• Images
  • Text
  • Find a Couple + Registry
GO
Customs and Traditions

Is this a PPD?

If a couple had to legally marry before they could do anything else. Would that anything else afterwards be a PPD?  

When I say legally married I mean no party, no family, no friends, no traditions, no calling each other newly weds, no exchanging of vows, no promises kept for each other, no meeting with a minster, priest, etc., no changing of FB status, no gifts. Just simply legally getting married in your county. Then celebrating, exchanging vows etc. on another day. Would you consider second part to be a PPD? 
«1

Re: Is this a PPD?

  • fwtx5815fwtx5815 cowboys nation member
    500 Love Its 100 Comments First Anniversary First Answer
    Yes. They are married. It doesn't matter what their reasons were for doing a JOP wedding.

    The only way it wouldn't be a PPD is if they had a celebration of marriage (so, a party basically) without all of the typical wedding traditions, and if they were honest with the party guests about being married already.

    ----


     fka dallasbetch 


    image


    Lilypie Maternity tickers

    emmaaaweddingcactusCMGragain
  • NYCMercedesNYCMercedes BOS, NYC, DC. Forever a city girl member
    Sixth Anniversary 2500 Comments 500 Love Its 5 Answers
    leelabear said:
    If a couple had to legally marry before they could do anything else. Would that anything else afterwards be a PPD?  

    When I say legally married I mean no party, no family, no friends, no traditions, no calling each other newly weds, no exchanging of vows, no promises kept for each other, no meeting with a minster, priest, etc., no changing of FB status, no gifts. Just simply legally getting married in your county. Then celebrating, exchanging vows etc. on another day. Would you consider second part to be a PPD? 

    Yes. You are clearly married. You can certainly have a party for any reason. There's no reason at the party to do anything bridal, of course.
    emmaaa
  • edited January 2015
    That is pretty much the definition of a PPD. And really, I have yet to hear a reason that genuinely prevented any couple from planning a wedding party that coincided with their legal marriage. I have only ever heard reasons that indicated the couple was shit at planning and/or unwilling to jump through the hoops to get what they wanted.
    image
    slothiegalesstee33emmaaaweddingcactus
  • That is pretty much the definition of a PPD. And really, I have yet to hear a reason that genuinely prevented any couple from planning a wedding party that coincided with their legal marriage. I have only ever heard reasons that indicated the couple was shit at planning and/or unwilling to jump through the hoops to get what they wanted.
    TOTALLY
  • slothiegalslothiegal The Sloth Farm member
    1000 Comments 500 Love Its First Answer Name Dropper
    leelabear said:
    If a couple had to legally marry before they could do anything else. Would that anything else afterwards be a PPD?  

    When I say legally married I mean no party, no family, no friends, no traditions, no calling each other newly weds, no exchanging of vows, no promises kept for each other, no meeting with a minster, priest, etc., no changing of FB status, no gifts. Just simply legally getting married in your county. Then celebrating, exchanging vows etc. on another day. Would you consider second part to be a PPD? 
    This is a poor choice of words.

    And yes, this is the exact definition of a PPD.
    Anniversary

    image
    esstee33plainjane0415
  • Well, I guess that settles it then. It’s a pretty princess day.

    To be honest, it really saddens me that this seems to be the case. I guess my view of getting married is a little different than everybody else’s. To me marriage is a promise, a commitment to another human being. The point of becoming married comes when you tell that person you will be there for them. I’m sure everyone may have slightly different wording for this. Some people write their own vows (promises and commitments) and others prefer to use the standard version (in sickness and in health, etc.). For those who believe in God, it might involve saying these commitments with as Him as a witness. These commitments along with love and understanding are what hold a couple together.

    To me getting married isn’t about the white dress, the perfect reception, the gifts, the sendoff, or the traditions. It’s also not about a piece of paper that tells my government I’m in a legal contract with another person. Is that what marriage is to you? A legal marriage contract doesn’t make me feel confident that someone will cheer me up when I am down, hug me when I need one, or hold my hand when I am on my deathbed.

