June 26, 2007, - 11:50 am

Gay Marriage, Fraud & Immigration: Not Addressed in the Amnesty Bill

By Debbie Schlussel
Aside from moral reasons and my opposition to the attempt to alter the definition of marriage, one of the biggest reasons I’m against legalized gay marriage is the hardly-mentioned increased marriage fraud problems it would spur in the immigration arena.
We already know that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials–including an ICE Special Agent in Charge in Texas–have ordered agents in various cities not to investigate sham marriages. Imagine the increased marriage fraud activities, were this country to recognize gay marriage.
The Seattle Times reports various sob stories on 36,000 gays and lesbians in “partnerships” with foreign aliens. Gays call them “love exiles.” I call them potential fraud marriage perpetrators who badly want U.S. citizenship.

gaymarriagehomersimpson.jpg

Imagine the system getting even more swamped with phony marriages, were gay marriage to be recognized. There would be no way to determine that these were legit couples. It’s not exactly like Citizenship and Immigration Services adjudicators are going to give the couples a “test drive” to determine they are really gay and in a relationship. There is a huge potential for “I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry” gay marriage fraud.
And FYI, the Immigration Amnesty Bill makes no mention of how these people will be treated, should gay marriage ever become legal in the 50 States. That’s a potential black hole of immigration fraud.
Oh, and by the way, those gays in these relationships with foreign aliens support the Illegal Alien Amnesty Bill. Gee, I wonder why.
(Canada recognizes gay marriage and gives foreign alien gay “spouses” visas and citizenship. Do we want to be like Canada, where every terrorist gets a golden ticket of entry?)

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Print Friendly



Tags: , , , , , , ,

15 Responses

Our society is disintegrating. Marriage is chief among our failing institutions.
The best environment for a family is a marriage with 1 husband (male) and 1 wife (female). There is no equivalent substitute.
Any form of marriage between people of the same sex is not marriage; it is an illusion; it is a matter belonging to some other issue than raising a family.

Happiness Pursuer on June 26, 2007 at 1:10 pm

Hey Debbie, why stop at immigration fraud?
Let’s poll all the young twenty somethings married to middle-aged men to ensure that they didn’t marry for money. Conversely, let’s poll all those middle-aged men to ensure that they didn’t marry for a pretty face and some T&A.
While we’re at it, let’s strip all divorced people of their right to remarry — obviously they all committed fraud since they couldn’t honor their marraige vows the first time around. Why should they have the right to marry again?
And how about those states that allow teenagers (sometimes as young as 15) to get married? Isn’t that fraud as well since teenagers can’t even vote, much less pay taxes? Yet MY tax dollars will pay for any court proceedings necessary to dissolve thier ill-advised unions.
And how come first cousins can get married in most states? Doesn’t the whole incest factor nullify the validity of that marriage?
I’ve got it — LET’S JUST OUTLAW MARRIAGE ALTOGETHER. That way everyone will be equal under the law and we won’t have to worry about that pesky fraud issue.
Sorry for the sarcarsm, but snark is the only logical response to a ridiculous argument. Based on your flawed logic, all straight people shouldn’t have the right to marry either, since a certain percentage of those marriages are fraudulent and/or immoral.
I love how you qualify your argument against Gay Marraige with “Aside from moral reasons and my opposition to the attempt to alter the definition of marriage…” News flash — the definition of marraige is constantly evolving. Remember the good old days when women couldn’t vote and were basically the property of their husbands? Or when states forbade people of different races from marrying? How about we just go back to the biblical days when every man had more than one wife (I’m sure most straight men wouldn’t object to that)?
And don’t preach to me about the “morality” of my lifestyle. In the United States the issue of Gay Marraige is about RIGHTS — NOT MORALS. A whole heap of immoral straight people (such as prisoners) still have the right to get married. I don’t care if your “religion” tells you homosexuality is wrong. SO WHAT! My religion tells me that closed-minded hypocritical straight people shouldn’t breed — but I’m not fighting tirelessly to take away their right to do so. This is still the United States, where freedom of religion and separation of church and state are explicity written into the United States; hence, someone’s closed-minded religious views should not preclude me from the right to a civil marriage. I pay the same taxes as everyone else.
Let me repeat that — I PAY THE SAME TAXES AS EVERYONE ELSE. Yet, I can’t marry my partner of 11 YEARS simply because she’s a woman. Meanwhile, my tax dollars are subsidizing not only heterosexual marraiges, but heterosexual divorces, custody hearings, etc. So either give me and my partner our rights — all the rights of married partners, such as inheritence rights, healthcare proxy rights, etc. — or give me a 50% tax cut.
You really need to open your eyes on this issue. I’d suggest the following essay: http://www.bidstrup.com/marriage.htm

