Facing problem with not wanting to take full oath

V

vaippatel

Registered Users (C)
Now,
I am a woman and my husband is a US citizen. when I filed for citizenship, I had denied to take the full oath since I believe in non-violence. I had an interview today and I had a discussion about this with my officer. She was asking me if I had problem with war and killing because I am a hindu? I said that is part of the reason but even if I was not hindu and I was christian I still would have a problem with killing anyone. It is part of the morals. Anyway, She got off from her seat (may be to talk with someone) came back and had me sign on the last 2 parts of the N-400 and told me that I would hear from them in a month. All she saw was greencard and passport. She did go over entire N-400 with me but that was it.... Did anyone had such problems? what should I expect?????? I am 99% sure that I am not getting it.........but is this what you get for telling the truth???
 
On one hand, kudos to you for speaking your mind not fearing the outcome. On the other hand, IMHO, N-400 interview is the last place you want to argue with officers about the moralities. The constitution of United states requires the citizens to take up arms, if required, unless otherwise your religion prohibits you from doing that. The officer cannot do anything about the constitution. If you know you are firm on your beliefs, you could have consulted a lawyer before going through N-400 process.

Anyways, good luck to you. I will be keen to know the outcome. Please do post it.
 
hmmm

do you think that i can get myself out by giving religious certification? It is not like I will be able to change costituition. Do you think at this point I should hire a lawyer before it gets any worse.???
I do know that you get a chance to appeal and that is what I am most likely going to hear after a month.

Does anyone think that if I carry letter from my priest on the oppointment I make throught infopass, she would give me rest of the interview?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
but....

the explanation that i gave her had hindu religion written on it and my morals are from religion. Does not it? and no religion wants you to kill whether it is hindu or Christian.
 
Cool man...

Thanks for the support. I am feeling better. May be I will make a case for religion then. and go with the letter and explain and may be it might work.
FIRST TIME IN MY LIFE I AM FEELING SORRY FOR DEFENDING THE TRUTH. TERRIBLE..........
 
vaippatel said:
Thanks for the support. I am feeling better. May be I will make a case for religion then. and go with the letter and explain and may be it might work.
FIRST TIME IN MY LIFE I AM FEELING SORRY FOR DEFENDING THE TRUTH. TERRIBLE..........
Click to expand...

You shouldn't be sorry for defending your truth***, but you've chosen the wrong place and the wrong time.
The only mistake you should avoid, at least from now on, is speaking more than is necessary or more than you've been asked.
When the officer asked you "this is because of your religion?" the appropriate and only answer supposed to be "YES"...period, nothing else! Your comments, if you get denied, are what got you in trouble. And, by the way, by answering YES only, your answer was truthful 100% nobody asked you about the things you aded voluntarily to your answer.
As a general rule, when you deal with INS, police, etc. you have to answer truthfully but you don't volunteer informations and extra details.
I wish you good luck. :)

***I underscored your truth, because I don't share your convictions. I don't have any problem with any of the points in the Oath, but I want to mention that I don't judge you for thinking differently, it's your right to feel that way.
 
I respect your beliefs but now where Hindu Religion forbids taking up arms to defend yourself, your family, your country and so on.
 
Ummm... since one of the four basic castes in Hinduism is the warrior caste, it seems a bit tough to justify based on a religious claim. Perhaps they won't dig as deep and just approve your application with an amended oath.
 
True, if your a a hindu and belong to warrior caste (kshtriya class) , but what if you are a brahmin or vasiya or sudra . According to hinduism they are not supposed to take up arms.
 
rpranesh said:
True, if your a a hindu and belong to warrior caste (kshtriya class) , but what if you are a brahmin or vasiya or sudra . According to hinduism they are not supposed to take up arms.
Click to expand...

It's a point. But for the record, Christians are not that bad like some people from other religions try to portrait them.
Like my best friend in this forum said it privately to me in a PM, I'm going to say it out-loud for everybody to hear it and take a moment of reflection on it: If hindu are so peceful people, how comes that India and Pakistan are ready to nuke*** themself at any given moment for the past many years?!?

***in war, conventional bombs kill 90% or maybe more, enemy warriors, and problably much less than 10% innocent people, a nuclear bomb will kill equaly men, women and children...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
is it necessary to find bad examples?

There are good examples everywhere. India got its independence non-violently and Gandhi was also a true hindu who believed in non-violence. I also know christians, for example, Jehovah witnesses who believe in non-violence. Can not help if you choose not to follow your religious book and word of god.
 
vaippatel said:
There are good examples everywhere. India got its independence non-violently and Gandhi was also a true hindu who believed in non-violence. I also know christians, for example, Jehovah witnesses who believe in non-violence. Can not help if you choose not to follow your religious book and word of god.
Click to expand...

Not too many Christians will agree with you regarding categorising the Jehovah Witnesses as Chrisitans. God's Heaven is not made up for ONLY 144,000 people. Besides, they are just too busy knocking on doors to do anything else.
 