    Maybe perhaps, my view on marriage is rather skewed. It could be that I watched too many movies growing up. Like in Brave Heart how William Wallace married Murron in secret so he didn’t have to share his wife with an Englishman. Technically his marriage wasn’t legal by today’s standards.

    So when people define a PPD by having anything marriage like including vow exchange on a day after the day they only legally got married, I think it’s sad. One the other hand, I can completely agree it’s a PPD if a couple vow/commit themselves to each other one day and then have an over the top party with reenactment vows another day.

    I cannot agree that marriage is simply a piece of paper handed out by our government. It’s sad that so many people view it this way. 

    libra44423
  • edited January 2015
     

    Except that legal marriage is a public record that you have made that commitment. You do have to acknowledge in signing that paper that you are freely entering into matrimony with that person. Most states also require some form of vows. If you are treated the legal portion flippantly, IMO you do not need to get legally married. Obviously that part is important to you though if you're going to do it.

    And frankly it is offensive to call it 'simply a piece of paper' when so many people still are denied the thousand-plus rights that come with it and would do anything to be able to get it.
    image
    STARMOON44[Deleted User]themuffinman16
  • LondonLisaLondonLisa London, UK member
    Seventh Anniversary 2500 Comments 500 Love Its 5 Answers
    Ditto Annabelle- the Braveheart reference was ridiculous. It is a Hollywood film with so many historical inaccuracies it is hilarious. There is absolutely no evidence that jus primae noctis ever existed. Also William Wallace didn't even wear a kilt or have blue face paint. Kilts were invented in the 18th century by the English wealthy lords to wear on their Scottish estates. I mean, technically Maid Marion and Robin Hood in the children's Disney film had a PPD because foxes cannot legally get married...
    [Deleted User]Knottie87246922
  • I think my point was missed. The commitment made is more important than the marriage license. The definition of a PPD makes this legal document the most important. 

    Yes, the marriage license matters. It gives you a lot of legal rights. Its something LGBT should fight for. I'm just pointing out that it shouldn't be the keystone in your marriage. 
    Yes, Mel Gibson is an ars and Braveheart is riddled with historic inaccuracies. That wasn't the point I was making. 
    Yes, most people that get married one day and have a party the next do have PPDs suited by both yours and my definition. And they should acknowledge and let people know it is a PPD. 
    Yes, most people should do better planning so all these things can happen on the same day. But a small amount of people can't for understandable reasons. They shouldn't be thrown under the bus, be labeled, have guests who are so offended that they actually don't attend the "PPD" party, etc. 

    My point is the definition of a PPD gives the marriage license more importance than the commitment. 
  • If the vows/commitment part was so important to you, you shouldn't have skipped it.

    Similarly, if the vows/commitment part is still so meaningful to you, you're free to go ahead and do it. You just don't get to throw a giant party around then because you're already married, and that party is intended to celebrate with those who witnessed you becoming married. So please feel free to join hands with your spouse in your living room and make all those promises.

    Otherwise, definition of a PPD, reenacting what people assume to be a marriage when really you just wanted to show off in a pretty dress.

    image
    image
    slothiegallovegood90
  • I see your point (kinda). The paper doesn't insure that he'll always love you. The paper is the physical display of the commitment that you're pledging your love but that doesn't mean that you can just have a PPD. The party isn't the commitment. The party is just a party. At least that paper means that H is willing to stay with me forever. What does the party mean? That you could throw a party.

    The commitment is made every day, not on the day you have the party. I saw a quote once that said "Marriage is waking up next to your husband and thinking: I could strangle him or make breakfast. Oh well, pancakes it is."

    That paper does however give you legal rights. That party doesn't give you squat.
    flyingfoxesleelabear[Deleted User]themuffinman16
  • LondonLisaLondonLisa London, UK member
    Seventh Anniversary 2500 Comments 500 Love Its 5 Answers
    leelabear said:
    I think my point was missed. The commitment made is more important than the marriage license. The definition of a PPD makes this legal document the most important. 

