Not Engaged Yet
Options

2 weddings non military

So when ever the 2 weddings for military people come up I always wonder, what about religious reasons?  Is that acceptable to people? 

In Utah its not uncommon to have a civil ceremony and wait a year to have your temple (eternal) wedding.  In some situations you are required by the temple to wait a year (I'm not sure why).  The temple wedding is considered the real and important one because the other is only for this lifetime (where as in a temple wedding there is no death do us part) and your not married in the eyes of God. When my family moved to Utah the neighbors told us they had been married for different amounts of time, the wife counting from the temple wedding, husband from the civil.   

What do people think about this?  Is it ok?  Is it different if you get civilly married before you are allowed to get married in a Catholic church or before you can have a Jewish wedding then in an LDS community where its common?

Sorry if this makes no sense, I'm KUI.  I just have a lot more experience with religious second weddings than military ones and wondered what people thought. I've never found it odd to have your religious wedding be fake, but considered more important, maybe its because I grew up around it. 
image

Re: 2 weddings non military

  • Options
    ravenrayravenray member
    5 Love Its Name Dropper First Anniversary Combo Breaker
    edited December 2011

    My father finally converted in our church in May.  In August my parents got "re-married" in the church.  They have been legally married for 15 years.  Not that our church doesn't recognize marriages unless you are married there, but it is a good thing to get remarried if you were married outside the church beforehand.  It was really cool to be able to attend my parents wedding.  There is also another couple in my church who can't get married civilly because she (who has MS) will lose all of her health benefits, so they got married in the church but with no wedding certificate... I have seen it work both ways.  I think it depends on what is important to you, your marriage in the church or your civil service.  To me my marriage in the church would be more important, but if you aren't religious I can see how that wouldn't matter.  Also if you need benefits based on work the civil service would be important too.

    "Love is not affectionate feeling, but a steady wish for the loved person's ultimate good as far as it can be obtained"-C.S. Lewis

    Married! May 27th, 2012

  • Options
    edited December 2011
    i seriously couldn't read through this because I am KUI but I will take this poll in the morning. it seems important and interesting :)
    Wedding Countdown Ticker
  • Options
    bethsmilesbethsmiles member
    First Anniversary First Comment First Answer 5 Love Its
    edited December 2011
    I'm from a very LDS community and really JOPing it before the real ceremony is not common. I know 1 couple who has done it, and they only did because her husband was not temple worthy at the time they got married. So they had their wedding and THEN they got sealed in the temple later (but when the had the religious ceremony they didn't act like it was a new wedding, they didn't have a reception, and she didn't have a another pretty princess day). IMO you get one or the other, you don't get both.


  • Options
    KatyRoseMKatyRoseM member
    First Anniversary First Comment
    edited December 2011

    When I was growing up it seemed like LDS would have a civil ceremony if one wasn't temple worthy, or a family member who wanted to see the wedding wasn't temple worthy.  So they would have a civil wedding for non LDS family, then a religious one for the rest of the community a year latter.  I'm not LDS so I don't really know what the requirements are, I just know what receptions I was invited to (oddly perhaps it was always the temple part that they had a reception for).  Perhaps its not that common if your LDS and not in the Salt Lake gentile community. 

    I hope this wasn't offensive in any way, its just something I observed. 

    image
  • Options
    edited December 2011
    In my experience with LDS, the temple wedding is their "real" wedding, they JOP just to sign some papers to make them married by law, and then they only have one reception. I think the problem with two weddings is when people try to have double weddings for double attention or double presents.
    Anniversary
  • Options
    KatyRoseMKatyRoseM member
    First Anniversary First Comment
    edited December 2011
    If the problem is asking for twice the party and attention then why is there a problem with general second "weddings"?  They didn't get attention and such for the first one, why is this different? I'm really asking, I just don't know. 
    image
  • Options
    heyimbrenheyimbren member
    First Comment
    edited December 2011
    In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_2-weddings-non-military?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special Topic Wedding BoardsForum:136Discussion:ea354ead-afef-4bc2-9ae5-a49db4aeff10Post:a33f2042-e44a-458c-aa5c-4bfb7701abcc">Re: 2 weddings non military</a>:
    [QUOTE]If the problem is asking for twice the party and attention then why is there a problem with general second "weddings"?  They didn't get attention and such for the first one, why is this different? I'm really asking, I just don't know. 
    Posted by KatyRoseM[/QUOTE]

    Here's my reasoning, but I'm not sure if any one else feels the way I do:
    Second weddings normally bother me because it does seem like trying to eat your cake and have it too.
    If a religion REQUIRES you to wait a year after signing the papers, then so be it. That's extenuating circumstances.
    But if someone chooses to have a DW, then also wants an AHR I just see that as them not dealing with the consequences of their choice to have a DW. Same with eloping. If you really want to elope, great, but don't expect all the traditional aspects of a wedding too.
    It does bother me when people JoP it, then have their "real wedding" later when they have more money. Honestly, if you're in that much of a rush to get married, then that's your the priority and I feel like you should forfeit the wedding.

