Why is it not that a state divorce is actually an argument AGAINST a church annulment petition rather than a necessary condition for such petition? Note: This question may be wrong. I think the right question is in the following link: How do Filipino Catholics get a church annulment when their state marriage is valid, considering the Philippines doesn&#39;t have divorce?

Apparently, state divorce is a necessary condition to begin a church annulment process. Why isn't a state divorce actually an argument against rather than a necessary condition for a church annulment petition?
I mean, there are reasons to get an annulment instead of divorce despite divorce being cheaper. So, if your church marriage is invalid, as you want to petition, then why did you get a state divorce instead of a state annulment for your state marriage, which I guess was also invalid?
Of course, answers may include:

Your state marriage is invalid, but the financial reasons for getting a state annulment instead of a state divorce weren't applicable to you. Hence, even though your state marriage is invalid, you chose the cheaper route of getting a state divorce instead of a state annulment.

Your state marriage is valid though your church marriage is still invalid.



Related: Marriage invalid. Would a church annulment require a state annulment or state divorce?
Update:
Would a state separation suffice in the place of a state annulment or state divorce? Case 1: The country has divorce. Case 2: The country is the Philippines.
Your state marriage is valid though your church marriage is still invalid.


I think that this is the answer in most cases:

In nearly all cases I have heard about a state marriage would be perfectly valid but a church marriage is not.

Edit

I have heard about the following cases:


The husband had a child with another woman and he didn't tell his wife
The husband was homosexual and the wife did not know about this


In both cases a civil marriage is valid and a church marriage can be annulled.