Please Settle this Debate

soontobehanby · February 2013

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_please-settle-this-debate?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:09008b65-244d-4ee3-af26-093aa0c3ea11Post:14825e96-b019-4ae9-840c-a7e0bec328c8">Re: Please Settle this Debate</a>:
[QUOTE]I do think having an option for them is ok if you honestly can't afford an open bar. (I know this hypothetical). I do also think dry weddings are ok. It's up to the bride/groom! I'm just curious, some people are being offended by coming back with the fact they are having a dry bar. Aren't you being just as rude by hating on the ladies who DO/DID have a cash bar and calling it tacky/rude/not ok etc? I have an open bar set up so this really doesn't pertain to me but I think some people need to learn to throw less stones. Just bc it's not the way YOU would do it, doesn't mean it's wrong or rude. I have been to a mixture of open, cash, and then even cash limit weddings where you buy your drink after the bar reaches a certain tab. They all turned out just great. But to the OP, I do think as a guest you should never EXPECT alcohol. You should go wanting to see your friends marry. So I don't think it's worse one way or another, it's each bride's opinion for her own wedding is what's ok!
Posted by gypsylynn2005[/QUOTE]<div>
</div><div>I don't think cash bars are rude because I am having a dry wedding. I think they are rude because they are. And most people who have dry weddings because they can't afford open bars did so because they are rude.

</div>

AddieCake · February 2013

Not every event or dinner or even restaurant a person goes to involves alcohol. People are not being bad hosts if they don't provide it as an option because guests are not entitled to it.

allychase · February 2013

Mud

hoffse · February 2013

PPs all gave good reasons why cash bars are rude from an etiquette standpoint. I can give you another reason why they are rude from a practical standpoint: some guests don't bring cash. Personally, I never do.

I have been to many weddings both with and without bars. All were lovely. I have been to only one that had a cash bar, and it was by far the most frustrating one for me, because I do prefer a drink but I am also fully capable of enjoying myself without one, as long as the other guests are doing the same. I couldn't participate in the cash bar because I was carrying no cash. I never carry cash or credit cards to a wedding, because I have had purses stolen twice and both times were awful. I carry keys, some lip gloss, MAYBE my cell phone (if FI is not there) and that is it. I know many other women who do the same thing - stuff gets stolen or lost at weddings (search for that topic under stolen wedding gifts).

That particular wedding FI was a groomsman - so he also didn't bring his wallet with him other than his drivers' license. The bride required them to change out of their tuxes at the venue after the wedding was over, and we were concerned it would get lost. So I carried everything essential for him. This particular cash bar also ONLY took cash, so even if we had had his wallet we wouldn't have been able to get drinks anyway since he doesn't carry cash either.

So I have been the guest at the wedding where alcohol was an "option" but that still didn't give me adequate access to it. You know what? That really sucks, and it was rude as hell to have it available to some (who had come properly equipped with actual cash) but not available to all. I vastly preferred the dry weddings I have been to, where nobody has a drink and are all still able to function and enjoy themselves.

If you want to drink so badly at every wedding you go to and aren't capable of enjoying yourself without a drink, then do what generations of people have done before you and bring a flask for the car.

Jen4948 · February 2013

If you attend a wedding without alcohol, but you want to drink, you have two options:

1) Suck it up and try to have a good time anyway. This was why you were invited-to have a good time with the couple, their families, and their other guests. If you can't do that, your only other option is
2) Leave and get a drink on your own time and dime. This does reveal you to care more about your ability to get alcohol than the couple's feelings.

nextrightthing · February 2013

I can't get over the part about "having sobriety forced on me." If that's how you feel about not drinking at a wedding, that sounds like a problem to me.

