Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
She didn't really make any challenge, she received a request by DHS and responded to it, DHS then accepted her response, which was received by the date asked for and then properly granted her a change of status.
The DHS phrase does not require/oblige her to join any church, DHS simply asked for the letter based on her own admission of spiritual/religious beliefs, DHS assumed she was a member of a church based on her claim.
Call it a request or a challenge, she did not do as requested and wrote to ask that they rethink. They did and changed their mind, so she was right. The semantics is irrelevant.
Whether or not she belonged to any church (atheist or not), being told to join one or being told to join some other one was wrong, she asked them to rethink and they did so she was right.
She thought it was worth doing and so do I.
I agree that the DHS did not know she was an atheist and assumed that she belonged to some church that could act as a vouch or reference for her non -violent character. This assumption, then, was what was challenged. And it is necessary and important that the point be made that membership of some church that could give this reference or assurance was effectively forcing church membership on someone who did not want it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic 2.0
Which was stupid of them. She said nothing about a church, so asking for her "church's official position on the bearing of arms" just made them look like the fools they were. Hopefully next time they'll think before they act.
I rather think that it was bureaucratic. I can see why they would think that a church vouching for someone would be a convenient way of checking up. It probably didn't occur to them that anyone would not belong to a church or would have any reason not to join one. It was the same here and is only now that the forms are being altered so that one can put 'None' and that be accepted.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 06-23-2013 at 01:37 AM..
Call it a request or a challenge, she did not do as requested and wrote to ask that they rethink. They did and changed their mind, so she was right. The semantics is irrelevant.
Whether or not she belonged to any church (atheist or not), being told to join one or being told to join some other one was wrong, she asked them to rethink and they did so she was right.
She was never told to join a church nor was she told to join some other one. This isn't semantics, its you adding things in that aren't factually true. You are twisting what has happened for some argument that isn't there.
This whole situation was made into Mt Fuji from some sand pebble.
She didn't really make any challenge, she received a request by DHS and responded to it, DHS then accepted her response, which was received by the date asked for and then properly granted her a change of status.
The DHS phrase does not require/oblige her to join any church, DHS simply asked for the letter based on her own admission of spiritual/religious beliefs, DHS assumed she was a member of a church based on her claim.
The request should never have been made in the first place.
You may not know this, but there is no requirement of religious belief or membership in a church for citizenship.
Perhaps the person who gave her that information should be better trained or given a letter of reprimand for such stupidity.
The request should never have been made in the first place.
You may not know this, but there is no requirement of religious belief or membership in a church for citizenship.
Perhaps the person who gave her that information should be better trained or given a letter of reprimand for such stupidity.
The request was made because she stated herself it was due to her spiritual/religious belief.
DHS simply then asked for a letter from her church (DHS assumed she was a church member due to her own admissions) on church letterhead stating the position of the church and to verify show was in good standing with said church. (all she would then do is provide a letter explaining her religious belief of atheism)
I do know quite a bit about the citizenship process, I have been through it more than once. There is no requirement of religious belief or membership in a church, I have never stated otherwise, neither has DHS, nor has DHS required her to do anything more then provide some documentation, in letter form by a specific date.
She was never told to join a church nor was she told to join some other one. This isn't semantics, its you adding things in that aren't factually true. You are twisting what has happened for some argument that isn't there.
This whole situation was made into Mt Fuji from some sand pebble.
Well, that's odd. That's just what I thought you were doing.
The bottom line is that she got her way. She was right and they were wrong.
The request was made because she stated herself it was due to her spiritual/religious belief.
DHS simply then asked for a letter from her church (DHS assumed she was a church member due to her own admissions) on church letterhead stating the position of the church and to verify show was in good standing with said church. (all she would then do is provide a letter explaining her religious belief of atheism)
I do know quite a bit about the citizenship process, I have been through it more than once. There is no requirement of religious belief or membership in a church, I have never stated otherwise, neither has DHS, nor has DHS required her to do anything more then provide some documentation, in letter form by a specific date.
And I used to work at the INS.
So I know a little about the process myself.
No joke there is no requirement; hence the need for training and/or reprimand for the idiot who asked for it.
Well, that's odd. That's just what I thought you were doing.
You might try re-reading the thread and take notes that I wasn't the one making claims that she was to be forced to join a church as many have claimed she was to do. I wasn't the one twisting statements and fact to fit some biased argument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA
The bottom line is that she got her way. She was right and they were wrong.
This wasn't about right and wrong. The issue, there really wasn't one to begin with, was that she felt she was being denied something based on her beliefs - atheism. Once she clarified her beliefs, DHS authorized the paperwork. DHS does have the authority to request documentation and to deny change of status for any reason they deem so whether you like it or not.
And I used to work at the INS.
So I know a little about the process myself.
No joke there is no requirement; hence the need for training and/or reprimand for the idiot who asked for it.
Why the need for reprimand or training when by her own admission she stated she had spiritual/religious beliefs that imposed on her a no bearing of arms? All the DHS agent did was ask for her to provide documentation for her said beliefs. DHS ( back in the day - INS) does have the right to ask for verification of all claims made and can deny based on the lack of verification.
Why the need for reprimand or training when by her own admission she stated she had spiritual/religious beliefs that imposed on her a no bearing of arms? All the DHS agent did was ask for her to provide documentation for her said beliefs. DHS ( back in the day - INS) does have the right to ask for verification of all claims made and can deny based on the lack of verification.
What we're trying to tell you is that verification that she has spiritual/religious convictions that contrast with the bearing of arms and verification that she's a church-goer or someone who is well known by any church are not at all the same thing. Therefore, they were not asking for verification of her claims; they were asking for verification of something they had just assumed to be true.
In God We Trust is the official US motto... She did not know that? It's visible on the currency.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You might try re-reading the thread and take notes that I wasn't the one making claims that she was to be forced to join a church as many have claimed she was to do. I wasn't the one twisting statements and fact to fit some biased argument.