jillofalltrades on June 26, 2007 at 2:45 pm

(Canada recognizes gay marriage and gives foreign alien gay “spouses” visas and citizenship. Do we want to be like Canada, where every terrorist gets a golden ticket of entry?)
Name one terrorist caught in that situation.

Norman Blitzer on June 26, 2007 at 3:06 pm

While I disagree with her, JillofallTirades (no offense, Jill — you have a long comment, and adding the “i” is too easy to do) does take us in the direction of some valid points.
First of all, there is a great deal of abuse of spouse-immigration laws among Pakistani Muslims in the UK. One woman will be designated to bring some men in; one arrives in the UK, then, according to Islamic Law, says “I divorce thee, I divorce thee, I divorce thee” and the woman is now used to bring in another. I imagine it’s happening in Sweden a great deal, too, although the Swedes are loathe to report the failings of their system and the resultant problems.
I do share Jill’s concern about our tax dollars subsidizing things — it seems Washington, under both Republicans and Democrats, regretfully, believes it knows how to spend our money better than we do.
I agree with your premise, Debbie, that the gay/lesbian marriage thing would open up another loophole in the immigration laws. It’s an interesting idea that hadn’t occurred to me.
I would like to see the government spend less time telling us what a marriage is or should be (Jill may agree with that?) and more time scrutinizing the people that get let into the country, and even more time keeping out people who are trying to get in illegally.

Yankee Doodle on June 26, 2007 at 4:13 pm

No offense taken Yankee. It’s one thing to be denied your rights — it’s another to have right-wing pundits throw up any conceivable excuse as justification. Such rhetoric tends to make one impatient and prone to tirades.
The immigration issue is a slippery slope — and I can see all sides to the issue. There are valid points at every angle. However, Debbie’s agenda is pretty transparent. She wants to keep all Muslims out, regardless of whether they actually have ties to terrorism or not. Since, she has no real affinity for gay people either, she’s throwing us under the bus to further her anti-Muslim agenda.
While I do believe there is a need for immigration reform, I do not believe the answer lies in denying any one group of people — whether gays or Muslims — their human rights. This is a complex issue that is better addressed on an individual case-by-case basis than through scare tactics and discrimination. Perhaps if the legislators in office (both Democrat and Republican) spent as much time actually working as they did campaigning, we’d have a resolution to this issue.

jillofalltrades on June 26, 2007 at 5:33 pm

Convicted felons are a much more problematic group with marriage fraud than gays, but make no mistake, gays use marriage fraud, too.
Also, there have been hundreds of commited terrorists or their sympathizers using marriage fraud. Sometimes this is mentioned in the press releases but because the charges are often visa fraud, perjury, or mail fraud, it is not easily perceived by the public. Like I mentioned before, the actual federal criminal charge for marriage fraud is rarely used.

code7 on June 26, 2007 at 7:25 pm

Listen up Jill of the Tirades. You seem like an OK person who is just looking out for her rights. But you err on two aspects. The first is: marriage is between a man and a woman as husband and wife and no other combination fits the definition as this society has seen fit since its beginning. You may not like that; you may want to change that, but you have no “right” to make it any other way.
The second error is: Your relationship with your partner is what it is, but it is not marriage. And as far as your tax burden goes, all single people, except those called out in the IRS tables, share the same tax burden. So the fact that you and your partner live together, have hormones that simultaneously rage and buy each other presents is no basis to get you a tax break.
Debbie began the blog pointing out benefits accrued to terrorists, etc. under the guise of gay union and the like. I went a step further and simply objected to gay unions in general.
Go hug your partner and pay your taxes. You have no rights to either marriage or a tax break.