I guess the bottom line is, most people think it is rude to have a cash bar. If you want to do it anyway, be aware that some/most of your guests are going to be talking about you and thinking you are rude.

loca4pook · February 2013

I personally think a "cash bar" wouldn't bother me nor would a sober wedding. I get that not everyone could afford it so I am not sure I would really care. I think it would only bother me if I knew they were loaded, and just being cheap... I agree that I would much prefer the option to BUY a drink, than to have nothing to drink. IF the couple is religious and there is no liquor for that reason, I'd be fine too, though

I had some co-workers go to a wedding recently that served 1 bottle of wine to each table and that was it. They said tables were bribing other tables to fork over their bottle if it wasn't being used. to ME, I would have been mortified as a bride to know that happened and I would have felt llike a bad host.

We got into this same discussion following that situation and everynoe agreed, they would MUCH prefer a cash bar, than a sober wedding. They said this wedding was super boring (it also had an IPOD as a dJ), so they all left early.....

emeejeeayen · February 2013

I think this depends on the type of wedding, to be honest.

I personally would never host a cash bar, never.

BUT if I were to go to a wedding of a somewhat distant friend, there were like 500 people there and I knew only 2-3, I would be upset if there weren't alcohol. (I'm socially awkward, so sue me.) If I had the option to buy alcohol, I would happily do so in that situation.

However, if it were my best friend's wedding of 50-100 people, and I knew half the people there, I would have no problem with a dry wedding, and I would think a cash bar very odd.

dtbluv · February 2013

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_please-settle-this-debate?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:09008b65-244d-4ee3-af26-093aa0c3ea11Post:3188e13a-e574-4ea0-85ac-5db9c8963133">Re: Please Settle this Debate</a>:
[QUOTE]I personally think a "cash bar" wouldn't bother me nor would a sober wedding. I get that not everyone could afford it so I am not sure I would really care. I think it would only bother me if I knew they were loaded, and just being cheap... I agree that I would much prefer the option to BUY a drink, than to have nothing to drink. IF the couple is religious and there is no liquor for that reason, I'd be fine too, though I had some co-workers go to a wedding recently that served 1 bottle of wine to each table and that was it. They said tables were bribing other tables to fork over their bottle if it wasn't being used. to ME, I would have been mortified as a bride to know that happened and I would have felt llike a bad host. We got into this same discussion following that situation and everynoe agreed, they would MUCH prefer a cash bar, than a sober wedding.<strong> They said this wedding was super boring</strong> (it also had an IPOD as a dJ), so they all left early.....
Posted by loca4pook[/QUOTE]

I have no problem with dry weddings, however I do think the dry weddings that take place at night, with looooong receptions and don't have a dj that is good at getting the party going are kind of boring. I mean, you can only stand around and talk for so long. I prefer dry weddings in the day time, or with shorter (4 hours at the most) receptions. I'm not going to boycott night time dry weddings or anything, but unless there is an awesome dj to get everyone dancing (or something going on besides chit chatting all night) I'd duck out early.

I do think cash bars are rude though. There are many ways to have a fun, beautiful, classy, budget-friendly wedding that do not resort to having a cash bar.

LDubHawksFan · February 2013

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_please-settle-this-debate?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:09008b65-244d-4ee3-af26-093aa0c3ea11Post:d9b04b76-f462-41ed-ba5a-6d597f8e6375">Re: Please Settle this Debate</a>:
[QUOTE]It's not ok to expect your guests to pay for all their alcohol. You can do something like what I'm doing. I'm providing the champagne toast, and the wine with dinner. If they want more than that then there is a bar where they can get more but it will be for purchase. I know lots of people can't afford an endless open bar, but you should provide something. Be it a signature drink or the toast etc.
Posted by katasiamarie[/QUOTE]

That <em>is </em>a cash bar though. If your guests have to purchase drinks, then it's a cash bar.

LDubHawksFan · February 2013

I've been to all kinds, fully hosted, hosted (beer and wine), partially cash bar, and dry weddings. I don't like cash bars for the same reasons listed above. Your guests shouldn't be paying for anything, and more importantly, I rarely bring much, if any, cash with me to weddings.

Summer2011Bride · February 2013

This would be like serving pasta but telling your guests if they really wanted steak, they could pay for it and eat that instead. Don't you see how bizarre that is, to say you are denying your guests a desire? As a host, it's not your job to make their every wish and desire come true. It IS your job to be a proper host, which includes not making them pay for something at your wedding.

