Photos to prove the relationship - are kissing photos acceptable?
- Thread starter djnutz26
- Start date
Based on the recent post from @Armoured95, perhaps you should submit a conjugal sponsorship ASAP and hope for the best, especially if marriage is absolutely not an option.
The issue is most of the countries that allow same sex marriages are western countries (like Canada, UK, Australia etc. - so very few countries to choose from). and they have very strict visa requirements for us South Asians. It is not easy to get a visa for the south asians to these western countries by establishing that you will rightfully leave at the end of your visit. Even in this case, we applied for a visitor visa twice to Canada and both were refused.
@Ponga and obviously we wouldn't want another visa refusal from a "big boy" country like UK or Australia to add to the list of 2 visa refusals from Canada that my boyfriend already has.
Also, given that I am also a citizen of the concerned south asian country (although I am a Canadian PR) I would also require a visa to enter this other country if we are to marry. And the likelihood of visa approval for both of us just for the purpose of marriage in a completely different country is extremely rare (given even Canada is not willing to let my partner in on a visitor visa).
Well, there are 34 countries that do recognize it. No reason to try another "big boy" country at all.
joconstantine
Hero Member
- Mar 30, 2020
- 555
- Category........
- FSW
- NOC Code......
- 0213
- Pre-Assessed..
- Yes
- AOR Received.
- 01-08-2020
Taiwan would be a good option. My husband and I got married in the US. We have been in a long distance relationship since the very beginning. And his application (I was the sponsor) has just been approved.
We are rooting for you. DM me if you need any questions.
I am quoting from the below website:Well, there are 34 countries that do recognize it. No reason to try another "big boy" country at all.
"
Requirement to be married before submitting the application
IRCC cannot require couples to marry in order to immigrate. However, if they are not married, they must be common-law partners. There is no provision in IRPA for fiancé(e)s or intended common-law partners."
https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/publications-manuals/operational-bulletins-manuals/permanent-residence/non-economic-classes/family-class-determining-spouse/legality.html#
While I am aware the US has a visa category that allows its citizens to bring down their fiance to marry in the US, Canada doesn't have such a visa category, obviously because IRCC cannot force anyone to marry just so that you could immigrate.
Marrying, or not marrying (and staying common-law) is purely a personal choice of the couple. As I understand it, marriage is a solemn/holy affair, and you get married only once, so you need to be fully prepared to do that. There is no need to rush a marriage just for the purpose of immigration.
Thank you so much. One time we were considering Taiwan as well, but we were not sure of their visa requirements, and didn’t want to take a risk in applying because my partner already has 2 visitor visa rejections from Canada in his profile. And we do not want to marry in a completely remote country away from our friends and known people, just so we could apply as a married couple, when we have this conjugal partner option available.
Fantastic news! I I wish you nothing but happiness in your new life with your partner. I am sure it muct be exciting to get together after a long long distance relationship.
You are correct in saying that IRCC cannot require couples to marry, but if a conjugal applicant CAN get married by traveling to a country where the marriage is legal...
You can see the paradox.
Also, don't use common-law in discussing your situation, because you are not common-law.
Well as a couple, if we are not ready to get married at this time, and if IRCC is not forcing us to marry for immigration purpose either, then I believe there is no paradox. Marriage is a personal choice, and there is no reason for it to be forced just for immigration..I sincerely hope so.
There's a related paradox, which is that some countries (many actually) have fairly significant additional requirements for marriage (not just same sex), e.g. marriage is intended for residents, and documentation requirements can be difficult.
Ultimatley this is why the conjugal sponsorship exists - it's a bit of a 'hack' in the sense of being grafted on to the spousal sponsorship program, and yes, there are some oddities in specifics of what is rquired.
I take a different view on this, which is that 'common law' is intended (historically, legally, culturally, etc) to be a de facto type of marriage. And the name of the program, spousal sponsorship, makes that point strongly - it is intended only for spouses (which if you look up definitions, is often or usually defined as someone in a state of marriage in relation to the other).
One can argue about the legal definition of 'marriage' and whether common law is basically the same thing or not (it's not exactly the same but is a legal relationship akin to marriage in many respects, hence ... 'spouse.').
But the government absolutely can establish criteria for immigration including family sponsorship, including marriage or a marriage like relationship, and that's exactly what it does. So yes, it does require it for spousal sponsorship. Don't like it, you can absolutely not do so, and the cost of such is not qualifying for immigration.
Conjugal sponsorship, in contrast, is simply a recognition that other countries put barriers to marriage that are not considered reasonable in Canada. In other words, where a couple do not have the ability to make that personal choice, and as a result cannot sponsor their (putative) spouse.
But if someone does not face such a barrier and chooses not to get married or become common law, government can and will refuse.
In theory, yes, in practice, this can actually be quite difficult. Whenever it comes up here, I do suggest / recommend - if you can, get married.
One option is to apply for a refugee status based on discrimination against LGBTQ people. It depends on which part of South Asia your partner comes from for that to apply to you as it is legal in some parts like India, etc. I am aware of a couple who did that a few years ago, who were from India (but this was when homosexuality was illegal there).