Happiness Pursuer on June 26, 2007 at 7:38 pm

Hey, Jill!
Glad you took my play on your name the way it was intended. :)
“I do not believe the answer lies in denying any one group of people — whether gays or Muslims — their human rights.”
Immigration into the United States is a privelege, not a human right.
To the extent that marriage is a right, why does the government regulate it at all? Shouldn’t it be between a person and that person’s church?
The issue gets regulated by the government, and then hotly contested as a moral issue, but in reality, it deals with money — tax breaks, access to health insurance from the employer of one’s partner, etc.
Remember, Washington’s politicians keep us divided up over many issues, but they do it because of money.
“Perhaps if the legislators in office (both Democrat and Republican) spent as much time actually working as they did campaigning, we’d have a resolution to this issue.”
I disagree with you here, too. I’d rather have them campaigning. They do less damage when they’re campaigning than they do when they’re legislating. ;)

Yankee Doodle on June 26, 2007 at 9:35 pm

Well Happiness Pursuer, all I can say is that you’re quite lucky you were born heterosexual. It must be pretty easy to pursue happiness when the laws are in your favor and you don’t have to jump through all kinds of legal and financial hoops to protect your relationship. Want to know what rights you and your spouse have that my partner and I don’t? Click the following link for a revelation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights_and_responsibilities_of_marriages_in_the_United_States
So even though I’m “an OK person” by your assessment, my relationship should be denied the 1000+ rights available to heterosexual couples on the basis of what? Anatomy? Who made that stupid rule?
In fact, no such legal definitions of marraige existed in the US until 1995 when DOMA was passed — based on the urgings of paranoid and bigoted heterosexual lawmakers.
So while your spouse can get your Social Security benefits (susidized by my tax dollars) should you unexpectedly pass away, I must pay a lawyer to draw up a healthcare proxy, just so I can visit my partner in the hospital if God forbid she’s in an accident!
I know it helps you make sense of the world to distill my relationship down to a few superficial quips. The reality is, you have no idea how much of a family we really are. Our love is unconditional, our mutual respect unwavering, and our committment unbreakable. We have lasted 11 years without any help from the US government — unlike the 50% of hetero marraiges that end in divorce (in considerably less time). We adore our families, as they do us — as do most people who actually take the time to get to know us.
I know you think you are better than me, and entitled to more than I am. And you can go on believing that if it helps you get through the day. But somewhere along the line you are going to have to confront your beliefs for what they are — an unfortunate lie.

jillofalltrades on June 26, 2007 at 9:49 pm

Jillofalltrades, I owe you an answer. We both can thank Debbie for subsidizing our private, in a public arena, conversation.
I will excuse myself for being glib when I really do not know you. And whether or not I agree with your logic is not the real issue. My issue is not with you and your partner, but with a government that is “of the people” but no longer “for the people and by the people.”
I am displeased that marriage, a key backbone to society, has come undone, along with so many other institutions that made life worth pursing happiness in this country. A 50% divorce rate is a clear signal that our American society and civilization is on the decline. A president, with a 26% approval rate, that has no idea of how to do his job or even what he is doing in his job, a Congress with an even lower approval rate and the other endless set of woes that need not be is my real concern, along with terrorists that need a lesson in what happens when you attack the world’s only superpower. If they had not attacked us and merely destroyed the rest of the world, we would have sat idly by.
So good fortune to your and your partner. This time give her hug for me.

Happiness Pursuer on June 26, 2007 at 10:33 pm

“JillofallTrades” allow me to add my two cents. I am a heterosexual male with many lesbian tendecies. I can relate to how easy it is to love woman. My urges to carpet munch are insatiable, just like yours. Nothing turns me on more than a very intelligent and well versed lady like yourself. Jill you are hot, keep up the fight for our cause.

