Why would anyone /not/ say the oath?

[isilrion]

I just had my citizenship ceremony. It was a good ceremony (not that I have anything to compare with, but at least I liked it).

During the oath, I noticed that CIC personnel were looking at our faces, as if to make sure we were reciting the oath. At one point, one of them signalled to the woman in front of me to enunciate. She was probably a shy person who didn't move her lips much. It did not escalate further (she was reciting the oath).

This made me question why would someone not speak the oath. You have to sign it, you have to be in the ceremony, you would have to rise your hand and at least pretend that you are saying the oath. Barring health (physical or mental) issues, why would someone do all that, yet be troubled with actually saying the words out loud? Obviously the CIC personnel is sufficiently concerned about this to verify that we are saying the words.

I am not questioning the legal aspects of not saying the oath, nor the reservations one might have for taking it (e.g., I know that some are uncomfortable with the pleading allegiance to a monarch). I am just perplexed as to why would someone be ok with signing the words, but not with speaking them. I also wonder if anyone has been ever caught doing that.

 

[malimm0a75]

Interesting topic...! its just human mentality....! Since this is hard earned process (immigration, landing citizenship etc...) so one should not jeopardize this at the last stage....! say it loud so CIC agents, shud tell u - (take it easy guys.... )

besides some people may have moral cultural hindrances, like allegiance to the Queen of England (British empire) who ruled the indian subcontinent and who thinks things otherwise....!! so say it man....

 

[PMM]

Hi

I just had my citizenship ceremony. It was a good ceremony (not that I have anything to compare with, but at least I liked it).

During the oath, I noticed that CIC personnel were looking at our faces, as if to make sure we were reciting the oath. At one point, one of them signalled to the woman in front of me to enunciate. She was probably a shy person who didn't move her lips much. It did not escalate further (she was reciting the oath).

This made me question why would someone not speak the oath. You have to sign it, you have to be in the ceremony, you would have to rise your hand and at least pretend that you are saying the oath. Barring health (physical or mental) issues, why would someone do all that, yet be troubled with actually saying the words out loud? Obviously the CIC personnel is sufficiently concerned about this to verify that we are saying the words.

I am not questioning the legal aspects of not saying the oath, nor the reservations one might have for taking it (e.g., I know that some are uncomfortable with the pleading allegiance to a monarch). I am just perplexed as to why would someone be ok with signing the words, but not with speaking them. I also wonder if anyone has been ever caught doing that.

1. There have been 3 federal court cases (that I know of) where the citizenship applicants refused to pledge allegiance to the Queen and were refused citizenship. They lost at the Federal court level. One was Irish, one Rastafarian, and I am unsure what the other

 

[screech339]

Hi


1. There have been 3 federal court cases (that I know of) where the citizenship applicants refused to pledge allegiance to the Queen and were refused citizenship. They lost at the Federal court level. One was Irish, one Rastafarian, and I am unsure what the other

The other was Jamaican. It is ironic that the Jamaican refuses to say the oath coming from a guy whose country is a commonwealth country like Canada.

 

[bambino]

There are many Canadians who have never had to, and would refuse to swear allegiance to Aunt Lizzie. That was actually the very point of the lawsuit (there were three plaintiffs, but one action).

The effort to crack down on people who only pretend to say the oath at their citizenship ceremonies started (like everything else that has caused so much grief) around 2011-2012.

 

[screech339]

There are many Canadians who have never had to, and would refuse to swear allegiance to Aunt Lizzie. That was actually the very point of the lawsuit (there were three plaintiffs, but one action).

The effort to crack down on people who only pretend to say the oath at their citizenship ceremonies started (like everything else that has caused so much grief) around 2011-2012.

Why is it so much grief due to cracking down on people not saying the oath. If you are not going to say the oath, why are you even there at all?

If you don't want to say the oath, that's your right. You have a right to remain a PR.

 

[eileenf]

I personally found the phalanxes of CIC officers who emerged to stalk the aisles and examine the movements of people's lips to be undignified. After all the challenges many of us have had on the way to becoming citizens, this examination of the body and the voice, as a proxy for an examination of the heart and soul seemed petty.

