Immigration servuce to recognize gay ...

Immigration servuce to recognize gay marriage from other states

There are 79 comments on the Yuma Sun story from Jul 28, 2013, titled Immigration servuce to recognize gay marriage from other states. In it, Yuma Sun reports that:

PHOENIX Gay Arizonans who legally wed to foreigners in other states will be able to use their status to gain a visa and a path to citizenship for their spouses living here even though Arizona won't recognize their union.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Yuma Sun.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#46 Jul 31, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>This is the issue ...
NOT of THIS thread, crosspatch!

“ reality, what a concept”

Level 2

Since: Nov 07

this one

#47 Jul 31, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
This is the issue: IRS harassment. They leaked NOM's 2008 tax return to same sex marriage supporters, the Human Rights Campaign.
Same sex marriage is bad because you don't want your tax return leaked to your political enemies.
Actually dear, the issue WAS the immigration rights of legally married same sex couples, not your delusions about the IRS.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#48 Aug 1, 2013
The issue is same sex marriage and law; if the IRS is corrupted, why not check on the INS?

The Executive Branch don't write laws; nor do the courts. If our INS isn't following Congress's legislation on chain immigration, if they are illegally granting immigration status to the ineligible; then investigate and impeach.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#49 Aug 1, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>^^^See the leaked NOM's Schedule B, same sex marriage is an invasion of privacy; they leaked names, addresses and donation amounts.
I think you are a bit off topic. Again.

Why don't you go find the countless other posts on other threads where this has been thoroughly addressed?

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#50 Aug 1, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
The issue is same sex marriage and law; if the IRS is corrupted, why not check on the INS?
The Executive Branch don't write laws; nor do the courts. If our INS isn't following Congress's legislation on chain immigration, if they are illegally granting immigration status to the ineligible; then investigate and impeach.
Again, I think you are confused.

“ reality, what a concept”

Level 2

Since: Nov 07

this one

#51 Aug 1, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
The Executive Branch don't write laws; nor do the courts.
Didn't you stay awake through 8th grade Civics? The Executive branch writes the regulations to necessary to carry out said laws and the Courts weigh the constitutionality of both.

“No Headline available”

Level 2

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#52 Aug 1, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
The issue is same sex marriage and law; if the IRS is corrupted, why not check on the INS?
The Executive Branch don't write laws; nor do the courts. If our INS isn't following Congress's legislation on chain immigration, if they are illegally granting immigration status to the ineligible; then investigate and impeach.
You're off topic again, Brian.

The INS is enforcing the law in accordance with the recent interpretation by the US Supreme Court. If you didn't have the mind of a child, you would understand that.

Please do try to keep up, and not simply saturate the thread with your irrelevant rantings about off topic drivel.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#53 Aug 1, 2013
Quest wrote:
I think you are a bit off topic. Again. Why don't you go find the countless other posts on other threads where this has been thoroughly addressed?
The topic is law and same sex marriage:

E-mails Suggest Collusion Between FEC, IRS to Target Conservative Groups
By Eliana Johnson
July 31, 2013 6:00 AM
...
The FEC general counsel’s office, in its recommendation on the case, apparently didn’t tell the agency’s commissioners about how it had obtained the information about the group’s tax-exempt status. Recommending that the commissioners prosecute the American Future Fund, the general counsel’s office wrote,“According to its response, AFF submitted an application for tax-exempt status to the Internal Revenue Service ... on March 18, 2008.” The footnote to that sentence reads,“The IRS has not yet issued a determination letter regarding AFF’s application for exempt status. Based on the information from the response and the IRS website, it is likely that the application is still under review.” In fact, an FEC lawyer knew that the organization had yet to obtain tax-exempt status because Lerner provided the confidential information....

erner was placed on paid administrative leave in late May after she revealed the IRS had inappropriately targeted conservative groups. The IRS has yet to respond to requests from lawmakers about her current employment status with the agency.

“No Headline available”

Level 2

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#54 Aug 1, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>The topic is law and same sex marriage:
E-mails Suggest Collusion Between FEC, IRS to Target Conservative Groups
By Eliana Johnson
July 31, 2013 6:00 AM
...
The FEC general counsel’s office, in its recommendation on the case, apparently didn’t tell the agency’s commissioners about how it had obtained the information about the group’s tax-exempt status. Recommending that the commissioners prosecute the American Future Fund, the general counsel’s office wrote,“According to its response, AFF submitted an application for tax-exempt status to the Internal Revenue Service ... on March 18, 2008.” The footnote to that sentence reads,“The IRS has not yet issued a determination letter regarding AFF’s application for exempt status. Based on the information from the response and the IRS website, it is likely that the application is still under review.” In fact, an FEC lawyer knew that the organization had yet to obtain tax-exempt status because Lerner provided the confidential information....
erner was placed on paid administrative leave in late May after she revealed the IRS had inappropriately targeted conservative groups. The IRS has yet to respond to requests from lawmakers about her current employment status with the agency.
Came back to the topic at hand, troll Brian.

“ reality, what a concept”

Level 2

Since: Nov 07

this one

#55 Aug 1, 2013
lides wrote:
Come back to the topic at hand, troll Brian.
He really wasn't up to speed on the subject when he started his rant here, he's just now finding out that the INS really does have the legal authority to do what they are doing. His disagreement is entirely in his own head. At least with his current tangent, he's got a source for his paranoia.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#56 Aug 1, 2013
And he's derailed yet another thread.

Level 6

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#57 Aug 1, 2013
snyper wrote:
And he's derailed yet another thread.
It's what he does.

A while back he was posting on threads about gay issues claiming that he was an active duty soldier stationed in Germany.