There is a middle ground between cash bar and full open bar. We hosted beer and wine--quite a variety of both, actually. Our guests were completely happy with their options, we didn't break the bank, and none of them had to open their wallets.

LDubHawksFan · February 2013

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_please-settle-this-debate?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:09008b65-244d-4ee3-af26-093aa0c3ea11Post:c12320e2-eab8-4d1f-b2e0-2327d895e7ec">Re: Please Settle this Debate</a>:
[QUOTE]This would be like serving pasta but telling your guests if they really wanted steak, they could pay for it and eat that instead. Don't you see how bizarre that is, to say you are denying your guests a desire? As a host, it's not your job to make their every wish and desire come true. It IS your job to be a proper host, which includes not making them pay for something at your wedding. There is a middle ground between cash bar and full open bar. We hosted beer and wine--quite a variety of both, actually. Our guests were completely happy with their options, we didn't break the bank, and none of them had to open their wallets.
Posted by Summer2011Bride[/QUOTE]

btw, I always love this analogy, because honestly at weddings, I'm really <em>desiring</em> a nice prime rib steak, but often get chicken. I can't believe all my friends have always denied my desire! haha OP, host what you can afford without making your guests pay. Wine and beer is a very acceptable option that is much more affordable than an open bar.

OjoGrande · February 2013

So as clearly as I can understand it...

It is improper etiquette as so named from the etiquette fairy to have a cash bar.

I also get the impression that most people would prefer to have access to a cash bar as opposed to no access.

Perhaps the etiquette fairy should update her/his standards?

Thanks to all the posters who couldn't get past my calling an idea terrible and asserted I was calling them terrible.

Thanks to the lady who decided this was MUD because I wished to have intelligent recourse about a topic.

Thanks to the lady who called me an idiot. Way to make an ad hominem attack an invalidate any point you have ever made on this board.

Thanks to the posters who understood my general point and made me see the merits of their arguments. I still disagree, but that's ok.

Take it easy

MoonlightSilver · February 2013

I always stay out of the threads about what to do with the bar, because my opinion is different than etiquette.

As a guest, I would rather have an open bar. If that's not an option, I would rather have a limited hosted bar with additional alcoholic choices for cash. Etiquette says you just have the limited hosted bar, and not have any other alcohol on premises. But if you only host beer and wine, then I wouldn't be able to have a drink, because I don't drink beer and wine. But if you have hard liquor/cider/etc availabe for cash, at least I have the choice to pay for it and get it instead of not having any at all.

In the situation above, no one has to open their wallets. They can choose to do so, if they'd like. I think there can be a difference between "you must open your wallet to have a drink" and "you don't have to open your wallet unless you want to."

And I say all this as someone who A) doesn't drink more than 1-2 drinks a night and

someone who usually doesn't bring money to a wedding.

hoffse · February 2013

OP, the problem here is that a particular preference =/= etiquette. A very basic definition is social rules that we impose on ourselves to make others more comfortable. That's all it is in a nutshell. Hosting a bar is more comfortable than not hosting a bar. Having no alocholic option, however, is more comfortable for most people than having an option that only some are able to access (because many people won't show up to a wedding with cash, as I mentioned above). That's why it's rude. You may prefer to have a cash bar versus a non-cash bar (because maybe you are somebody who carries cash with you), but that doesn't make it the correct choice from an etiquette standpoint. It's like my nextdoor neighbor at my office. He has this thing where he basically screams into a phone (on speaker phone) and hardly ever shuts his door. I have to shut mine instead so I can get work done. Would I like to tell him to STFU? Would it be my preference to ask him to at least be the one to close his door when he takes a call? Of course it is. But would I say that to him? No - because then I would be the rude one and not him.

For couples who have no opposition to alcohol for religious or recovery reasons, there is ALWAYS a way to host it properly. Always. This might mean buying a wedding dress that doesn't cost thousands of dollars. Or using fake flowers instead of real ones. Or having an ipod instead of a DJ. Or hosting the reception in sombody's back yard rather than renting out a venue. Or (gasp) inviting fewer people. But it can always always be done. There is never an instance when hosting a cash bar should be a necessity because the couple wants alcohol available but "can't afford" to pay for it themselves. These couples who claim they can't afford it want to have their cake and eat it too. That wedding I went to with the cash bar? The groom paid for everything. He told his bride he could afford to host 30 people. She decided she "couldn't live" (yes those were her words) without at least 100 guests. That's why they had a cash bar - she wasn't willing to be realistic with their budget.

lauralaur · February 2013

In most of my experiences with cash bars, it was cash bar because whoever was paying for the wedding simply did not want to pay for the bar. It was a "why should I pay for people to get drunk?" mentality, and that bothered me. I have friends who said an open bar was too expensive, but they paid $18k for their wedding, which they could not afford by the way, because they had to have the full experience, but screw the bar. I have never in my experience seen a cash bar for any other reason than "are you kidding me? I'm not paying for that! People can pay for it if they really want it." And that, I would call rude.

EK2013 · February 2013

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_please-settle-this-debate?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:09008b65-244d-4ee3-af26-093aa0c3ea11Post:e822a111-1210-452f-ae86-b07393597bdc">Re: Please Settle this Debate</a>:
[QUOTE]So as clearly as I can understand it... It is improper etiquette as so named from the etiquette fairy to have a cash bar. I also get the impression that most people would prefer to have access to a cash bar as opposed to no access. Perhaps the etiquette fairy should update her/his standards? Thanks to all the posters who couldn't get past my calling an idea terrible and asserted I was calling them terrible. Thanks to the lady who decided this was MUD because I wished to have intelligent recourse about a topic. Thanks to the lady who called me an idiot. Way to make an ad hominem attack an invalidate any point you have ever made on this board. Thanks to the posters who understood my general point and made me see the merits of their arguments. <strong>I still disagree</strong>, but that's ok. Take it easy
Posted by OjoGrande[/QUOTE]<div>
</div><div>Are you disagreeing as to what is your preference, or as to what is more rude? You get to pick <em>your </em>preference (cash bar) but you do not get to pick what <em>the rest of the world at large </em>will find more rude. In the same vein, though, neither do I. Neither of us has polled a representative sample.</div><div>
</div><div>However, hoffse's story shines an important light on why a cash bar might be perceived as rude in a situation where hosted alcohol was not available.</div><div>
</div><div><div>Can you imagine hosting a party where some people might want to partake in alcohol but not be able to afford it (either generally speaking or simply because they do not have cash)?</div><div>
</div><div>I would feel terrible if a choice I made meant some of my guests felt <em>poor </em>all night, watching those with money drink the night away. And what if some of my guests started contemplating borrowing money from another guest if they wanted to drink a cocktail? Awkward for both the borrower and the lender!</div><div>
</div><div>Philosophically, I understand if you prefer to have alcohol around and available, and if you and your loved ones would be willing to pay to purchase it. </div><div>
</div><div>I have never heard of anyone opting to skip alcohol for purely financial reasons. I could never imagine someone judging someone who had a dry wedding because<span style="font-size:11px;line-height:14px;"> 1) the reception area (e.g. some churches) does not permit alcohol to be served or 2) one of the B&G/their VIPs is in recovery. I hope you would agree that there exist very legitimate reasons that a B&G would not want alcohol at their wedding even if some of their guests might prefer to drink.</span></div><div><span style="font-size:11px;line-height:14px;">
</span></div><div><span style="font-size:11px;line-height:14px;">I would never bring cash to a wedding, for the same reasons as hoffse described. If I were told ahead of time that there would be only a cash bar, I would at least know it was (let's be serious) <em>expected </em>of me to bring cash--but I also probably wouldn't attend, because none of my nearest and dearest would make that choice<em>. </em></span><span style="font-size:11px;line-height:14px;">I would probably assume that cash bar also means cuts were made as to the quality of the meal and entertainment. Sure that's not always true, but that's just me.</span></div><div><span style="font-size:11px;line-height:14px;">
</span></div><div><span style="font-size:11px;line-height:14px;">I also would not be put out to discover I was at a dry wedding because, while I will drink if alcohol is offered, I can be just as happy with other options.</span></div></div><div><span style="font-size:11px;line-height:14px;">
</span></div><div><span style="font-size:11px;line-height:14px;">I don't know why you asked TK to "Settle this Debate" if you'd already settled it for yourself....</span></div>