One of the buzz-cutted aisle stalkers at my ceremony appeared very angry. He paced and glared at immigrant after immigrant, returning again with more glares. It was like getting married and saying "I do" only to have the minister glare and demand "But do you really??? Do you???! Why aren't you yelling it??! No kissing!!!"

It spoke of a distrust and hostility that didn't have a place at the ceremony. It made me feel like they were still suspicious of me, even at the moment when they said they were welcoming me.

 

[screech339]

I personally found the phalanxes of CIC officers who emerged to stalk the aisles and examine the movements of people's lips to be undignified. Canada is not a land of shouting and showiness in my experience (for better and for worse) so this examination of the body and the voice, as a proxy for an examination of the heart and soul (after all the examinations so many of us have been through) seemed desperate.

One of the buzz-cutted aisle stalkers appeared incredibly angry and suspicious at my ceremony. He paced and glared with such suspicion and intensity at immigrant after immigrant, returning again with glared and more glares. It was like getting married and saying "I do" only to have the minister glare and demand "But do you really??? No kissing!!! Do you really accept this man/woman in holy matrimony??? Do you???! Why aren't you yelling it then??!"

It spoke of a distrust and hostility that didn't have a place at the ceremony, especially after such the long, arduous and exhaustive process many of us experienced.

I found it to be undignified.

Well, you can blame it on the few who didn't say their oath or pretended to, in the past. A few bad apples spoiled the barrel.

 

[bambino]

Boy, do you have a talent for missing the point.

 

[screech339]

Boy, do you have a talent for missing the point.

And you have a talent on focusing on one single point or problem (cherry picking) to make a point.

 

[eileenf]

Well, you can blame it on the few who didn't say their oath or pretended to, in the past. A few bad apples spoiled the barrel.

The pacing and physical examination is just a scare tactic. And like most scare tactics, it's undignified. There is no statutory provision for denial of citizenship due to unenthusiastic lip movements. CIC denied one person their citizenship certificate but when it leaked to the press they backpedaled and said that it was a misunderstanding.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/man-denied-canadian-citizenship-over-oath-mix-up-1.1260702

 

[isilrion]

If you don't want to say the oath, that's your right. You have a right to remain a PR.

Right. What puzzles me, though, is not that there are people not willing to say the oath. I'm puzzled by the idea that some people may have any objection to saying the oath, but would still attend the ceremony, pretend that they are saying the oath and then sign it. If I were to object to the oath, but I'm willing to sign it nonetheless, why would I not say the words as well? I would be lying anyways! The only difference is that, by not saying the words, I would be taking a greater risk of being caught, so it wouldn't make any sense for me to not say the words... hence my confusion. I would think that signing is more "binding" that speaking.

I'll take a look at those cases. If they went to their ceremonies willing to sign but not to speak, maybe I'll get some idea of what's going on in their heads.

 

[malimm0a75]

The best solution of this problem, (take oath individually from every person rather than for a group of 10 or 30) . How an officer would know by looking from a distance, to a person standing somewhere in the middle of the rows, that if he is saying or just lip movement??? vocal cords are not loud for everyone.
So it seems CIC is finding excuse to deny you citizenship till the very end....! whereas in the whole process yet tried to find excuse and they couldn't, now here they would and might find some arrogant brat who is not saying it loud (SOL) lol lol lol...!!! come on...

 

[isilrion]

And like most scare tactics, it's undignified.

Indeed, particularly if you are booted from the ceremony for not being sufficiently enthusiastic, as in your link. Fortunately, I didn't feel that pressure during the ceremony, until the official gestured to the woman in front of me. Or, I was able to block the scrutiny from my mind.

 

[screech339]

The pacing and physical examination is just a scare tactic. And like most scare tactics, it's undignified. There is no statutory provision for denial of citizenship due to unenthusiastic lip movements. CIC denied one person their citizenship certificate but when it leaked to the press they backpedaled and said that it was a misunderstanding.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/man-denied-canadian-citizenship-over-oath-mix-up-1.1260702

I read the article. The officer pulled out the wrong person that was apparently not saying the oath. There was still a person not saying the oath. The officer made a mistake in pulling the wrong person out. That's the only misunderstanding. There's no backpedaling.