ICE4EVER on June 27, 2007 at 10:00 am

Not sure how to take this story. I am laughing but it does present an issue with regard to immigration.
Not so sure that ‘gay marriage’ is the problem, but that civil unions might prove to be more troublesome. Many of the Presidential aspirants speak to supporting the latter vice the former. The question then becomes how does the immigration law currently being debated deal with civil unions, if in effect, this becomes a reality.
I wish someone would speak to the immigration issue as if it were Iraq. Yep, it is all noble and grand to deal with Iraq, as it is all noble and grand to deal with immigration.
But, look at where Iraq is now, and wonder where immigration will be in five, ten, twenty years? It was easy going into Iraq and disposing Saddam. It is easy passing immigration legislation.
The real deal starts when the rubber hits the road on the ground after we’re into it. The strategy of going into Iraq, and into immigration is one thing. Pray tell what is the strategy once we’re there? Remember, the architect of Iraq and immigration are the same person. Do we want the same results for immigration that we now have in Iraq? That is the question.
There is glory in the overall plan, but the devil is in the details.
Based on Pres Bush’s track record, I suspect there are 12 million devils in this immigration plan.

zyzzyg on June 28, 2007 at 8:45 am

All I can say is this is an extremely idiotic argument! The reason’s why you are an idiot are ten thousand fold, but I will only respond on two counts.
If we just close are borders to “gay people” half the marriage fraud wouldn’t be committed because gay people have no other way to stay with their partners so they marry women and live with their partner.
Right now my health insurance covers “domestic partnerships,” but not on an equal par and for 10 times the cost of adding my spouse. My partner and I have been together longer than most people I know. We’ve seen couples marry & breakup. But if I want to add him to my healthcare it’s 10 times the work, proof and money!!! SEPARATE IS NOT EQUAL!!!
You are proving the point that gays in this country are not equal and full citizens!
So in your assumption we can’t let gays marry, use healthcare, live in the same country as their partner, or get to know our children cause “GOD FORBID” they indoctrinate and create more gay kids. Don’t masquerade your feelings, don’t justify your actions, you’re grandchildren will be ashamed of you and that makes me happy!!!

A GAY PERSON on September 8, 2009 at 11:38 am

I’m gay, born in centralamerica, no much tolerance for gay people here, I lived in the USA for 12 years, moved there because my sexuality not because any financial trouble, I’ve been always financially secure down here…got my social security number i could use with my permit to work I renewed every year, I worked hard and reached a great income to keep on into my usual lifestyle and pay lot of money in taxes…I did fall in love twice , at the end I lose my case of asylum and got back home, I’m not a terrorist, I love my partner and I paid taxes, yes, TAXES, the same that pay everyone else benefits but mine… I couldn’t stay with the person I love because gay marriage is not legal, why WE, gay people can’t have the same opportunities as anyone else if WE do the SAME things straight people does, There is good people in both sides and there is bad people in both sides too. Frauds will be as has been always in any case and in any group, straight, gay, latin, white or whatever, but this is just as anything and anyone… You can’t not always get ONLY THE GOOD, there is always some crap anywhere, anyhow.

Edgar on November 15, 2009 at 8:14 pm

WOW, is all that I can say after reading this post by Debbie. One thing you have to applaud is the freedom and diversity of the internet and how any small minded ignorant person can provide a medium for other like minded ignorant people. At some point you ask Americans ‘do we want to be like canada where every terrorist gets a golden ticket’ the last time I checked it was America who sold airline tickets to over twenty extremist that were responsible for the world trade center and the pentegon included the downed aircraft over forest. these men all lived in america and studied in america they werent even committing marriage fraud to get visas yet you guys still give em out like popsicles every terrorist on u.s soil has had a u.s visa, and you write your horribly incorrect post or blogs whatever they may be for canadas compassion to foreigners. compared to the u.s i would say canada has a pretty good record with terrorist as supposed to the most hated country on earth which has been attacked more than I would want to count. Next time Debbie please do a little research before you decide to make pronouncments from your throne of bullshit. someone like you should keep your idiot opinions to yourself but hey you guys got freedom of speech so what can i do. but maybe if your country would have compassion for foreigners instead of destroying their countries stealing their resources and bombing their towns you guys wouldnt be the most hated and distgusting nation on earth.

troy on May 19, 2010 at 9:59 am

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field