Woman Denied US Citizenship Because of Atheism

reply to post by windword


Brilliant.

Thanks for the vid. Yeah, this thinking is NOT NEW. And it's also CORRECT.

What a disaster this world is becoming.

Margaret Doughty’s Application for Citizenship Approved Posted on: June 20, 2013

We heard the other day about Margaret Doughty, the 64-year-old Texas legal resident of 30 years who applied for U.S. citizenship, but noted that she has a conscientious objection to taking up arms. She was initially told that she would have to submit a letter from her church verifying their conscientious objector policy. Since she is an atheist, she is clearly unable to do so.

news.atheists.org...

reply to post by Annee


That article states...

We could not be more thrilled with this outcome. This was a clear-cut case of discrimination because Doughty is an atheist.

How so? I don't see ANY discrimination at all. It's a clear-cut case of the government asking someone to do something they clearly are not possible of doing and then withdrawing their request after they realise their mistake. It happens all the time....try DHS sometimes...they ask my (now)wife for proof of income(specifically paystubs from her place of employment)...when she clearly stated on the application that she is disabled....they withdrew their request after they realised their mistake.....Discrimination? Doubt it.

A2D

reply to post by Annee


This is very good news!


reply to post by Agree2Disagree


If your disabled (now) wife was in a wheel chair and needed to go into a government building that had no wheel chair access, because they never considered it important to accommodate those in wheel chairs, would you consider that discrimination?

YAY!!!!

SQUAWKING WORKS!!

+1 for refusal to submit
-1 for imposed religion

Keep the baton from hitting the ground, ladies and gentlemen! We are gaining on them.

reply to post by windword


Never been to a government building without disabled accessibility....your point is invalid.(Also, do they have "atheist accessibility"...I think THAT would be discrimination....but they pretty much allow anybody and everybody to walk right in and they don't ask you outside before you enter, "YOU HAVE RELIGIOUS AFFILIATION RIGHT!?")


A2D

reply to post by Agree2Disagree

Originally posted by Agree2Disagree
Never been to a government building without disabled accessibility....

Exactly! Point made. They didn't always have disabled accessibility, you know?

reply to post by Annee


Great news! I knew this would happen. I opened this thread again because I was going to check the status and see if she had been accepted yet and lo and behold, you beat me to it.

Congratulations Ms. D and welcome to the US and citizenship!!

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Yes, exactly my point as well. This was not even close to "a clear cut case of discrimination because Doughty is an athiest"....that's just pure propaganda right there.

A2D

reply to post by Agree2Disagree


If she had believed in a God, there wouldn't have been an issue.
Since she doesn't, there was an issue.

Seems the deciding factor was her lack of belief in a God (atheism). Seems pretty clear-cut to me.

Great news she has been given citizenship...hold on she was from the UK and defected to the states? boo hiss you turncoat
Jk btw.
Good luck to her and good for the atheist community.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Make it about what you want it to be about....but that's not the case at all.....

As I said previously:

It's a clear-cut case of the government asking someone to do something they clearly are not possible of doing and then withdrawing their request after they realise their mistake.

The standard reply to conscientious objection to war is to ask for proof of their beliefs from an authority on their beliefs....As is the case with atheism, it's been shown many times, including Welsh v. United States, that a conscientious' objectors beliefs need not be based in religion. It's not about "discrimination", it's more they have to withdraw their standard requests....as is the case with my disabled wife and DHS....

Now, if my wife or the disabled community wanted to make it seem like something bigger than what it actually is, we could easily act as though it was discrimination......but we don't have an agenda....

A2D

(Also, by your own logic-
If my wife had a job there wouldn't have been a problem at DHS
but since she doesn't, there was...
seems the deciding factor was her lack of employment? Discrimination? No, it's not....not even close buddy)

reply to post by Agree2Disagree

Originally posted by Agree2Disagree
It's not about "discrimination", it's more they have to withdraw their standard requests....as is the case with my disabled wife and DHS....

As I said, I thought she would be granted citizenship once they looked into it. So I do agree that they withdrew their request. But why was she denied at first? Because she follows her own morals, and didn't have a supreme being's to refer to. Call it discrimination or not. If she was religious, the denial wouldn't have happened.

As regards your wife, I don't understand how that story relates here at all. Many disabled people work and would have pay stubs. Why you think it was out of the ordinary for them to ask, I don't understand. It was reasonable for them to believe that she may have a job.

not even close buddy)

What's the the attitude?