REPEAL INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKER LAW
-
Author:
n/a -
Send To:
U.S. CONGRESS
-
Sponsored By:
-
More Info at:
SUBJECT: REPEAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKER LAW, H.R. 3402, P.L. No. 109-162, TITLE VIII, SUBTITLE D, WHICH VIOLATES MY FREE SPEECH AND FREE ASSOCIATION, PRIVACY RIGHTS, RIGHT TO COURT AND MARRY, AND LIMITS MY ROMANCE CHOICES ABROAD AND IS ANTI-MALE AND ANTI-COUPLE.
Dear Congressman, Congresslady and Senator:
I am a U.S. citizen gentlemen, and reside in the United States, or am a foreign national woman, or am a friend, supporter or ally. I have read and heard about the passage of "International Marriage Broker Regulation Act of 2005" (IMBRA), H.R. 3402, Public Law No. 109-162, Title VIII, Subtitle D.
I am very concerned about the practical consequences of this law, which was passed with only a voice vote without any hearings or testimony or statistical evidence to support it, at the last minute just before the Holiday recess, after being tacked onto the back of other important legislation, namely, The Violence Against Women and Justice Dept. Reauthorization Act.
Did you vote for this International Marriage Broker law? Did you mean to vote for it?
As a single gentleman, foreign woman, or friend, supporter or ally, very interested in romance options outside my country for love, courtship and marriage, this law plainly violates the rights of U.S. citizens, and unfairly and improperly restricts my opportunities.
For me as a U.S. citizen gentleman, just to say "Hi" to a woman from another country through a legitimate romance agency or tour company, I am now forced to supply any legitimate romance agency or tour company all my police record information, domestic violence records, and much more (even if I have no such record). My free speech and privacy rights are being grossly violated, to say the least.
Why am I and other single American gentlemen being branded as "criminal abusers" under this law? Is there any supporting statistical or empirical evidence that incidences of serious abuse and death of foreign national women are any higher than that of domestic women, to justify this law?
This law requires that before "International Marriage Brokers" release a womans contact information to a person, they must provide her with a copy of the background collected on that person in her primary language, advise her of the rights and resources available to domestic violence victims in the U.S. in written form, and obtain her written consent to release her contact information.
It is obvious that romance companies, which have signed up a large volume of hundreds and even thousands of sincere women abroad seeking sincere and good-faith U.S. gentlemen spouses, will NOT be able to complete this kind of prohibitively costly and physically impossible commercial task. They will go out of business or go overseas or offshore. My choices as a U.S. citizen consumer or foreign woman consumer will be severely curtailed.
As a foreign woman interested in romance options with sincere U.S. citizen gentlemen, I know that there are thousands of happy and successful inter-cultural marriages, many among my friends, neighbors and even family. With the passage of this law, I and my friends and female family members will have even less options in my country, where there is higher domestic violence and a less desirable living condition and future.
If the purpose of the law is to provide some abuse protection for immigrant women, then that purpose is more than adequately served anyway by other less onerous and violative provisions of the law which say that the U.S. Embassy in the woman's home country will conduct an intensive criminal and domestic violence background check on the gentleman and supply her with all documentation available on him in her primary language, together with domestic violence protection information, BEFORE she secures a visa to visit the U.S.
The International Marriage Broker provisions are not necessary and only unjustifiably violate U.S. citizen rights of free speech and privacy, and a foreign woman's romance options and opportunities.
I urge you to re-consider this unnecessary and pernicious law as it pertains to International Marriage Brokers, and vote to repeal it.
Thank you.
Dear Congressman, Congresslady and Senator:
I am a U.S. citizen gentlemen, and reside in the United States, or am a foreign national woman, or am a friend, supporter or ally. I have read and heard about the passage of "International Marriage Broker Regulation Act of 2005" (IMBRA), H.R. 3402, Public Law No. 109-162, Title VIII, Subtitle D.
I am very concerned about the practical consequences of this law, which was passed with only a voice vote without any hearings or testimony or statistical evidence to support it, at the last minute just before the Holiday recess, after being tacked onto the back of other important legislation, namely, The Violence Against Women and Justice Dept. Reauthorization Act.
Did you vote for this International Marriage Broker law? Did you mean to vote for it?
As a single gentleman, foreign woman, or friend, supporter or ally, very interested in romance options outside my country for love, courtship and marriage, this law plainly violates the rights of U.S. citizens, and unfairly and improperly restricts my opportunities.
For me as a U.S. citizen gentleman, just to say "Hi" to a woman from another country through a legitimate romance agency or tour company, I am now forced to supply any legitimate romance agency or tour company all my police record information, domestic violence records, and much more (even if I have no such record). My free speech and privacy rights are being grossly violated, to say the least.
Why am I and other single American gentlemen being branded as "criminal abusers" under this law? Is there any supporting statistical or empirical evidence that incidences of serious abuse and death of foreign national women are any higher than that of domestic women, to justify this law?
This law requires that before "International Marriage Brokers" release a womans contact information to a person, they must provide her with a copy of the background collected on that person in her primary language, advise her of the rights and resources available to domestic violence victims in the U.S. in written form, and obtain her written consent to release her contact information.