The problem with Jehovah's Witness members is that once they get a member in, they require them to give up their life for the spreading of the doctrine. They push their disciples to the limit. It's hardcore door-to-door salesmanship.

God put us on this Earth to create, build, and enjoy life. Not to incite people to follow a certain ideology day and night.
 
Hi Publicus, you troublemaker !!! :D :D :D . Your personal mail box is full. I have filed a case for Judicial review, under 1421c, after following your guidelines. I read in one of your posts about PACER, what is that. I am like you, I am just tired of cowtowing to attorneys to make a good case for me, and then finding that they have ommited something which comes back again, as a new allegation by INS. Like you I want to be fully responsible and I will be happier knowing that the US attorney has to send me a copy of every motion they file with the court, one is always uncomfortable not knowing what exactly is going on with the court system. I had a falling out with my attorney yesterday, because I did not seek her help in pursuing my case in District Court, however, I really could not afford it and she had actually told me on a prior occasion that she had NEVER filed a case in federal court, now how can that be for an attorney who only practices immigration law, I thought that was absurd. She was insisting that she could get them to review, inhouse, my denial, after it was affirmed for the second time. Now that to me is what you call.....really bad legal advice......I would be the one who would have to live with a denial for the rest of my life or until I am eligible to file again. So there, any help you can give would be appreciated.
 
Vaippatel - good luck with your case. Hope it works out for you but I fully agree with vulpasin that you should know when not to speak too much.

By the way - may I also add that your belief that hinduism disallows bearing of arms is misguided IMO. I know from a reliable source whom I asked (a good friend who is a professor of religion in NY and a Hindu) that you are definitely allowed to defend yourself if attacked - the religion only says don't go out and attack/kill people unprovoked. Think about it - if it weren't for defending oneself, would the Hindus in India have survivied thousands of years and dozens of foreign attacks?

Anyway, you are welcome to believe whatever you want and I respect that, but again an INS officer is probably not the best person to share the details of your belief with.

Hmmm, this is getting to be more of a religious forum than one on immigration :) so let's keep our focus. Sorry!

JoeF said:
Indeed. See, e.g., http://www.contenderministries.org/jehovahswitnesses.php

Christian sects like the Mennonites, the Hutterers or the Amish are better examples. See, e.g., http://www.mennoniteusa.org/mennos/
"Mennonites are known for their peace stand, taken because they believe Jesus Christ taught the way of peace. Many members choose not to participate in military service. Some take their belief further by objecting to government military expenditure; a few choose not to pay the percentage of their annual income tax that would go for military purposes."
Click to expand...
 
vaippatel said:
Thanks for the support. I am feeling better. May be I will make a case for religion then. and go with the letter and explain and may be it might work.
FIRST TIME IN MY LIFE I AM FEELING SORRY FOR DEFENDING THE TRUTH. TERRIBLE..........
Click to expand...
I do not see any reason why you have to make a case here. If you value YOUR conviction of hindu religion's non violence more than US citizenship, you should not care about it. Why do you have to try to work around the situation compromising YOUR beliefs and values? BTW, citizenship oath is not asking you to be voilent. It only say IF REQUIRED (when the country needs you) you should be prepared to take up arms. If that sounds irrational or unreasonable to you then probably US citizenship is not worth your values. BTW, I admire your boldness and clarity in your thinking. You did what your gut told you and and there is nothing wrong in having a firm opinion as long as you are convinced 100% about it.
 
I find it amazing just how everyone subscribes to the "sheep mentality" when it comes to taking the oath for naturalization. And then you wonder how dictators come into power: It's the SHEEP that put them there. The same sheep who did not question anything and just rolled over when they were told to do so.

Anyway, I wanted to clarify a few things. First and foremost many people that work for the Govt. do NOT have a very good understanding of the law. With that being said, many people on the internet also do NOT have a good understanding of the law.

Go to this website: USCIS Interpretations of the Oath Laws

Here you will find ALL you need to know on how a USCIS case worker "should" in my opinion, interpret laws surrounding CONSCIENTIOUS Objectors! There is a lot of case history surrounding Consientious objectors and there have been plenty of rulings from the Supreme Court on this subject. The only problem, as i stated earlier, is that no one really knows how to apply these laws and some don't even know the laws exist!

Also, for the record, a relative who is a LPR just applied for her citizenship and answered "no" to the questions relating to military service due to religious conscientious objection. I'm not sure if she will be granted the CO status, but according to the USCIS' own interpretations of the laws which are on the books, she should be just fine. You'll note that belonging to a certain church or organization is not necessarily a prerequesite.

Unfortunately, due to the fact that the majority of the population is a bunch of sheep, most case workers don't even get exposed to these laws because very few people ask to have the oath modified. That's a shame. Esp. since some have claimed to have taken the oath, but not necessarily with a clear conscience.

If the original poster is still around, I would like to know how her case turned out or if she is still waiting for the decision to be handed down...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top