jczutell · February 2013

I agree I cash bar is MUCH better then a dry wedding. I worked weddings the whole way throught college and for a year after (one to three wedding a weekend), and let me tell you nothing clears out faster than a dry wedding. Guest will not stay very long after then dinner hour. You can put money on it.

ladyomnipotent · February 2013

I also think that a cash bar is preferable to a dry wedding. I don't believe alcohol is necessary for a good time, but a lot of people do, and the reality is that they will be unhappy if they have no option to obtain alcohol.

hoffse · February 2013

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_please-settle-this-debate?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:09008b65-244d-4ee3-af26-093aa0c3ea11Post:7ed78676-d1d5-44c5-b1b4-9daf5294eeb9">Re: Please Settle this Debate</a>:
[QUOTE]I also think that a cash bar is preferable to a dry wedding. I don't believe alcohol is necessary for a good time, but a lot of people do, and the reality is that they will be unhappy if they have no option to obtain alcohol.
Posted by ladyomnipotent[/QUOTE]

<div>But then the bride and groom should find a way to host it. That's all anybody here is saying. There is ALWAYS a way to make alcohol available - be it finding a new venue or making cuts elsewhere.</div>

katasiamarie · February 2013

No they don't have to purchse wine or champagne, just everything else.

magnificentred · February 2013

Personally, every wedding I've been to was cash bar. In most cases, the couple provided champagne for toasting, in one or two, sparkling cider was provided for toasting. No guests I have ever spoken with at any of these weddings had any problem with it being a cash bar, so my perspective of the etiquette in the situation has always been skewed. I believe proper etiquette is really dictated by what your guests are used to/OK with, not necessarily what tradition dictates. For example, all of these weddings also had a Money Dance, even though etiquette dictates this to also be tacky. Most guests in my area are very familiar with the Money Dance and see it as a cute way to contribute a little something extra while also grabbing a few precious, private moments to congratulate the couple. At my own brother's wedding, the money dance was pretty much the only time I got to speak to him at all what with his other hosting duties.

I also attended a wedding where the bride and groom were both non-drinkers (just out of preference) and so they had no bar, but provided champagne for toasting only to the few guests who really wanted it (and everyone else had cider for toasting). My point is, in all of these cases, the guests were happy to be there and no one was hurt or offended. I think any choice regarding alcohol that fits the bride and groom would be acceptable to their loved ones.

That said, my FI and I do want to serve alcohol. He doesn't enjoy drinking himself, but both our families tend to have alcohol at family events. He also feels very strongly, and I agree, about no one getting over-served (because frankly, out-and-out drunk people never really *improve* a celebration). In my family, at least, this can be a bit of a touchy subject and there are a couple family members in various stages of recovery. So we're planning to host a limited bar for that reason. OP, personally I giggled reading this thread because of the excessive use of new analogies. As though the analogies were tag-teaming each other to try to break your argument down, when really they were all the same thing (and look! They are multiplying! I just made an analogy about analogies!). It's unfortunate that this discussion became so heated when all you wanted was a reasoned debate of the issue at hand.

Peledreamsofrain · February 2013

In my family, alcohol is important. Without going into a boring list of reasons, the primary reason being my father is a wine columnist. To my husband and I, having a wedding without alcohol at the reception was out of the question. With that in mind, I would be MORTIFIED to make guests pay, despite our lack of being rich. We cut back on other items, and cut the guest list to 75 people so that we could be sure that we could host to the hilt.