It is obvious that romance companies, which have signed up a large volume of hundreds and even thousands of sincere women abroad seeking sincere and good-faith U.S. gentlemen spouses, will NOT be able to complete this kind of prohibitively costly and physically impossible commercial task. They will go out of business or go overseas or offshore. My choices as a U.S. citizen consumer or foreign woman consumer will be severely curtailed.
As a foreign woman interested in romance options with sincere U.S. citizen gentlemen, I know that there are thousands of happy and successful inter-cultural marriages, many among my friends, neighbors and even family. With the passage of this law, I and my friends and female family members will have even less options in my country, where there is higher domestic violence and a less desirable living condition and future.
If the purpose of the law is to provide some abuse protection for immigrant women, then that purpose is more than adequately served anyway by other less onerous and violative provisions of the law which say that the U.S. Embassy in the woman's home country will conduct an intensive criminal and domestic violence background check on the gentleman and supply her with all documentation available on him in her primary language, together with domestic violence protection information, BEFORE she secures a visa to visit the U.S.
The International Marriage Broker provisions are not necessary and only unjustifiably violate U.S. citizen rights of free speech and privacy, and a foreign woman's romance options and opportunities.
I urge you to re-consider this unnecessary and pernicious law as it pertains to International Marriage Brokers, and vote to repeal it.
Thank you.
5131 Signatures
-
kurt m
-
William D
-
Dennis C
-
John F S
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- Just more of our rights that are syeadily being eroded from us, on a dalily basis,
-
Richard C. P
-
Cletus J. G
-
Kenneth L. S
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- Embassy Actions are sufficent now
-
Billy D W
-
Troy H
-
James B
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- This law is unAmerican
-
Anthony G M
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- I understand the premise of this act. However, I disagree with the full extent of what this act calls for. Protecting women against violence is necessary, but it should be up to each individual to use due diligence in identifying the person they choose to engage with.
-
kevin h
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- Just because someone did something wrong in the past does not mean they are not worthy of being happy when the find someone they love . Great they did something wrong in the past and paid for it threw the law & court system and should not be debribed of being happy with the person they choose to be with.
-
Theron
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- So long as the ladies are of legal age, what is illegal about such services. Every man, woman of legal age, and with legal intent has a right to persue their dreams. If they do not find a suitable mate in America why then can they not choose a mate of their liking from a foreign country?
-
Bryan E. V
-
Roy N
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- This is and unfair law,one sided, and needs to be repealed immediately.
-
Russ Jacob P
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- we are now guilty before convicted
-
robert f
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- This law makes me ashamed to be an American
-
George Richard H
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- IT IS OBVIOUS THAT CONGRESS AND THE PRESIDENT MADE A MISTAKE. NOW CONGRESS MUST ACT QUICKLY TO REPEAL THIS LAW AND AVOID RIDICULE FROM THE REST OF THE WORLD. THE INTENT WAS GOOD BUT THE EXECUTION IS EMBARRASSING.
-
harry g
-
Karl R
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- This act was passed on anecdotal information along with a couple of highly publicized cases. Congtress should take more careful aim before limiting rights. Order statistics be gathered for five years and THen LEGISLATE.
-
Scott D. C
-
David W
-
Robert G
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- The federal Government has no right to deter the right of the people to seek happiness. An assumption of guilt is not what our founding fathers wanted in our Great country/
-
Harvey H
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- Your delivery of 1984, the novel, has arrived
-
Dennis B. R
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- This is just another attempt to limit our rights as an American citizen
-
James S
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- I love women too much. I will never never harm. I have a mother and that's enough reason for me to respect women. My website doesn't harm women!!!
-
alonzo b
-
Ted S
-
Vicente R
-
joe r
-
kenneth w b
-
mido
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- mido,here
-
Stephen G. W
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- This law is unjust and un-American
-
Robert R
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- there are too many legislators interfering where their opinions are not wanted
-
Charles H
-
Verdeen H
-
Brian C. W
-
John E. K
-
Jeffrey P H
-
joe o
-
Roy L. C
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- My wife is Vietnamese, we have been married for 2 years, togather for almost 4 years. We have a wonderfull son and life. We met on a friendship site and are so happy that we are togather. We love each other very much.
-
mark w
-
Scott M
-
Judge Ronald W. F
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- I did not spend over 23 years of my life defending this country to be insulted and humiliated by this law that restricts my First Amendment Rights! The U.S. Congress as well as the President of the USA should be ashamed of themselves for passing such a law!
-
Andre O
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- I love my country ,but this is wrong people should be able to fall in love with whom ever they please aslong as the individual isn't already taken.
-
Timothy J. F
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- В
-
Jim S
-
David L. D
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- В
-
Jon M. P
-
Pete E
- Your Additional Comments Are Welcome
- While this law may be well intentioned I think it is uneccesary and obtrusive and requires way to much to just attempt to meet someone.I have no problem with a thourough check of a person when he attempts to bring a woman to the US.
-
5131
Signatures! - View Signatures
- Sign Petition