    Yes, the marriage license matters. It gives you a lot of legal rights. Its something LGBT should fight for. I'm just pointing out that it shouldn't be the keystone in your marriage. 
    Yes, Mel Gibson is an ars and Braveheart is riddled with historic inaccuracies. That wasn't the point I was making. 
    Yes, most people that get married one day and have a party the next do have PPDs suited by both yours and my definition. And they should acknowledge and let people know it is a PPD. 
    Yes, most people should do better planning so all these things can happen on the same day. But a small amount of people can't for understandable reasons. They shouldn't be thrown under the bus, be labeled, have guests who are so offended that they actually don't attend the "PPD" party, etc. 

    My point is the definition of a PPD gives the marriage license more importance than the commitment. 

    Name one situation where the two people can't say vows to each other when signing the marriage license. What is an understandable reason? I'm genuinely curious. I can't think of one other than poor planning and the vanity of a poofy white dress day...
    Kahlyla[Deleted User]
  • leelabear said:
    I think my point was missed. The commitment made is more important than the marriage license. The definition of a PPD makes this legal document the most important. 

    Yes, the marriage license matters. It gives you a lot of legal rights. Its something LGBT should fight for. I'm just pointing out that it shouldn't be the keystone in your marriage. 
    Yes, Mel Gibson is an ars and Braveheart is riddled with historic inaccuracies. That wasn't the point I was making. 
    Yes, most people that get married one day and have a party the next do have PPDs suited by both yours and my definition. And they should acknowledge and let people know it is a PPD. 
    Yes, most people should do better planning so all these things can happen on the same day. But a small amount of people can't for understandable reasons. They shouldn't be thrown under the bus, be labeled, have guests who are so offended that they actually don't attend the "PPD" party, etc. 

    My point is the definition of a PPD gives the marriage license more importance than the commitment. 

    Name one situation where the two people can't say vows to each other when signing the marriage license. What is an understandable reason? I'm genuinely curious. I can't think of one other than poor planning and the vanity of a poofy white dress day...
    I would also like to know this. And really, @leelabear, you keep on speaking as if this is a hypothetical. I expect it's rather that you're trying to get validation for your own situation but without giving this 'understandable reason' you think you have. Do tell, please.
    image
    [Deleted User]
  • lyndausvilyndausvi Western Slope, Colorado mod
    Moderator Knottie Warrior 10000 Comments 500 Love Its
    My point would be "that piece of paper" might not be MORE important to some. I get it, some people want the religious ceremony or formally say their vows in front of family and friends and for whatever reason (some legit, some not-so-much) circumstance prevented that.  More than a lot of knotties I get that part.  I really do.


    image

    C'mon mon,  the paper has to be at least AS important.  No?   Let's face it, if it wasn't at least as important why bother getting first or even at all for that matter?  You can say vows in front of your friends and family without that piece of paper, no?

    I expect adults to own their choices.    If you feel the need to get that paper license before you say your vows in front of family and friends OWN THAT SHIT.  Don't go around pretending the paper one isn't important.  That piece of paper IS IMPORTANT or you would never have gotten in the first place.  FACT.   

    At least in my world if you own your shit.  Tell everyone you got married in the courthouse but are planning a vow renewal we will support you.  Hell, we like a good party.   If you pretend the legal one didn't happen and go around planning a "real wedding" we will not.   And trust me, in most states marriage licenses are public record.   It will get out.  It always does.






    What differentiates an average host and a great host is anticipating unexpressed needs and wants of their guests.  Just because the want/need is not expressed, doesn't mean it wouldn't be appreciated. 
    Kahlyla[Deleted User]libra44423BESki2017
  • emmaaaemmaaa North Carolina mod
    Moderator 2500 Comments 500 Love Its Fourth Anniversary
    This is one of the most confusing threads I've read in a while. Why did this "hypothetical" couple HAVE to get legally married before they could do anything else? 

    In case I am missing something, whenever you get your marriage license and then have the JOP or someone else oversee your wedding (yes wedding, this "hypothetical" couple had a wedding) you probably had the option of saying vows.

    You said that vows and the verbal commitment are important to you and perhaps more important than a piece of paper. Was the proposal not a verbal commitment? What about when this hypothetical couple verbally decided to go get married? All of that is a commitment. It is no one else's fault, othern than the couple, that they got married privately, that's what some people really want.

    Have your "hypothetical" couple have a celebration with dancing, drinking, and food and move on.



  • OP, I think we would all have a much easier trying to follow your logic if you would just explain your situation that you are trying to have validated.
  • larrygagalarrygaga Czechoslovakia member
    2500 Comments 500 Love Its First Anniversary First Answer
    edited January 2015
    That is pretty much the definition of a PPD. And really, I have yet to hear a reason that genuinely prevented any couple from planning a wedding party that coincided with their legal marriage. I have only ever heard reasons that indicated the couple was shit at planning and/or unwilling to jump through the hoops to get what they wanted.
    TOTALLY
    Gay people sometimes have to leave their state but don't want to force everyone to attend a DW.

    Which in my opinion is the only fair PPD. Anything else is a lame excuse. Military related, foreigner related or even insurance purposes are all lame excuses and can be avoided. 
    Wedding Countdown Ticker
    image

  • larrygagalarrygaga Czechoslovakia member
    2500 Comments 500 Love Its First Anniversary First Answer
    leelabear said:

    Well, I guess that settles it then. It’s a pretty princess day.

    To be honest, it really saddens me that this seems to be the case. I guess my view of getting married is a little different than everybody else’s. To me marriage is a promise, a commitment to another human being. The point of becoming married comes when you tell that person you will be there for them. I’m sure everyone may have slightly different wording for this. Some people write their own vows (promises and commitments) and others prefer to use the standard version (in sickness and in health, etc.). For those who believe in God, it might involve saying these commitments with as Him as a witness. These commitments along with love and understanding are what hold a couple together.

    To me getting married isn’t about the white dress, the perfect reception, the gifts, the sendoff, or the traditions. It’s also not about a piece of paper that tells my government I’m in a legal contract with another person. Is that what marriage is to you? A legal marriage contract doesn’t make me feel confident that someone will cheer me up when I am down, hug me when I need one, or hold my hand when I am on my deathbed.

    Maybe perhaps, my view on marriage is rather skewed. It could be that I watched too many movies growing up. Like in Brave Heart how William Wallace married Murron in secret so he didn’t have to share his wife with an Englishman. Technically his marriage wasn’t legal by today’s standards.

    So when people define a PPD by having anything marriage like including vow exchange on a day after the day they only legally got married, I think it’s sad. One the other hand, I can completely agree it’s a PPD if a couple vow/commit themselves to each other one day and then have an over the top party with reenactment vows another day.

    I cannot agree that marriage is simply a piece of paper handed out by our government. It’s sad that so many people view it this way. 

    Marriage is exactly a legal document. Otherwise everyone would just stay boyfriend and girlfriend.  The loving commitment you speak of is recorded on a piece of paper so it's legal and recognized by basically everyone ever. The emotional commitment could be covered by a very serious set of boyfriend girlfriend or whatever LGBT combo it is. 

    Didn't want to exclude LGBT. 

    LGBTQ* I think is what it is now?
    Wedding Countdown Ticker
    image

  • flantasticflantastic The Midwest member
    2500 Comments Fifth Anniversary 500 Love Its 5 Answers

    Regarding marriage as more than just a piece of paper from the government...

    In my faith, the "real" marriage is also the religious covenant. The religious promises therein are very important to me, because we do believe that making them changes both of you in a spiritual way, and that you've specifically promised before God to be husband and wife forever.

    HOWEVER... This belief can't be used as an excuse to say the signing of the government paper doesn't matter. Because a) if the benefits accorded by the government by said piece of paper truly didn't matter at all, we wouldn't bother to get one and b) separating the marriage license from my marriage is defrauding the government for my own convenience. If I truly don't believe that I'm married until I make the religious promises, then I can't tell the government I'm married when I'm not, just for the legal benefits. So PPDs are still out.

    If you really believe that the "emotional commitment" or vows are when your marriage truly happens, you can't divorce the marriage license from that day without being fraudulent.*

    *Unless you live in France and are required to

    Tweetiepie19adwks
  • @larrygaga I believe the full acronym is now LGBTQIA (questioning, intersex, asexual on those last three)

    And I agree with you that SSM is the only excuse I find acceptable in a PPD scenario.
    image
This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards