Modified Oath while submitting N-400

M

modifiedoath

New Member
Hi,
I am trying to figure out whether anyone has had any experience with modified oath issue when submitting the N-400.

In particular, I would like to request that i be allowed to take the Oath without the following words:
• “to bear arms on behalf of the Unites States when required by law.”
• “to perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by law.”

It appears that I need to send a letter along with N-400 explaining the reasons. The reason are primarily based on my religion (jainism) and my upbringing that forbid me to participate in the armed forces.

Do i need to provide any background material on Jainism? The instructions say that a proof of belongingness to a religious group etc. may be required. I however do not belong to any group. These reasons i have are based more on my philosophy that was shaped by my upbringing.

Any suggestions would be helpful.

Thanks,
 
modifiedoath, have you already submitted your N400 application, and if so what is your DO and timeline. I am sure you can ask the Immigration officer who interviews you about any of these provisions.
 
I have not submitted the N-400 yet. There are couple of boxes in N-400 that one has to select or deselect for the issues I mentioned above.
Thanks,
 
modifiedoath said:
Hi,
I am trying to figure out whether anyone has had any experience with modified oath issue when submitting the N-400.

In particular, I would like to request that i be allowed to take the Oath without the following words:
• “to bear arms on behalf of the Unites States when required by law.”
• “to perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by law.”

It appears that I need to send a letter along with N-400 explaining the reasons. The reason are primarily based on my religion (jainism) and my upbringing that forbid me to participate in the armed forces.

Do i need to provide any background material on Jainism? The instructions say that a proof of belongingness to a religious group etc. may be required. I however do not belong to any group. These reasons i have are based more on my philosophy that was shaped by my upbringing.

Any suggestions would be helpful.

Thanks,
Click to expand...

This is just my opinion but ..
Why would you want to modify the oath in the first place ..?
If you want c'ship of a nation, any nation as a matter of fact, you have to be prepared to defend it when necessary or help out in a civilian capacity as required by law. Religion has nothing to do with it, because if you can not defend your land, you will have no place to practice your religion ...

I just wonder why people would go through this whole tedious process with immigration, and at the final stage try to complicate things unnecessarily ..
As a citizen of America, you are free to practice your religion without any problems.
 
Why ask why

Well, back to the original question. It doesn't matter why.

The law says you have to belong to a group - for some period of time and that the group has to have such a teaching as a fundamental aspect of religious doctrine. It may not be fair, but I think you're out of luck here.

Personally, I think the military draft is in conflict with the 14th amendment. I also think an all volunteer military is superiour. But it doesn't much matter what I think.

I looked into this for my wife, who would have liked to leave that part out - even though women have never been forced to fight in the US armed services. We decided to just let it slide. She didn't want to risk any trouble - and for her, as a woman and a Mom we knew it didn't matter. If ever the USA decides to conscipt mothers of young children into military service, we will leave. I (born USC) would not want to be part of a nation who presses young mothers (or any woman) into the military.

In some reading, I discovered that other nations - even some you might not expect - have such provisions in law. In the Soviet Union, Baptists were for some time after the revolution not required to serve in the military - until it happened that large numbers of otherwise unreligious young men suddenly were found to have a strong interest in joining the Baptists. The government basicly told the Baptist leaders that at their next national meeting they were to remove from their bylaws any objection to service in the military, or they would forcibly be disbanded. (The constitution of the USSR continued to allow religious objections, but they simply elliminated all the religions who objected - nice, huh). The Baptists didn't buckle the first time, but were forced to change leadership, make the demanded changes, and subsequently were not allowed to have national meetings - so they could never reinstate the objections to military service.

Yeah, I know... nobody asked.

-Ocelot
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The law does allow for someone to leave some words out of the oath, but does not give one a ticket to get out of serving in the military if required by law, it is whether you will bear arms while serving in the military or not, there are plenty of "non-combatant" jobs for people who don't believe in bearing arms ... doctors, nurses, pen pushers. These are without a doubt some of the safest in the military.

Good luck.
 
buster said:
The law does allow for someone to leave some words out of the oath, but does not give one a ticket to get out of serving in the military if required by law, it is whether you will bear arms while serving in the military or not, there are plenty of "non-combatant" jobs for people who don't believe in bearing arms ... doctors, nurses, pen pushers. These are without a doubt some of the safest in the military.

Good luck.
Click to expand...

ya, and priests too ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top