But that doesn't mean I expect everyone to be my clone, and look down my nose and sniff at dry weddings. Nor does it mean that I would pout about a lack of a bar at a dry wedding. Alcohol is part of our family culture, but it's not the basis upon which we do everything. It isn't REQUIRED for us to spend our evenings as a family unit.

Is it more likely that we would leave earlier from a dry reception than a reception with open bar? Yes. But couples throwing a dry wedding are aware of that, and probably aren't planning on partying late into the night anyway.

You don't show up at someone's house, look through their fridge, scowl at them, then go to the gas station to blatantly purchase what you want. That's seriously rude. When you are someone's guest, you accept the reality that you aren't in your own home, and won't have access to absolutely everything you want. That's not the host being rude, it's just reality. Nobody can provide everything that everyone could ever want ever at an event.

If the above fact ruins your day when you attend a hosted event, then I really feel sorry for you, because that means you spend more of your time unhappy than happy when you are with your friends. And that would seriously suck.

MobKaz · February 2013

EK..........

Are you disagreeing as to what is your preference, or as to what is more rude? You get to pick your preference (cash bar) but you do not get to pick what the rest of the world at large will find more rude. In the same vein, though, neither do I. Neither of us has polled a representative sample.

However, hoffse's story shines an important light on why a cash bar might be perceived as rude in a situation where hosted alcohol was not available.

Can you imagine hosting a party where some people might want to partake in alcohol but not be able to afford it (either generally speaking or simply because they do not have cash)?

Perhaps this is a generational thing, or a "Type A" personality issue, but I honestly cannot fathom leaving my house without ANY type of cash/credit card on me. Stuff happens. Cars break down. On the way you realize you forgot to fill up the car. Pants rip (this actually happened to my brother at my son's wedding).

I would feel terrible if a choice I made meant some of my guests felt poorall night, watching those with money drink the night away. And what if some of my guests started contemplating borrowing money from another guest if they wanted to drink a cocktail? Awkward for both the borrower and the lender!

Philosophically, I understand if you prefer to have alcohol around and available, and if you and your loved ones would be willing to pay to purchase it.

I have never heard of anyone opting to skip alcohol for purely financial reasons. I could never imagine someone judging someone who had a dry wedding because 1) the reception area (e.g. some churches) does not permit alcohol to be served or 2) one of the B&G/their VIPs is in recovery. I hope you would agree that there exist very legitimate reasons that a B&G would not want alcohol at their wedding even if some of their guests might prefer to drink.

I would never bring cash to a wedding, for the same reasons as hoffse described. If I were told ahead of time that there would be only a cash bar, I would at least know it was (let's be serious) expected of me to bring cash--but I also probably wouldn't attend, because none of my nearest and dearest would make that choice. I would probably assume that cash bar also means cuts were made as to the quality of the meal and entertainment. Sure that's not always true, but that's just me.

I was raised in an area where full open bars are the norm. However, my husband grew up in an area that typically has cash bars to some degree. I cannot imagine being so judgmental and superior as to decline attendance at their wedding because of such a petty issue.

I also would not be put out to discover I was at a dry wedding because, while I will drink if alcohol is offered, I can be just as happy with other options.

I don't know why you asked TK to "Settle this Debate" if you'd already settled it for yourself....

libby2483 · February 2013

In Response to Re:Please Settle this Debate:[QUOTE]No they don't have to purchse wine or champagne, just everything else. Posted by katasiamarie[/QUOTE]

That is exactly what a cash bar is, though. Cash bar is any time the guests have the option purchase any alcohol, even if some alcohol is hosted. What you're doing is rude according to etiquette standards, but personally I would prefer it to only having wine and chanpagne available since I don't drink either one very much.

