Atheist denied citizenship unless she joins church

[krych3k]

Irrelevant. The statement, "neither a State nor the Federal Government can constitutionally force a person 'to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion'. Neither can constitutionally pass laws or impose requirements which aid all religions as against non-believers, and neither can aid those religions based on a belief in the existence of God as against those religions founded on different beliefs" -- doesn't limit any law to whether a Notary Public may have a commission in Maryland. "Neither a State nor the Federal Government can constitutionally" means what it says, not what you want it to mean here but don't want it to mean there. That's why FFRF quoted it. And when it says no government "can constitutionally force", the First Amendment is exactly what it's referring to.

Besides, SCOTUS has already ruled that even the law as specifically applied to conscientious objection CANNOT require the CO to be a member of some organization, nor even have a religious basis, nor even a belief in God. See post 47, it's not going away.

Yeah, this is pointless. According to your anti-God position, the DoI's recognition of God is anti-Constitutional. Why do you hate God so much? It's not his fault you became what you became...

Again with the emotional meltdowns. This issue is not about God. It's about the State requiring God.
Apparently you believe the State should have such a power. Lucky for us our forebears didn't.

That's not what I believe. What I'm doing is calling you out on your motivation for ongoing nonsensical application of the "No Religious Test Clause", which is hatred of God and religion.

 

[Pogo]

I meant to type the DoI.

A country's laws aren't based on its DofI.

The DoI is the foundation of the Constitution. Do you get that?

Uh... no, it isn't. The Constitution is the foundation of the Constitution.
The DofI is simply telling the British Empire to fuck off. In that they can use any language they want.

 

[Sunshine]

Margaret Doughty, Atheist Seeking U.S. Citizenship, Told To Join Church Or Be Denied

Margaret Doughty, an atheist and permanent U.S. resident for more than 30 years, was told by immigration authorities this month that she has until Friday to officially join a church that forbids violence or her application for naturalized citizenship will be rejected.

Doughty received the ultimatum after stating on her application that she objected to the pledge to bear arms in defense of the nation due to her moral opposition to war. According to a letter to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services by the American Humanist Association on Doughty's behalf, officials responded by telling her that she needed to prove that her status as a conscientious objector was due to religious beliefs. They reportedly told her she'd need to document that she was "a member in good standing" of a nonviolent religious organization or be denied citizenship at her June 21 hearing. A note “on official church stationary [sic]" would suffice, they said.

Her letter is at the link.

Dudley, do you even bother to read this shit from HuffPO? It would seem not.

One of the citizenship requirements is to be willing to be in the armed forces. If you are a conscientious objector for the military, it has to be based upon a religious belief. The statute is at the link below and says, in part:

...no person "who by religious training and belief is conscientiously opposed to participation in war in any form" can be required to kill or train to kill in the military. CO provisions like this have been a part of American law since the time of the colonies.

Who is a Conscientious Objector?

She is correct in saying that at her age she would be unlikely to be drafted particularly since we don't have a draft. But being willing to serve is part of the process and the law says CO status has to be based on religious training.

That's the rule. If she doesn't like it she can check out and go back home.

 

[dblack]

If she is going to claim conscientious objector status she needs to prove that up.

What is there to prove? Beyond saying, "Yup, I am!"?

 

[Pogo]

Yeah, this is pointless. According to your anti-God position, the DoI's recognition of God is anti-Constitutional. Why do you hate God so much? It's not his fault you became what you became...

Again with the emotional meltdowns. This issue is not about God. It's about the State requiring God.
Apparently you believe the State should have such a power. Lucky for us our forebears didn't.

That's not what I believe. What I'm doing is calling you out on your motivation for ongoing nonsensical application of the "No Religious Test Clause", which is hatred of God and religion.

Yeah yeah I know, your posts live on emotional hissyfits and disconnected presumptions. It's tedious and childish.

 

[dblack]

She claimed to be a conscientious objector. In order to make that claim, you can't just object to war, that won't work. You have to have a basis for your belief. It can't be your personal opinion. In order for her to make a legitimate claim, she has to belong to group that as a matter of belief, objects to war. The naturalization requirements include a pledge to bear arms in defense of the nation. She says she can't because as a matter of her belief she objects to war. She can't take the oath of citizenship. There is an exception for those who belong to a religion that forbids the adherents to be fighters. In order for her to come under that exception, she has to actually belong to one of those religions.

Right. Corporatism in action. Group rights instead of individual rights. If I'm the only one who holds a particular conviction, it doesn't count, eh? Fuck that.

 

[Sunshine]

If she is going to claim conscientious objector status she needs to prove that up.

HUH???

What in the world would that have to do with anything? She's not refusing to go to war, you know.

How about she just "claims" the US Constitution.

Now that you have subscribed to that liberal rag, Hufpo, maybe you should READ the articles BEFORE you post them. What we are talking about is explained in the article, dimwit.

 

[Sunshine]

If she is going to claim conscientious objector status she needs to prove that up.

What is there to prove? Beyond saying, "Yup, I am!"?

I just posted the statute.

 

[Pogo]

Margaret Doughty, Atheist Seeking U.S. Citizenship, Told To Join Church Or Be Denied

Margaret Doughty, an atheist and permanent U.S. resident for more than 30 years, was told by immigration authorities this month that she has until Friday to officially join a church that forbids violence or her application for naturalized citizenship will be rejected.

Doughty received the ultimatum after stating on her application that she objected to the pledge to bear arms in defense of the nation due to her moral opposition to war. According to a letter to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services by the American Humanist Association on Doughty's behalf, officials responded by telling her that she needed to prove that her status as a conscientious objector was due to religious beliefs. They reportedly told her she'd need to document that she was "a member in good standing" of a nonviolent religious organization or be denied citizenship at her June 21 hearing. A note “on official church stationary [sic]" would suffice, they said.

Her letter is at the link.

Dudley, do you even bother to read this shit from HuffPO? It would seem not.

One of the citizenship requirements is to be willing to be in the armed forces. If you are a conscientious objector for the military, it has to be based upon a religious belief. The statute is at the link below and says, in part:

...no person "who by religious training and belief is conscientiously opposed to participation in war in any form" can be required to kill or train to kill in the military. CO provisions like this have been a part of American law since the time of the colonies.

Who is a Conscientious Objector?

She is correct in saying that at her age she would be unlikely to be drafted particularly since we don't have a draft. But being willing to serve is part of the process and the law says CO status has to be based on religious training.

That's the rule. If she doesn't like it she can check out and go back home.

You should try reading your own link. Later in the same page it notes:

>> Earlier, during World War I, the government would only give CO status to people who were members of "peace churches," such as the Society of Friends (Quakers), Mennonites or Brethren. But, this has changed.

In 1965 and in 1970 the Supreme Court ruled that the words "religious training and belief" must now be interpreted to include moral and ethical beliefs that have the same force in people's lives as traditional religious beliefs.

So, the word "religious" here refers to the nature of a person's training and beliefs. That means that the law considers many sincere beliefs "religious" even if they are not a part of what most people call a "religion."

Now, you don't have to belong to any particular religion to qualify as a CO. In fact, you don't have to belong to any religion at all. <<

Your own link.

-- which is the point already posted with the 1965 SCOTUS case (post 47). The requirement to be based in some organised religion has been struck down as unconstitutional.

Basically what this office is doing is what I call "Texas logic".

 

[dblack]

If she is going to claim conscientious objector status she needs to prove that up.

What is there to prove? Beyond saying, "Yup, I am!"?

I just posted the statute.

Yeah, I understand the statute. It's bullshit. The first amendment shouldn't be an opt out for privileged groups. The law should apply equally to everyone.

 

[syrenn]

Margaret Doughty, Atheist Seeking U.S. Citizenship, Told To Join Church Or Be Denied

Margaret Doughty, an atheist and permanent U.S. resident for more than 30 years, was told by immigration authorities this month that she has until Friday to officially join a church that forbids violence or her application for naturalized citizenship will be rejected.

Doughty received the ultimatum after stating on her application that she objected to the pledge to bear arms in defense of the nation due to her moral opposition to war. According to a letter to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services by the American Humanist Association on Doughty's behalf, officials responded by telling her that she needed to prove that her status as a conscientious objector was due to religious beliefs. They reportedly told her she'd need to document that she was "a member in good standing" of a nonviolent religious organization or be denied citizenship at her June 21 hearing. A note “on official church stationary [sic]" would suffice, they said.

