Recommendations for Part.10-H-37

V

vvrok

Registered Users (C)
I am almost done with my N-400 application. Just going over the answers for the final review. What do people usually put as the answer to Part.10-H-37 (If the law requires it, are you willing to bear arms on behalf of the United States?) I never served in the army and I am not planning to join any miltary organizations. I am very peaceful person. So, I guess my inclanation is to answer "No". But I am not really a pacifist. Would this (answering "No" to q.-37) cause any problems during processing/ interview? How do (male) applicants usually answer this question? And what about females? (I am preparing a parallel application for my wife.) Does an interviewer usually ask about this section during the interview? Thanks
 
If you unopposed against ALL war for RELIGIOUS reasons only
will you be excused. Please use caution and do more
research before you say NO
 
I did answer yes, althouth I'm in similar situation and have similar beliefs like you.

BUT, I figured, should a situation arise, that the government will need a person like me to bear arms.... man in that case things will be pretty much screwed anyway. (meaning there will be an enemy running around in our backyard or something to that extent) and I will be willing not only to bear arms but choke them with bare arms.

In my opinion, unless you are a deeply religious person and your religion prohibits it, don't mess with this question.
 
vvrok,

Take it a bit as a rhetorical question. If you look deep in your heart, even if you are mostly a pacifist you would probably bear arms under certain circumstances. Probably answering "NO" is going to complicate your processing, and then, presently there is no draft in the U.S., and depending on your age it would be pretty difficult that you ever get drafted or have to fulfill your promise. All this is not to encourage you to lie or misrepresent things in your application, but read it carefully and make your own decision. If you are in the selective service system you are already eligible to be drafted if the country decides to establish a draft system again, so I think at the end of the day it doesn't really matter much what you answer in this question, and makes me think this is mostly a rhetorical question as I stated at the beginning of this rambling paragraph :)

Your question about your wife is interesting, and I wish anyone who have already had experience in the naturalization process would answer this. I guess the issue is complicated, as since Clinton times women are allowed in combat operations as it was clearly seen in Iraq's war.


This is not legal advice, just my 2 cents about this issue.
 
Does an interviewer usually ask about this section during the interview?

YES they do ask this question.
 
vvrok,
If you do not wish to complicate , and if you do not want to risk a rejection (as I doubt that you will be able to prove the bonafides for answering "NO" to that question !) my advice : naswer "YES" .
 
VRVROK

Hi VRVROK

A question for you, I don't know if are still in this forum?

I am doing the same process of filing myself, did you have to include your passport copy along with your N-400.

Also, how did you show your citing information (if any) did you have copies of the speeding tickets attached ?

Thanks for any input:)
 
BEWARE!

To all of you guys ou there...
Never answer NO to Part 10 H 37 because if there is an invasion of United States or the citizens of this country are called for by the Congress of United States to protect from invadors or if the US Army is stretched thin(although this is very rare), you will have to report to duty or get arrested for refusing to serve your country and your citizenship revoked for refusing to serve this country.

When there is such problem-as religious reasons-then you will not be given a gun to kill the enemy. But, you will "stil"l have to serve either desk job in the army or other things such as doctor treating the wounded, technical jobs for armed forces, chef, truck driver for the army guys or maybe some other job.

Both of the above paragraphs seems a distant reality but the fact is First don't get in trouble in any way, shape, fashion, or form by answering NO. Second, if you did still answered NO does NOT make any difference and relieve you of your duty from serving this country because Congress/ President will not be looking at you Part 10 H 37 answer before ORDERING you to duty.

One should read some WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam and most importantly US Political Science and History before getting to the depth of what I just said.

Also, better answer Yes to avoid any stupid questions by USCIS interview officer.

I hope I made my answer clear for my friends out there....
 
I completely agree with bulbul-dude.

Please note that there are some responsibilities that come
with the citizenship. If you want to be a citizen of a new country
you must behave as if it is your own country. That is just plain
common sense.

I am sure nobody is forcing anyone to become a citizen of USA.
Every one is applying out of their own free will.

I don't understand this legal hair splitting only when it comes to
the responsibilities. Remember what JFK said "Ask not what
this country can do for you. Ask what you can do for the country"

Before answering NO, it always helps to remember the question CNN's Bernard Shaw asked Dukakis.

I am yet to come across a religion which preaches surrounding without a fight when one's existence is threatened.
 
to JoeF

daar Joef
you mentioned in your reply that draft is not happening. I agree but if and when it happens, to the best of my knowledge it will call 18- 26 year olds not people from other age groups to pick up arms. They will be doing other duties in armed forces unless they specifically request to pick up arms to killl enemy forces.

Regarding "Truthfully answering" question to that Part 10 H 37 I 100% agree that one has the right to answer NO to it. But, my point was will you be geting away with it in the long run sitting home watching Foxnews or CNN and the rest of the nation called to duty(if it comes to that) simply by answering NO to part 10 H 37. The answer to that is NO as well.

Well SIR we are not in India or any place else anymore. There are some duties and responsibilities that come with becoming a US citizen. There is no more Mera Bharat Mahaan logo here. US is not for making good dollars, good universities and buy a nice house and live a wonderful life ALONE. There is somethng else that all of us good EX-INDIANS should prove that if we become US citizens we will never forget our India but we will alsoenever run away from our responsibility from serving in any way shape fashion or form in serving this great country the United States of America, if time comes to that.

I hope it makes sense....:)
 
You have all the rights and responsibilities of any other US citizen. Part of that is that you have the right to be a consientious objector.
Click to expand...
I thought we are taking of responsibilities, NOT "rights AND responsibilities"
 
?

joeF is doing a line by line analysis as if he/she is going to grade my reply.

Most to all of the users in these forums are Indian's so I used some Indian slang to make the point. It was not intended toward a particular person but unfortunately it was taken as a college assignment to be graded by joeF from Western Europe??????????

You won I lost, makes all things even.....
Don't worry about responding to this.....
hows that.....:D
 
?

I am glad JoeF is not my professor; otherwise it seems most in the class will never pass the course he/she is teaching

Keep up your "eligible to be volunteer" civics and immigration analysis with a disclaimer below about bla bla bla etc....

Did I said that loud enough?

::eek: :eek:
 
Or read about the Geneva Convention. That was introduced after such atrocies against civilians in WW2.
Click to expand...

Still I don't get your point. All I see is trying to find a loop-hole in the law. By your admission your are not a lawyer. If I remember well you have not gone through the n-400 process. So all you dish out is your opinion based on the internet search. I am sure you have so much of free time on your hands.

The bottom line is: There are responsibilities that come with
citizenship (not rights alone). If one is so keen to skirt them by looking for loop holes that is fine. But let us not mis-advise the people who want to have some nobler thoughts.

I am sure this forum is more useful when people share their real experience. If we want legal opinion, probably we can go the attorney or to other forums where some times attorney replies
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anybody claiming or implying that a person having religious beliefs
Click to expand...
I am not sure there is any major religion in the world that prohibits defending one's existence. I will be very interested in knowing that.
 
and just for the record: I personally am not religious, and will of course voice the full oath.
Click to expand...
Then what are we doing here. Trying to have a discussion on religion and its impact on human race. Prof. Chandrasekar, Nobel Prize winner in Physics, once replied to the question, "What is the greatest invention of Man" by the word "God"
 
You are also changing the subject. "Defending one's existence" is different from serving in a military. At that point you are defending a man-made, abstract concept of a state or country, not your own personal existence.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately that "man-made, abstract concept of a state or country" only grants citizenship. :-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top