    But like I said in the other military post, I wouldn't fuss about it. But those are my thoughts.
  • Options
    Elle1036Elle1036 member
    First Anniversary 5 Love Its Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    edited December 2011
    In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_2-weddings-non-military?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special%20Topic%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:136Discussion:ea354ead-afef-4bc2-9ae5-a49db4aeff10Post:76ec3df8-d606-4f78-84cc-b77b1caa346c">Re: 2 weddings non military</a>:
    [QUOTE]In my experience with LDS, the temple wedding is their "real" wedding, they JOP just to sign some papers to make them married by law, and then they only have one reception. <strong>I think the problem with two weddings is when people try to have double weddings for double attention or double presents.</strong>
    Posted by Narwhal[/QUOTE]

    I may be completely wrong, but my impression on the military thread was that the girls were disapproving of people who had a big ceremony and a reception when they were already legally married, despite having done the JOP ceremony in secret.  I didn't think there was any mention of doubling up, and I think it's the same here.

    I do find it interesting that the votes are pretty different here than on the military thread.  Why is it ok to do it for religious reasons but not for military reasons?
  • Options
    Ana_2985Ana_2985 member
    First Comment
    edited December 2011
    In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_2-weddings-non-military?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special%20Topic%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:136Discussion:ea354ead-afef-4bc2-9ae5-a49db4aeff10Post:fc70f28e-d18f-4dac-8ff3-45212d34ba29">Re: 2 weddings non military</a>:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: 2 weddings non military : I may be completely wrong, but my impression on the military thread was that the girls were disapproving of people who had a big ceremony and a reception when they were already legally married, despite having done the JOP ceremony in secret.  I didn't think there was any mention of doubling up, and I think it's the same here. I do find it interesting that the votes are pretty different here than on the military thread.  <strong>Why is it ok to do it for religious reasons but not for military reasons?</strong>
    Posted by Elle1036[/QUOTE]

    In the military situation, you have the choice to have the civil and religious ceremonies together. In the religious situation, you do not have that option.
    Image and video hosting by TinyPic
  • Options
    calindicalindi member
    First Anniversary Combo Breaker First Comment
    edited December 2011
    In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_2-weddings-non-military?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special%20Topic%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:136Discussion:ea354ead-afef-4bc2-9ae5-a49db4aeff10Post:fc70f28e-d18f-4dac-8ff3-45212d34ba29">Re: 2 weddings non military</a>:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: 2 weddings non military : I may be completely wrong, but my impression on the military thread was that the girls were disapproving of people who had a big ceremony and a reception when they were already legally married, despite having done the JOP ceremony in secret.  I didn't think there was any mention of doubling up, and I think it's the same here. I do find it interesting that the votes are pretty different here than on the military thread.  Why is it ok to do it for religious reasons but not for military reasons?
    Posted by Elle1036[/QUOTE]

    From my perspective, the main difference is you get real tangible benefits from being married in the military.  If you're getting married for the purpose of accessing benefits (and thus using money that is allotted from tax dollars) then it is only right if you are acknowledging you are actually married to those around you.  If you're pretending you're not married but accepting benefits allotted for married couples, you're acting deceptively, not only to your family but also to the government.

    The difference for me is when people hide the fact that they're married.  In the LDS situation, it doesn't sound like they're hiding it - simply that they view one as legal and one as religious, and they really only celebrate one of those days.  They respect the JOP as getting married, but not as the religious blessing of the union, and that's fine in my opinion.

    *Edited due to excessive long-windedness and beating a dead horse*

    image

    Anniversary

  • Options
    calindicalindi member
    First Anniversary Combo Breaker First Comment
    edited December 2011
    In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_not-engaged-yet_2-weddings-non-military?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special%20Topic%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:136Discussion:ea354ead-afef-4bc2-9ae5-a49db4aeff10Post:fc70f28e-d18f-4dac-8ff3-45212d34ba29">Re: 2 weddings non military</a>:
    [QUOTE] I do find it interesting that the votes are pretty different here than on the military thread.  Why is it ok to do it for religious reasons but not for military reasons?
    Posted by Elle1036[/QUOTE]

    I don't find the votes that different... in the military thread, the resounding answer was that it's not a big deal to JOP first as long as it's not kept a secret.  It doesn't sound like the LDS society is getting married in secret to make extra money from the government - it sounds like it's part of the requirements of the religion.

    image

    Anniversary

  • Options
    Elle1036Elle1036 member
    First Anniversary 5 Love Its Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    edited December 2011
    Cate -- I think what surprises me is that there are zero votes for "yes but the civil ceremony is more important" when the opinion on your thread seemed to be exactly that.

    I get that it's important to a lot of couples to have their marriages recognized by their church, but, in the same way, it's important for a lot of couples to celebrate their marriage with their families.  I just don't see what's so different about the two situations, though I do understand that what most of you have a problem with is the deception.
This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards