Let me preface this by saying that I personally have no problem with same-sex marriages, though I do believe it is up to individual states to decide the issue, and I believe that unless a state approves of such a marriage, one should be bound by the law in a given state. That said, this is an interesting turn of events in a story that I have written on before.
"Thomas" Beatie, the infamous "pregnant man" has been told that she cannot divorce her wife of nine years because the judge cannot determine that they were married to begin with. Now, it should be noted that the judge did not base the ruling on it being a same sex marriage, just that Beatie, who kept his reproductive organs intact, and who has born children will claiming to be a man, failed to establish that she was a transsexual man at the time of the marriage. Well, DUH!!!!!
Oh, and the worst part...she wants to compete to get pregnant with her new girlfriend, commenting that perhaps both will be pregnant at the same time...
Here is a link to the story.
Showing posts with label divorce. Show all posts
Showing posts with label divorce. Show all posts
Saturday, March 30, 2013
Monday, November 15, 2010
A Dog in the Manger
There is an ancient Greek fable, sometime attributed to Aesop, about a dog lying in a manger who could not eat the hay but who nevertheless prevented the other animals from being able to eat it either. It is used as an idiom for someone who has no use for something, but seeks to prevent another from using it as well.
"Autumn" Sandeen has established himself as a classic example of a Dog in the Manger. In his most recent diatribe on Pam's House Blend he complains about how his ex-wife, who apparently has nothing to do with him, is seeking an annulment of their marriage from the Roman Catholic Church.
Now, for those who are not familiar with the practices of Catholicism, if one is divorced, and wishes to have their marriage sanctified by the sacrament of marriage in the Church, then the only choice is to have the previous marriage annulled. There are certain situations where the church will hold that the previous marriage was not properly entered into, and the annulment is granted.
Most often, the grounds for the annulment is that one or both of the parties was too immature to enter into a valid sacrament of marriage. Other grounds can include mental illness, a lack of intention to stay faithful or have children, deception and some other very technical reasons.
The simple, bottom line is, Mr. Sandeen's wife should have no problem getting such a decree. But he is not willing for this to happen. He intends to challenge his wife's effort. Now, he claims that part of the reason is that he does not want his children from the marriage, who will have nothing to do with him, to be made "illegitimate." However, a church annulment does not do that, legally, or in the eyes of the Roman Catholic Church. He would have some claim to that if this were a legal proceeding, but not in this case.
No, the obvious reason his ex-wife would seeks an annulment is that she plans to remarry (or perhaps has already remarried) and wishes to have the church recognize the new marriage as sacramental.
And, just as obviously, Mr. Sandeen's ONLY real reason for opposing the annulment is to spite his wife, and perhaps is also a vain attempt to prevent her from being able to remarry. Of course, there is no way that the church is going to deny the marriage. His silly little tantrum is going to do nothing but given ignorant people another bit to use against transsexuals (though ironically, Mr. Sandeen is not remotely actually a transsexual.
Mr. Sandeen is one of those men who, sometime during puberty, developed a fetish for wearing women's clothes, with no real evidence of gender issues prior to that, who then, after a long period of living as a successful male, decides to take his little fetish to the next level, and became full time. Then, he decided he would be a transsexual to gain higher standing as a "transgender."
Mr. Sandeen shows no desire to simply live as a woman. He is an "out, loud, and proud" transgender. He makes sure anyone and everyone knows his history, and in the past made it clear he had no desire to give up his penis. He now claims to be surgery tracked, though he also tends to indicate that he will have surgery only when he can have it paid for. In truth, I am sure if he does get it covered, he will find another excuse.
And adding to the silliness of Mr. Sandeen's claims is the comment by "Zoe Brain" the self-acclaimed "rocket scientist" who asserts, rather bizarrely that Mr. Sandeen's marriage was a "same-sex one, despite the fact that children resulted." Now, that is ridiculous. Mr. Sandeen had, and still has a penis. His wife had a vagina, ovaries, and a uterus. They had children, that were conceived from Mr. Sandeen's sperm, and his wife's eggs. To remotely suggest such a marriage was a "same sex one" is totally false. I guess they must have pretty low standards to be a "rocket scientist" down under.
Mr. Sandeen should be ashamed of acting so cruelly towards his ex-wife. He should just let her seek her annulment, ignore it all, and go on with is little fantasies. Seeking to deny her the ability to remarry is simply his being a dog in the manger.
And he should stop trying to speak for transsexuals.
"Autumn" Sandeen has established himself as a classic example of a Dog in the Manger. In his most recent diatribe on Pam's House Blend he complains about how his ex-wife, who apparently has nothing to do with him, is seeking an annulment of their marriage from the Roman Catholic Church.
Now, for those who are not familiar with the practices of Catholicism, if one is divorced, and wishes to have their marriage sanctified by the sacrament of marriage in the Church, then the only choice is to have the previous marriage annulled. There are certain situations where the church will hold that the previous marriage was not properly entered into, and the annulment is granted.
Most often, the grounds for the annulment is that one or both of the parties was too immature to enter into a valid sacrament of marriage. Other grounds can include mental illness, a lack of intention to stay faithful or have children, deception and some other very technical reasons.
The simple, bottom line is, Mr. Sandeen's wife should have no problem getting such a decree. But he is not willing for this to happen. He intends to challenge his wife's effort. Now, he claims that part of the reason is that he does not want his children from the marriage, who will have nothing to do with him, to be made "illegitimate." However, a church annulment does not do that, legally, or in the eyes of the Roman Catholic Church. He would have some claim to that if this were a legal proceeding, but not in this case.
No, the obvious reason his ex-wife would seeks an annulment is that she plans to remarry (or perhaps has already remarried) and wishes to have the church recognize the new marriage as sacramental.
And, just as obviously, Mr. Sandeen's ONLY real reason for opposing the annulment is to spite his wife, and perhaps is also a vain attempt to prevent her from being able to remarry. Of course, there is no way that the church is going to deny the marriage. His silly little tantrum is going to do nothing but given ignorant people another bit to use against transsexuals (though ironically, Mr. Sandeen is not remotely actually a transsexual.
Mr. Sandeen is one of those men who, sometime during puberty, developed a fetish for wearing women's clothes, with no real evidence of gender issues prior to that, who then, after a long period of living as a successful male, decides to take his little fetish to the next level, and became full time. Then, he decided he would be a transsexual to gain higher standing as a "transgender."
Mr. Sandeen shows no desire to simply live as a woman. He is an "out, loud, and proud" transgender. He makes sure anyone and everyone knows his history, and in the past made it clear he had no desire to give up his penis. He now claims to be surgery tracked, though he also tends to indicate that he will have surgery only when he can have it paid for. In truth, I am sure if he does get it covered, he will find another excuse.
And adding to the silliness of Mr. Sandeen's claims is the comment by "Zoe Brain" the self-acclaimed "rocket scientist" who asserts, rather bizarrely that Mr. Sandeen's marriage was a "same-sex one, despite the fact that children resulted." Now, that is ridiculous. Mr. Sandeen had, and still has a penis. His wife had a vagina, ovaries, and a uterus. They had children, that were conceived from Mr. Sandeen's sperm, and his wife's eggs. To remotely suggest such a marriage was a "same sex one" is totally false. I guess they must have pretty low standards to be a "rocket scientist" down under.
Mr. Sandeen should be ashamed of acting so cruelly towards his ex-wife. He should just let her seek her annulment, ignore it all, and go on with is little fantasies. Seeking to deny her the ability to remarry is simply his being a dog in the manger.
And he should stop trying to speak for transsexuals.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
