One of the demons she was fighting was RFK jr. Once a crudball always a crudball. Poor Mary should have gotten a clue when he paid off the catholic church to grant him an annullment from wifey #1 so he could wed Mary in the church. The fact that he effectively made his first 3 kids bastards with the annullment has no bearing on anything I guess.
Any documented reference; not just parroting what you read somewhere on the internet, like a document from a Canonical Tribunal, for that claim? RFK Jr and Mary Richardson were married in a civil ceremony onboard the Shannon, an environmental research vessel floating in Haverstraw Bay, not in the Church.
The fact that he effectively made his first 3 kids bastards with the annullment has no bearing on anything I guess.
It only has a bearing on bolstering your lack of intelligence.
You wouldn't happen to be the host of a show on MSNBC would you?
Please don't peddle this crap. RFK, Jr. might be a Grade A #1 A$$, but contrary to popular opinion, folks don't 'pay off the Church' to get an annulment. Every annulment costs money in administrative time and paperwork, so money DOES change hands. It is no different than paying a lawyer, when couples are getting a divorce. Do we consider that cost "paying off the State"? Considering how the Kennedy men view marriage, I'm guessing it wasn't hard to prove that he had no intention of making a lifelong commitment.
As for the seeming continual claim that annulment makes the children of the marriage 'bastards', this is absurd on its face. An annulment simply states that the SACRAMENT of Matrimony wasn't valid, so that union didn't exist in a SACRAMENTAL manner. The idea of a child being a 'bastard' comes from the LEGAL condition of marriage. Do children become 'bastards' when the LEGAL marriage contract is broken? If not, then annulment has nothing to do with the LEGAL condition of children, vis a vis their parents.
The word and the concept "bastard" is in dictionaries and is (or was) found in civil law, but the concept and word do not exist in Catholic canon law. There is no such category. If a man and a woman have a child, the child is termed their "natural child" and nothing else. Neither divorce nor annulment changes that.
Second, RFK Jr's second marriage was performed by Justice DONALD N. SILVERMAN of the New York State Supreme Court onboard a boat in the Hudson River. You don't need to be a canon lawyer to see that this was not a Catholic wedding.
Third, marriage tribunals do not post publicly the reasons why they end up with a finding of nullity. Sometimes it's because it became clear that the original wedding vows were fraudulent, e.g. one or both of the spouses never intended an exclusive, faithful, lifelong marriage. Therefore, fraud. Without knowing anything more than that, I think we'd be entitled to assume that if the tribunal judges said they found fraud in the RFK-Emily Black marriage vows, they probably did.