(no subject)
Sep. 27th, 2002 01:15 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
semperfionaThe bedroom is hereby declared finished. I did the touch-up painting, I painted the inside of the window frames, I restained the windowsills where they had gotten water damaged, I cleaned up the mess and vacuumed the floor, and I put back all the switchplates and outlet covers. And on top of all that, I also stained the risers of the main staircase (which had been damaged in the process of removing the carpets, lo these many moons ago), and stained the front door, which was water damaged from exposure to the elements.
And I only started after ten pm, because I went to Culpeppers with the STL Bloggers until 8:00, and then came home hoping for an ACW game. After waiting a few minutes I found that Paul had sent his regrets, so I read the Riverfront Times and then went to get started on the project.
At which moment the phone rang. It was Ray, wanting to discuss further his plans to apply for an annulment. We ended up talking about it for quite a while. It sounds like he is going to try to claim that because I am polyamorous and bisexual that we never had a real marriage (according to the biblical vows, doncha know) to begin with. I think it's a load of crap.
But I'll be getting some questionnaires which I'll have to fill out--or actually, I don't think I have to. I could make him do all the work. But I'm not sure I want to do that. I don't know whether I want to let him mischaracterize me without having my own say. But I also don't know what good my own say will be, because none of my feelings, ideas or beliefs are given any credence by the Church. I suppose it may depend on the questions they ask.1
Then we each have to have some number of witnesses also answer questions. I don't know how many, or what the required relationships are with those witnesses. He said something like I should name a witness who "knows about open relationships and bisexuality". I'm not quite sure what he meant by that: whether he meant someone whom I had told everything to, or someone who could opine on whether it's possible to have a true marriage when one or both spouses are bi and/or poly. Either way, my first thoughts were of Christine and of Jen. I do find it rather highly amusing to think of Jen being my witness. Not sure what good it would do, though if we told the truth that we had been dating since well before the divorce, that would probably suffice to get Ray his annulment.
He mentioned his mother and one of his brothers being his witnesses. Again, I don't know what they're supposed to say. I think he's going to try to blame me for everything. He'll say he was committed and faithful and all the things that the Church approves of in marriage, but I was not willing to live by those vows. What I'm almost sure he won't say is that he was too arrogantly self-righteous to work with me on anything.
For yet more evidence of that, he wants to have one of our marriage counselors as a witness. Apparently if I sign an agreement to break the patient confidentiality, he can do that. Also apparently it's not uncommon, because the annulment tribunal has forms all ready, and the counselor in question even suggested it. That, more than anything else, bothers me. I did not talk to him and bare my soul to him in order to have it used against me. But my inkling that he was dead-set against my feelings is now vindicated. (As if it hadn't been already. He told us "open marriages never work". Any self-respecting scientist worth his salt ought to know better than to say "never" about anything.)
1 I think I'll post them. Hmm. Wonder if someone already has. ::runs off to google::
And I only started after ten pm, because I went to Culpeppers with the STL Bloggers until 8:00, and then came home hoping for an ACW game. After waiting a few minutes I found that Paul had sent his regrets, so I read the Riverfront Times and then went to get started on the project.
At which moment the phone rang. It was Ray, wanting to discuss further his plans to apply for an annulment. We ended up talking about it for quite a while. It sounds like he is going to try to claim that because I am polyamorous and bisexual that we never had a real marriage (according to the biblical vows, doncha know) to begin with. I think it's a load of crap.
But I'll be getting some questionnaires which I'll have to fill out--or actually, I don't think I have to. I could make him do all the work. But I'm not sure I want to do that. I don't know whether I want to let him mischaracterize me without having my own say. But I also don't know what good my own say will be, because none of my feelings, ideas or beliefs are given any credence by the Church. I suppose it may depend on the questions they ask.1
Then we each have to have some number of witnesses also answer questions. I don't know how many, or what the required relationships are with those witnesses. He said something like I should name a witness who "knows about open relationships and bisexuality". I'm not quite sure what he meant by that: whether he meant someone whom I had told everything to, or someone who could opine on whether it's possible to have a true marriage when one or both spouses are bi and/or poly. Either way, my first thoughts were of Christine and of Jen. I do find it rather highly amusing to think of Jen being my witness. Not sure what good it would do, though if we told the truth that we had been dating since well before the divorce, that would probably suffice to get Ray his annulment.
He mentioned his mother and one of his brothers being his witnesses. Again, I don't know what they're supposed to say. I think he's going to try to blame me for everything. He'll say he was committed and faithful and all the things that the Church approves of in marriage, but I was not willing to live by those vows. What I'm almost sure he won't say is that he was too arrogantly self-righteous to work with me on anything.
For yet more evidence of that, he wants to have one of our marriage counselors as a witness. Apparently if I sign an agreement to break the patient confidentiality, he can do that. Also apparently it's not uncommon, because the annulment tribunal has forms all ready, and the counselor in question even suggested it. That, more than anything else, bothers me. I did not talk to him and bare my soul to him in order to have it used against me. But my inkling that he was dead-set against my feelings is now vindicated. (As if it hadn't been already. He told us "open marriages never work". Any self-respecting scientist worth his salt ought to know better than to say "never" about anything.)
1 I think I'll post them. Hmm. Wonder if someone already has. ::runs off to google::
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2002-09-27 03:15 am (UTC)Which church? Catholic? There's a book that claims to have the questionnaire info in it - http://www.haworthpressinc.com/store/product.asp?sku=4621 . There's another book here http://www.federationpress.com.au/Books/Stuart.htm as well. You might be able to find a copy of one or both at a local library or using an interlibrary loan.
I found one mention of annulment and open marriage at http://www.dwc.org/questions/Annulments/open.htm . According to that and a couple of other sites, unless you told him before marriage that you never intended to be monogamous, the fact that you're polyamorous wouldn't be grounds for annulment.
And there's no way I'd sign papers giving the marriage counselor permission to break the confidentiality agreement!
no subject
Date: 2002-09-27 05:48 am (UTC)It's not like I'm really going to be in suspense all that long, if he really does it I'll have my very own copy quite soon.
And yes, Catholic.
Re:
Date: 2002-09-27 07:21 am (UTC)So maybe you can break the silence and publish what's in the stuff :-)
*hugs*
no subject
Date: 2002-09-27 07:39 am (UTC)Say, btw, I'm going to add your ids to my Trillian contacts list. These are mine: fionamber on AIM, rbekaa on Yahoo.
Re:
Date: 2002-09-27 08:48 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2002-09-27 07:47 am (UTC)I don't think he has grounds for annulment--but of course you don't actually have to have "grounds", you just have to have money. Give the church enough $$ and they will bend and break their own rules, no problem. (I have some real issues with a) the Catholic church, and b) annulment in general, so my comments may be a little heated and/or biased.) The MIL tried to discuss me annulling my first marriage so that Lynn & I could "really" be married in the "eyes of the Church and the Lord." Her caps, her church, her lord. Screw that noise. If it was me, I wouldn't do a thing to help him get it done--it's his religion, let him deal with it--but again, I probably have blinders on where the "Church" is concerned.
Good luck, chica.
R
no subject
Date: 2002-09-27 09:14 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2002-09-27 10:55 am (UTC)"Mommy, I don't like him" (Bec will understand this)
Date: 2002-09-27 08:28 pm (UTC)