At least he's dropped that little charade.

Level 6

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#58 Aug 1, 2013
Okay, I have a question that is kind of related to this topic.

A few weeks ago I was concerned with the decision on the part of democrats not to include protections for gay and lesbian couples in the proposed immigration reforms.

Once Patrick Leahy filed an amendment that would be brought forward and put to a vote in the event that the Supreme Court didn't strike down much of DOMA, I was back onboard with immigration reform.

Right now, an American citizen legally married to someone of the same gender has the same right to apply to have their spouse here as anyone else.

What I'm not clear about is whether or not a same-sex couple from another country has the same right to immigrate here together the way heterosexuals can and whether or not undocumented immigrants currently in the country would be eligible to bring their same-sex partners (married in another country) here if and when the reforms go through.

Anybody know anything about this?

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#59 Aug 2, 2013
Same sex marriage is like criminal charges against showing a gay pride flag in Russia. The Obama administration doesn't get to make its own immigration law; it has to follow legislation passed by congress and signed by the President.

Congress didn't authorize same sex marriage visas; impeach Obama for violating our laws.

“No Headline available”

Level 2

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#60 Aug 2, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
Same sex marriage is like criminal charges against showing a gay pride flag in Russia.
Just how dumb do you want us to think you are? Now you are just trolling.
Brian_G wrote:
The Obama administration doesn't get to make its own immigration law; it has to follow legislation passed by congress and signed by the President.
Wow, that's utterly irrelevant to the topic at hand. Did you take your meds today?
Brian_G wrote:
Congress didn't authorize same sex marriage visas; impeach Obama for violating our laws.
Brian, wake up and smell Windsor v United States. The federal government recognizes same sex marriages performed in jurisdictions that allow them. That includes the INS, which has long extended visas to spouses.

Grow a brain, Brian.

Level 6

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#61 Aug 2, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
Same sex marriage is like criminal charges against showing a gay pride flag in Russia. The Obama administration doesn't get to make its own immigration law; it has to follow legislation passed by congress and signed by the President.
Congress didn't authorize same sex marriage visas; impeach Obama for violating our laws.
There's no such thing as a "same-sex marriage license" big guy.

Just a plain old marriage license like all the rest and if you're married, you're entitled to all the rights and responsibilities that go along with that.

I'm starting to think you just make this crap up as you go along.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#62 Aug 2, 2013
Before the 21st Century, all written law defined marriage as male/female. Same sex marriage is radical social and government change. It might not be wise to make government gender blind in marriage.

Level 6

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#63 Aug 2, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
Before the 21st Century, all written law defined marriage as male/female. Same sex marriage is radical social and government change. It might not be wise to make government gender blind in marriage.
That's not true and we've discussed this before.

Formal, legally binding same-sex marriages were being performed in China as long ago as the earliest written histories and continued until as late as late as the 17th century.

Not to mention the fact that most early western civilizations recognized one type of formalized same-sex union or another right up until the first Roman Emperor converted to Christianity.

The history of civilization taken in it's entirety, defining marriage as one man, one woman is the oddity.

You can't rewrite history to suit your own needs.

Well, you can try, but you won't get away with it.

“No Headline available”

Level 2

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#64 Aug 2, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
Before the 21st Century, all written law defined marriage as male/female. Same sex marriage is radical social and government change. It might not be wise to make government gender blind in marriage.
Do you ever make sure you have a point before you post?

Brian, how does allowing same sex couples to marry in any way effect you, your life, or your rights?

How does allowing same sex couples to marry impact any traditional marriage whether existing or yet to be performed?

An intelligent and honest person could answer these simple and direct questions if their position actually had any merit. One wonders why you hide from them? Or, maybe we already know?

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#65 Aug 2, 2013
Jaxxon wrote:
Okay, I have a question that is kind of related to this topic.
A few weeks ago I was concerned with the decision on the part of democrats not to include protections for gay and lesbian couples in the proposed immigration reforms.
Once Patrick Leahy filed an amendment that would be brought forward and put to a vote in the event that the Supreme Court didn't strike down much of DOMA, I was back onboard with immigration reform.
Right now, an American citizen legally married to someone of the same gender has the same right to apply to have their spouse here as anyone else.
What I'm not clear about is whether or not a same-sex couple from another country has the same right to immigrate here together the way heterosexuals can and whether or not undocumented immigrants currently in the country would be eligible to bring their same-sex partners (married in another country) here if and when the reforms go through.
Anybody know anything about this?
Only generally.

After a Court Decision like this, the various administrative areas get their heads together with Administration Legal Counsel to determine the implications and applications of the Court Decision with respect to their departmental policies. This can take quite a long time; especially when there are additional Cases coming down the turnpike. The phone lines are burning (as is the midnight oil) with calls among the various sub-department supervisors all trying to come to a consensus understanding.

I've been through similar occurrences more than a few times. Nobody is dragging their feet. Consensus takes time. Likely interpretations are going all the way down to frontline staff meetings, and reactions and input are making their way back up the chain.

6 months to a year is pretty much standard for minor changes.

This one isn't a minor change.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Immigration Reform Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News How Undocumented Immigrants Help Strengthen Our... 41 min MODEADFEDS 168
News Juan Williams: The pollution of politics 4 hr PiXies 7
Rose's Pub (Mar '10) 4 hr J ValJean 138,471
Why Americans are starting to really hate mexic... (Oct '07) 5 hr Raj 1,560
News Trump - what the village idiot says about the v... 5 hr Larry Craig s WC ... 386
News NBC to Donald Trump: "You're fired!" 6 hr tomin cali 8
News 4 Jacksonville people indicted in marriage and ... 6 hr wild child 1
More from around the web