Simply Fated · February 2013

Yeah, people are definitely confusing preference with etiquette. It's like chairs. Preferably, I'd want a nice big comfy chair. Fluffy cushions, arm rests... the works. But I'll take what seat my host provides for me lol.

s-aries8990 · February 2013

I didn't read any of the posts but OP this is what I think:

It's perfectly acceptable to host a dry wedding- it is a privelage to drink. You supply your guests with what you can afford and it is impolite to ask your guests to pay for something. You wouldn't ask your guests to buy drinks at your house would you?

Alcohol is an awesome edition to a party, but is by no means necessary.

If you want your guests to have access to alcohol but can't afford to provide it, have it at a venue where there is a completely separate bar in a separate area, like a large country club with a separate club house section or a large hotel ( you know, the kind with multiple ballrooms, a restaurant, etc). Do not advertise it at all by any means.If they're that much of a booze hound they'll find the bar wherever they are.

ETA: clarity

soontobehanby · February 2013

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_please-settle-this-debate?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:09008b65-244d-4ee3-af26-093aa0c3ea11Post:f9d8c995-49e7-4946-8e5a-9a22323d10de">Re: Please Settle this Debate</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Please Settle this Debate : Hmm, actually, an ad hominem attack is an attack that appeals to emotion, particularly though not exclusively prejudice, rather than fact or reason. You came onto this board and without any regard for circumstance or collection of any sort of facts informed every bride who had a dry wedding that they were being terrible to their guests by "forcing sobriety" on them. You then were somehow surprised that they were offended. An idiot, by modern definition is a person without sense, someone who does not employ logic, a fool. Your blanket proclamation, as well as your inability to forsee the way it would be interpreted by the reader, pretty much demonstrates a lack of sense or logical reasoning. Calling you an idiot was a. an argument based on evidence and conclusions and b. a demonstration of how ineffective it is to insult someone and then expect them not to mind (otherwise known as a counterpoint example). It was not, however, ad hominem, which is more than can be said for your initial post which ignores imperical evidence and societal standards and criticizes dry weddings based on emotion and predjudice. I've never claimed to be a lady, but I AM a former nationally ranking debater on domestic policy with a philosophy degree. Don't throw buzzwords at me unless you actually know what you're talking about, please and thank you.
Posted by StageManager14[/QUOTE]<div>
</div><div>I'm gonna start a slow clap here. Boom, roasted.

</div>

GardenMaven · February 2013

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/wedding-boards_etiquette_please-settle-this-debate?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Wedding%20BoardsForum:9Discussion:09008b65-244d-4ee3-af26-093aa0c3ea11Post:f9d8c995-49e7-4946-8e5a-9a22323d10de">Re: Please Settle this Debate</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Please Settle this Debate : Hmm, actually, an ad hominem attack is an attack that appeals to emotion, particularly though not exclusively prejudice, rather than fact or reason. You came onto this board and without any regard for circumstance or collection of any sort of facts informed every bride who had a dry wedding that they were being terrible to their guests by "forcing sobriety" on them. You then were somehow surprised that they were offended. An idiot, by modern definition is a person without sense, someone who does not employ logic, a fool. Your blanket proclamation, as well as your inability to forsee the way it would be interpreted by the reader, pretty much demonstrates a lack of sense or logical reasoning. Calling you an idiot was a. an argument based on evidence and conclusions and b. a demonstration of how ineffective it is to insult someone and then expect them not to mind (otherwise known as a counterpoint example). It was not, however, ad hominem, which is more than can be said for your initial post which ignores imperical evidence and societal standards and criticizes dry weddings based on emotion and predjudice. I've never claimed to be a lady, but I AM a former nationally ranking debater on domestic policy with a philosophy degree. Don't throw buzzwords at me unless you actually know what you're talking about, please and thank you.
Posted by StageManager14[/QUOTE]

<div>This post makes me want to hug you, Stage. :-)</div><div>
</div><div>I'll admit, I had a very emotional reaction to OP's view of my dry wedding and dry weddings in general. I assume he hasn't lost anyone to the effects of alcohol or seen what it can do to a family. I have, and it is not pretty. </div>

Please Settle this Debate

Re: Please Settle this Debate

Choose Another Board

Search Boards