John F*ckin: America's second Black President.
Furthermore, note that it doesn't say he actually got an annulment - and in fact, he himself has only said that he "requested" one. So with his remarriage, it's rather unclear that he is actually a member in good standing of the Catholic Church (although he seems to believe that claiming he is will get him votes). I'd like to see more information about that, too, while we're digging through records.
It's important to note that an anullment from the Catholic Church does not mean Kerry's daughters are illegitimate. This is not the Church's stance at all. An anullment only affects the Sacramental portion of the marriage. It has nothing to do with the daughters.
In years gone by this created a tremendous headache, and heartache, for those children, e.g. Henry VIII's daughter Mary.
Granted things to do are no where near as bad for children of annulled marriages but still...why did Kerry do it? It would seem to me a secular divorce would -- and did -- solve the matter of his first marriage. Why the annulment as well? Perhaps his children sided with their mother and this was his way of "getting back" at them. I have no idea. But it does strike me as a mean, even vicious, thing for him to do to his own children.
The dirty little secret of kerry's divorce is that he most likely demanded alimony FROM his wife.
Dear Ms Thorne,
Remember that marriage you thought you had with John F. Kerry? Well, it never happened as a result of it being annulled. Oh, and those two kids you had in the non-existent marriage are now illegitimate.
Have a nice day!
The Annulment Bureau
Was the Kerry Annulment before or after the annuled wife of Joe Kennedy III wrote her book on this topic and thus gave annulment a really bad name? I'm curious because before her book there was no big stigma in the public on the topic of annulment but nowadays there is. BTW, isn't that book that she wrote the reason why Joe Kennedy III dropped out of politics?
No children are "illegitimate" in the eyes of God and His Church.
In the Catholic Church, especially in America, an annulment is practically the same thing as a divorce nowadays.
When I and my first wife divorced, I applied for and received an annulment. But, that marriage was short-lived, and there were no children. There was also (now, looking back, I can see it), the problem of depression. (Women are susceptible to this.) Plus, I had grounds. That annulment was legit.
When my second wife and I divorced, we had been married for several years, and had a children. Plus, depression was not involved, and it was a no-fault divorce. Therefore, neither I nor my second wife sought, nor do I think I, her or we would have been given an annulment.
All things considered, Kerry's case seems to be more like my second divorce. Yes, the woman suffered depression, but this, by itself, is not grounds for an annulment. That would be like saying that if the woman has a physical illness, that would be grounds for an annulment.
When you marry, you marry for "better or for worse, in sickness and in health." Mere depression is a risk you run when marryng another person. The Catholic Church should NOT have granted the annulment to Kerry. Either that, or the Catholic Church should accept the fact of divorce.
An annulment does NOT make the children of the putative marriage into bastards. This journalist ought to be fired for repeating an old, tired anti-Catholic slur.
The writer is WRONG! Annulment does not create illegitimacy any more than a divorce does.
I'm NOT for Jean alQuery, but just wanted to set the record straight, as this fiction about annulment and illegitimacy seems to pop up from time to time.
Idiot newspeople trying to be theologians. The Sacrament of Holy Matrimony would be annulled, this has nothing to do with the legitimacy of the kids. The Church has always held that the kids are not responsible for the stupidity of their parents.
No he didn't.
(I hate Kerry as much as the next guy but this is an uninformed statement.)
remember when the libs ripped Newt over far less serious circumstances affecting his separations?
Dumb question/observation here....wouldn't the book Julia Thorne wrote (while Sydney Bristow thought she was her on ALIAS!) have far more juicy detail out in the public forum than his records?
According to the Catholic church the marriage isn't valid to it would make his children illegitimate but heck good luck explaining common sense to a Catholic.
Just curious but how come the Repuplican's SEALED records are exposed without their permission and John Kerry has NO judge helping journalists UNSEALING his divorce papers. The same reasoning was used for the Republican - spare the kids the dirt but with John Kerry they can not be unsealed - no journalist is pursuing it and NO judge is offering it to be "fair" politically speaking.
I asked this very question in a different thread; "Does not
the annulment make his children retroactively illegitimate"?
what kind of man chooses his own self-interest over the
bastardy of his own children?