I think it is quite disingenuous for Roman Catholics to disparage others as "woefully uninformed on the church" when they discuss the subject of divorce and annulments. Though, on paper, the "rules" seem to be reasonable, we know from practice that these rules are stretched frequently. Case in point, the infamous Ted Kennedy. He was able to get an annulment after his divorce from his first wife, Joan, from whom he had been married for twenty-five years and had four children, on the grounds that, "He never intended to be faithful to his wife."! So, he's the one who wanted an annulment so he could marry his current Catholic wife and it was granted to the very person who was the one guilty of adultery - Teddy. According to
http://www.ewtn.com/vexperts/showmessage.asp?number=582101:
In any case, if a Catholic receives an annulment based on some defect of the vows, then they are free to remarry, provided that defect is not going to repeat itself in the new marriage. The Church cannot marry someone knowing they are entering an invalid marriage. So, any Catholic in that situation would have to assure the Church that the reason for the defect in the marriage receiving the Decree of Nullity will not re-occur in the marriage they want to make. That would apply to the Senator and anyone in a similar situation. Presumably that was done.
Is it any wonder why the practice is called "Catholic Divorce"? Apparently, the "pretty involved procedure" is not so much if you have enough money and/or influence.
Disingenuous? It’s downright disgusting the ways they find to finesse God’s clear commandments.
And then they get on their moral high horse about birth control.
Of course, considering the lack of large Catholic families any more, we can see that how THAT is going, too.