 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2004Lightning annulment
A news item leads me to wonder. Would non-consummation be valid grounds for an annulment if a couple had had sexual intercourse *before* the marriage but not after? Mike. > A news item leads me to wonder. Would non-consummation be valid > grounds for an annulment if a couple had had sexual intercourse > *before* the marriage but not after? Using applicable mores, there would then be no need to formalize the _union_.  SignatureGood luck and good sailing. s/v Kerry Deare of Barnegat http://kerrydeare.tripod.com Lyle: >A news item leads me to wonder. Geez, I *wonder* which "new item" that could be. >Would non-consummation be valid >grounds for an annulment if a couple had had sexual intercourse >*before* the marriage but not after? Who knows? But why's the subject "lightning annulment", and what's the subject supposed to mean? > Lyle: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Who knows? But why's the subject "lightning annulment", and what's the subject > supposed to mean? You must, I imagine, have heard the expression "lightning courtship". > de781@aol.com (DE781) wrote > > Lyle: > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > You must, I imagine, have heard the expression "lightning courtship". Not really. "whirlwind courtship" 2830 "lightning courtship" 18 SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux > > de781@aol.com (DE781) wrote > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > "whirlwind courtship" 2830 > "lightning courtship" 18 Well, like eighteen others plus me, you have now. But I'll rename the thread "Whirlwind annulment" if you prefer. Still, and call me a romantic fool if you like, the *coup de foudre* yet remains a more striking and memorable image than a vulgar "quickie". Mike. > > Lyle: > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > You must, I imagine, have heard the expression "lightning courtship". No, but I've heard of (and even seen) "lightning rods." -skipka Lyle: >You must, I imagine, have heard the expression "lightning courtship". Nope. Now I have. But, still, what does the speed of Britney's annulment have to do with whether or not they consummated the marriage, which they likely did anyway? Britney's a ho! She's been around the block more times than the mailman and the postman combined! My point is that a couple could be married for months or years without even having had sex, so the fact that Spears did a "lightning annulment" doesn't make a difference, especially when they likely had sex DURING the wedding, as drunk as they were. >>Lyle: >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > You must, I imagine, have heard the expression "lightning courtship". Or 'temporary hitch'. SignatureRob Bannister >Lyle: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >Who knows? But why's the subject "lightning annulment", and what's the subject >supposed to mean? A Zionist came and put powerful muti on the house. Steve Hayes hayesmstw@hotmail.com http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm Hayes: >>Who knows? But why's the subject "lightning annulment", and what's the >subject >>supposed to mean? > >A Zionist came and put powerful muti on the house. Do you mean "puta"? What's "muti"? > Hayes: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Do you mean "puta"? What's "muti"? http://www.ornellamuti.net/ .m M: >> Do you mean "puta"? What's "muti"? > >http://www.ornellamuti.net/ Woah! Muti's got nice tits! In alt.usage.english, mUs1Ka wrote: >> Do you mean "puta"? What's "muti"? > >http://www.ornellamuti.net/ Tutti frutti! SignatureMickwick >In alt.usage.english, mUs1Ka wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Tutti frutti! Oh, rooty! -- Ross Howard In alt.usage.english, Ross Howard wrote: >On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:21:32 +0000, Mickwick <mickwick@use.reply.to> >>In alt.usage.english, mUs1Ka wrote: >>>http://www.ornellamuti.net/ >> >>Tutti frutti! > >Oh, rooty! Even after all these years, pondering Muti's performance in _Flash Gordon_ still ruttles my gorge. (And she didn't even take her clothes off!) SignatureMickwick > In alt.usage.english, Ross Howard wrote: > >On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:21:32 +0000, Mickwick <mickwick@use.reply.to> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Gordon_ still ruttles my gorge. (And she didn't even take her clothes > off!) Ricardo Muti conducted the music for *Flash Gordon*? Blimey! Mike. >> In alt.usage.english, Ross Howard wrote: >> >On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 12:21:32 +0000, Mickwick <mickwick@use.reply.to> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Ricardo Muti conducted the music for *Flash Gordon*? Blimey! It was a comic opera. -- Ross Howard Ross Howard filted: >>Ricardo Muti conducted the music for *Flash Gordon*? Blimey! > >It was a comic opera. And he was feeling Mercurial at the time....r In alt.usage.english, Ross Howard wrote: >On 10 Jan 2004 15:22:16 -0800, mike_lyle_uk@yahoo.co.uk (Mike Lyle) >>Mickwick <mickwick@use.reply.to> wrote in message news:<uqNinE >>> Even after all these years, pondering Muti's performance in _Flash >>> Gordon_ still ruttles my gorge. (And she didn't even take her clothes [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >It was a comic opera. It was an ornic caldera. SignatureMickwick >Hayes: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Do you mean "puta"? What's "muti"? What's puta? Muti is medicine. SignatureSteve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk >>Hayes: >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >What's puta? A Spanish term for "whore". Joey can get ghetto in two languages. >Muti is medicine. Cooper: >>What's puta? > >A Spanish term for "whore". Joey can get ghetto in two languages. More than two. I know how to say "ho" in at least 8 languages. Hayes: >>>A Zionist came and put powerful muti on the house. >> >>Do you mean "puta"? What's "muti"? > >What's puta? "Ho" in Spanish. >Muti is medicine. Or a woman with nice tits, apparently. > >Hayes: > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Muti is medicine. <http://www.sonyclassical.com/artists/muti/> SignatureBob Lieblich Love his Verdi >> >Hayes: >> > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > ><http://www.sonyclassical.com/artists/muti/> http://library.thinkquest.org/27209/Healing.htm http://www.apts.edu/caps/Occasional%20lecture/series03/SESSION%202.pdf SignatureSteve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk > A news item leads me to wonder. Would non-consummation be valid > grounds for an annulment if a couple had had sexual intercourse > *before* the marriage but not after? It certainly was, into the 1970s at least, under English law. My father was involved in a case then---although not as one of the parties to the marriage! SignatureSAm. > > A news item leads me to wonder. Would non-consummation be valid > > grounds for an annulment if a couple had had sexual intercourse > > *before* the marriage but not after? > > It certainly was, into the 1970s at least, under English law. My father was > involved in a case then---although not as one of the parties to the marriage! Thank Heaven, and you, for an answer to the actual question! Mike. >A news item leads me to wonder. Would non-consummation be valid >grounds for an annulment if a couple had had sexual intercourse >*before* the marriage but not after? In England, yes. Signaturewrmst rgrds Robin Bignall Quiet part of Hertfordshire England |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.