Her letter is at the link.

i guess islam is out.

however, the way i see it, if she wont bother to defend this country, she does not deserve to be a citizen.

 

[Pogo]

Margaret Doughty, Atheist Seeking U.S. Citizenship, Told To Join Church Or Be Denied

Margaret Doughty, an atheist and permanent U.S. resident for more than 30 years, was told by immigration authorities this month that she has until Friday to officially join a church that forbids violence or her application for naturalized citizenship will be rejected.

Doughty received the ultimatum after stating on her application that she objected to the pledge to bear arms in defense of the nation due to her moral opposition to war. According to a letter to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services by the American Humanist Association on Doughty's behalf, officials responded by telling her that she needed to prove that her status as a conscientious objector was due to religious beliefs. They reportedly told her she'd need to document that she was "a member in good standing" of a nonviolent religious organization or be denied citizenship at her June 21 hearing. A note “on official church stationary [sic]" would suffice, they said.

Her letter is at the link.

i guess islam is out.

however, the way i see it, if she wont bother to defend this country, she does not deserve to be a citizen.

Fortunately our conscientious objection laws have looked into it more deeply than that.

There's a difference between defending one's country, and accepting the premise that war is the way to do it.

 

[Sunshine]

Margaret Doughty, Atheist Seeking U.S. Citizenship, Told To Join Church Or Be Denied



Her letter is at the link.

Dudley, do you even bother to read this shit from HuffPO? It would seem not.

One of the citizenship requirements is to be willing to be in the armed forces. If you are a conscientious objector for the military, it has to be based upon a religious belief. The statute is at the link below and says, in part:

...no person "who by religious training and belief is conscientiously opposed to participation in war in any form" can be required to kill or train to kill in the military. CO provisions like this have been a part of American law since the time of the colonies.

Who is a Conscientious Objector?

She is correct in saying that at her age she would be unlikely to be drafted particularly since we don't have a draft. But being willing to serve is part of the process and the law says CO status has to be based on religious training.

That's the rule. If she doesn't like it she can check out and go back home.

You should try reading your own link. Later in the same page it notes:

>> Earlier, during World War I, the government would only give CO status to people who were members of "peace churches," such as the Society of Friends (Quakers), Mennonites or Brethren. But, this has changed.

In 1965 and in 1970 the Supreme Court ruled that the words "religious training and belief" must now be interpreted to include moral and ethical beliefs that have the same force in people's lives as traditional religious beliefs.

So, the word "religious" here refers to the nature of a person's training and beliefs. That means that the law considers many sincere beliefs "religious" even if they are not a part of what most people call a "religion."

Now, you don't have to belong to any particular religion to qualify as a CO. In fact, you don't have to belong to any religion at all. <<

Your own link.

-- which is the point already posted with the 1965 SCOTUS case (post 47). The requirement to be based in some organised religion has been struck down as unconstitutional.

Basically what this office is doing is what I call "Texas logic".

You need to go to law school if you want to pretend to know the law.

Here the SCOTUS holding:

App. 10. Welsh elaborated his beliefs in later communications with Selective Service officials. On the basis of these beliefs and the conclusion of the Court of Appeals that he held them "with the strength of more traditional religious convictions," 404 F.2d at 1081, we think Welsh was clearly entitled to a conscientious objector exemption. Section [p344] 6(j) requires no more. That section exempts from military service all those whose consciences, spurred by deeply held moral, ethical, or religious beliefs, would give them no rest or peace if they allowed themselves to become a part of an instrument of war.

Welsh v. United States

You have to be able to prove your moral, ethical, ore religious beliefs. Atheism does not nothing to prove that. Serious, they are trying to help this woman and she is too stupid to see that. She is almost my age. All she had to do was to say she would serve. She herself said she doubts that would ever happen.

No doubt this piece of crap will be paid out of the taxpayer's pockets along with every other stupid liberal leaning.

