Posted on 09/19/2004 1:21:23 AM PDT by MadIvan
Funny as hell, didn't someone say that Kerry might have been dishonorably discharged and then waited for a few years so he could re-instate papers so he could look like he was honorably discharged? Seems like the same situation here folks.
What would someone to the right of Rush be considered?
Not to defend Kerry. But he's not the only one who's married someone for money. Believe me, there are tons of other people who do this to. I'm sure you can find tons of both Democrats and Republicans who do this. People who are known and not known.
What would someone to the right of Rush be considered?
NeoCon
Also, Teresa Heinz has a prenup with Kerry. If she passes away, all the Heinz money goes to her kids not Kerry.
What new "attacks" are to appear because she's clear of cancer?
Annulment greatly wounded my son's stepson. This is an unbelievable practice, especially if it is for money.
"What would someone to the right of Rush be considered?"
That would be almost any Democrat of forty years ago.
Julia Thorne can't be too angry with Kerry. I saw her brother on TV this week, defending Kerry. He is working on Kerry's campaign campaign.
Her brother was saying that Steve Pitkin was a liar...
Senator Kerry maintains the lid on the reporting of his prostate cancer that was diagnosed and treated some 18 months ago. He refuses to release medical records and claims a complete cure on the basis of his physicians's findings.
There is a difference between a legal annulment and a church annulment. Catholic annulment does NOT mean that the children from the marriage are illegitimate. It means that there was some spiritual impediment that prevented a true union from taking place. It has no bearing on the legitimacy of the children.
That could mean that one member of the couple was under age. It could mean that one member of the couple harbaored reservations about the marriage -- spoken, or unspoken. it could mean that one member of the couple did not intend to enter into a Catholic marriage, i.e. that one member of the couple did not intend to welcome children into the union. It could mean that one member of the couple all along thought that divorce was an option if things did not work out.
There are many other reasons that can be brought before the church tribunal in a petition for an annulment. Some of the requirements are statements from witnesses who know the couple before and after their marriage, as well as from the parents of both husband and the wife.
The church will not even CONSIDER annulment until the civil divorce is complete.
A common misconception. My daughter's annulment cost about $200 and those fees were for the paperwork and the time of a church lawyer to help her through the process.
That's what being around John Kerry will do to a person. Explains a lot about Teresa's psychological imbalances.
that's easy.... be a catholic in Massachusettes with lots of money... you know, the same church that covered up the homosexual priests by taking money from parishoners and paying off lawyers and families.
jeez, didn't you know that the church can't be corrupted? Kennedy, Kerry, Cuomo=good catholic
Mel Gibson, heterosexual males, conservative= bad Catholics
simple
"How the hell can you annul a marriage that produced two kids"?
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$...
and... FAVORS!
LLS
"What would someone to the right of Rush be considered"?
Uhhh, a Buchananite? ;-)
LLS
Life with Jean-Fraude...one would be led to conclude that this is his approach/attitude to his lifes work.
Sane!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.