As I said, if he DOES NOT believe his marriage is invalid-- i.e. he believes it is VALID-- then it would be dishonest to file a petition for nullity. He could respond defending the bond. Or, if something comes to light during the process as respondent that changes his mind he could concur with the petitioner.Many people have no idea how many things will invalidate a marriage. As long as he is truthful in his petition, I don’t see anything immoral.
But you went well beyond it. And editing your post after the fact to remove the term “animosity” does not hide it, especially when what you edited it to (“trying to wreck”) is also beyond what was posted.I can only go by what was posted.
Of course they are. But that doesn’t mean that you can’t be called on them or have them questioned. And I don’t understand what grammar has to do with either version of the post I responded to and quoted.My assumptions are my own.
Six children or sixteen, the number doesn’t make it a marriage. Valid consent does.Six children. How does anyone pretend it was not a marriage?
No no no!! A petition for nullity is not an exploratory exercise. You have to have grounds.The only way he wilL KNOW is if he fills out the petition.
Lots of people have children without any marriage at all, civil or otherwise.Six children. How does anyone pretend it was not a marriage?
Not really. Using the word “animosity” implies more than a mere “trying to wreck” does.The meaning is the same,
Consent to have intercourse, sure.I’d argue having six children required valid consent.
I’d argue having six children required valid consent