 

[Unkotare]

Plenty of people who put their lives at great risk everyday for our sake "don't believe in killing," but will do so - will make that sacrifice of themselves - to protect this country and all the rest of us. Plenty of police officers "don't believe in killing," but will shoot and kill a maniac who is in the act of trying to kill an innocent person if there is no other option. They do so - they make that sacrifice of themselves - for the sake of all of us. For society as a whole. For the principles this country stands for and are worth protecting. That's why these people are so admirable.

This bitch just wanted to march into an ICE office and declare that she would deign to become a US citizen, but only on her terms and in words of her choosing. She knows damn well she will never be drafted even if we ever reinstate the draft. Push her unceremoniously aside and make room for one of the millions who really value the citizenship she wants to play games with.

 

[Pogo]

Dudley, do you even bother to read this shit from HuffPO? It would seem not.

One of the citizenship requirements is to be willing to be in the armed forces. If you are a conscientious objector for the military, it has to be based upon a religious belief. The statute is at the link below and says, in part:



Who is a Conscientious Objector?

She is correct in saying that at her age she would be unlikely to be drafted particularly since we don't have a draft. But being willing to serve is part of the process and the law says CO status has to be based on religious training.

That's the rule. If she doesn't like it she can check out and go back home.

You should try reading your own link. Later in the same page it notes:

>> Earlier, during World War I, the government would only give CO status to people who were members of "peace churches," such as the Society of Friends (Quakers), Mennonites or Brethren. But, this has changed.

In 1965 and in 1970 the Supreme Court ruled that the words "religious training and belief" must now be interpreted to include moral and ethical beliefs that have the same force in people's lives as traditional religious beliefs.

So, the word "religious" here refers to the nature of a person's training and beliefs. That means that the law considers many sincere beliefs "religious" even if they are not a part of what most people call a "religion."

Now, you don't have to belong to any particular religion to qualify as a CO. In fact, you don't have to belong to any religion at all. <<

Your own link.

-- which is the point already posted with the 1965 SCOTUS case (post 47). The requirement to be based in some organised religion has been struck down as unconstitutional.

Basically what this office is doing is what I call "Texas logic".

You need to go to law school if you want to pretend to know the law.

Here the SCOTUS holding:

App. 10. Welsh elaborated his beliefs in later communications with Selective Service officials. On the basis of these beliefs and the conclusion of the Court of Appeals that he held them "with the strength of more traditional religious convictions," 404 F.2d at 1081, we think Welsh was clearly entitled to a conscientious objector exemption. Section [p344] 6(j) requires no more. That section exempts from military service all those whose consciences, spurred by deeply held moral, ethical, or religious beliefs, would give them no rest or peace if they allowed themselves to become a part of an instrument of war.

Welsh v. United States

You have to be able to prove your moral, ethical, ore religious beliefs. Atheism does not nothing to prove that. Serious, they are trying to help this woman and she is too stupid to see that. She is almost my age. All she had to do was to say she would serve. She herself said she doubts that would ever happen.

No doubt this piece of crap will be paid out of the taxpayer's pockets along with every other stupid liberal leaning.

Umm... maybe you should read your own posts too. Your passage above in no way limits the objection to religious grounds. It includes, literally, "moral" or "ethical" grounds as well. There's nothing in that that requires membership in a church, or in an organized religion at all. Quote from above: "moral, ethical, OR religious beliefs".

And again, this has been spelled out before, specifically (US v. Seeger, 380 U.S. 163 (1965) - see post 47).

Atheism, theism, this religion, that religion, no religion at all -- are all irrelevant.

 

[Pogo]

Plenty of people who put their lives at great risk everyday for our sake "don't believe in killing," but will do so - will make that sacrifice of themselves - to protect this country and all the rest of us. Plenty of police officers "don't believe in killing," but will shoot and kill a maniac who is in the act of trying to kill an innocent person if there is no other option. They do so - they make that sacrifice of themselves - for the sake of all of us. For society as a whole. For the principles this country stands for and are worth protecting. That's why these people are so admirable.

This bitch just wanted to march into an ICE office and declare that she would deign to become a US citizen, but only on her terms and in words of her choosing. She knows damn well she will never be drafted even if we ever reinstate the draft. Push her unceremoniously aside and make room for one of the millions who really value the citizenship she wants to play games with.

-- and allow the Texas office to thumb its nose at the Constitution?
No thanks.

 

[bodecea]

Margaret Doughty, Atheist Seeking U.S. Citizenship, Told To Join Church Or Be Denied

Margaret Doughty, an atheist and permanent U.S. resident for more than 30 years, was told by immigration authorities this month that she has until Friday to officially join a church that forbids violence or her application for naturalized citizenship will be rejected.

Doughty received the ultimatum after stating on her application that she objected to the pledge to bear arms in defense of the nation due to her moral opposition to war. According to a letter to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services by the American Humanist Association on Doughty's behalf, officials responded by telling her that she needed to prove that her status as a conscientious objector was due to religious beliefs. They reportedly told her she'd need to document that she was "a member in good standing" of a nonviolent religious organization or be denied citizenship at her June 21 hearing. A note “on official church stationary [sic]" would suffice, they said.

Her letter is at the link.

i guess islam is out.

however, the way i see it, if she wont bother to defend this country, she does not deserve to be a citizen.

That would include a great number already citizens.

 

[Sunshine]

Plenty of people who put their lives at great risk everyday for our sake "don't believe in killing," but will do so - will make that sacrifice of themselves - to protect this country and all the rest of us. Plenty of police officers "don't believe in killing," but will shoot and kill a maniac who is in the act of trying to kill an innocent person if there is no other option. They do so - they make that sacrifice of themselves - for the sake of all of us. For society as a whole. For the principles this country stands for and are worth protecting. That's why these people are so admirable.

This bitch just wanted to march into an ICE office and declare that she would deign to become a US citizen, but only on her terms and in words of her choosing. She knows damn well she will never be drafted even if we ever reinstate the draft. Push her unceremoniously aside and make room for one of the millions who really value the citizenship she wants to play games with.

IOU + rep for that one.

How true. You've no idea how many veterans I have worked with over my career whose deepest heartache is the people they had to kill. On the battlefield those people are the enemy. At home, our veterans begin to see them as fathers, brothers, and children who, like they, have families who depend on them. They tend to hang together because the rest of polite society can't listen to the things they have to tell about. And those of us who work with them get what is called 'secondary PTSD' from hearing about it. The vets come home messed up in the head over things they had to do that conflict with their own moral values, even those who volunteer.

This woman's 'plight' is one or arrogance, and nothing more. She needs to check out and go the fuck home! Especially if she is here on a work visa. Likely she is retiring and can't claim work as her basis for staying.

My SIL's folks are naturalized. All of them, old and young, were also subject to this requirement.

 

[Pogo]

Margaret Doughty, Atheist Seeking U.S. Citizenship, Told To Join Church Or Be Denied



Her letter is at the link.

i guess islam is out.

however, the way i see it, if she wont bother to defend this country, she does not deserve to be a citizen.

That would include a great number already citizens.

As has been pointed out, the applicant is a 64-year-old woman, and obviously has little chance of being inducted and placed in a foxhole in the near future, so clearly we can agree her objection is on principle...

... which means all these wags declaring "agree to take up arms or stay out" are in effect basing citizenship solely on a test of approved thought.

Ponderable.

 

[Sunshine]

Margaret Doughty, Atheist Seeking U.S. Citizenship, Told To Join Church Or Be Denied

Margaret Doughty, an atheist and permanent U.S. resident for more than 30 years, was told by immigration authorities this month that she has until Friday to officially join a church that forbids violence or her application for naturalized citizenship will be rejected.

Doughty received the ultimatum after stating on her application that she objected to the pledge to bear arms in defense of the nation due to her moral opposition to war. According to a letter to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services by the American Humanist Association on Doughty's behalf, officials responded by telling her that she needed to prove that her status as a conscientious objector was due to religious beliefs. They reportedly told her she'd need to document that she was "a member in good standing" of a nonviolent religious organization or be denied citizenship at her June 21 hearing. A note “on official church stationary [sic]" would suffice, they said.

Her letter is at the link.

i guess islam is out.

however, the way i see it, if she wont bother to defend this country, she does not deserve to be a citizen.

IOU + rep too chickie. I did my pay back rep and now I'm out for a while.