Legally married, now having a "real" wedding? Stop here first! (AKA, the PPD FAQ thread)

mrs4everhart · March 2014

Maggie0829 said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

Maggie0829 said:

I think you're totally missing my point.

But ok.
She will always miss your point. Which is why you should just stop talking to her and trying to get her to see your side. It is a waste of time.

I didn't miss it. I intentionally ignored it. Her "point" was essentially moot. The fact is that marriage does not always guarantee a tax benefit, which was the most recent discussion on this board. I wasn't disputing that there aren't legal benefits to marriage. Of course there are. But a sweet tax break isn't always amongst them 100% of the time.

@STBMrsEverhart - just drop it...seriously.

I guess the only way that's ever going to happen is if you all quit quoting me or referring to me. Or the day you all quit spouting pure stupidity. Let's see which happens first.

Maggie0829 · March 2014

STBMrsEverhart said:

Maggie0829 said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

Maggie0829 said:

I think you're totally missing my point.

But ok.
She will always miss your point. Which is why you should just stop talking to her and trying to get her to see your side. It is a waste of time.

I didn't miss it. I intentionally ignored it. Her "point" was essentially moot. The fact is that marriage does not always guarantee a tax benefit, which was the most recent discussion on this board. I wasn't disputing that there aren't legal benefits to marriage. Of course there are. But a sweet tax break isn't always amongst them 100% of the time.

@STBMrsEverhart - just drop it...seriously.

I guess the only way that's ever going to happen is if you all quit quoting me or referring to me. Or the day you all quit spouting pure stupidity. Let's see which happens first.

Or you could be the bigger person and stop fucking responding. Actually everyone should just stop fucking responding because this thread has become ridiculous. I don't see the point in the ongoing berating of everyone and everything that is said. It is getting no one anywhere. This thread should just be left to die.

NYCBruin · March 2014

STBMrsEverhart said:

LDay2014 said:

mrshutzler said:

If married people were not able to benefit from being married, they would wait to be married until their real wedding instead of having a PPD. As it stands, I've yet to see a single instance of wedding then "real wedding" where neither party benefited in some way... generally through insurance benefits from a federal of private job. I have no problem with people marrying due to extenuating circumstances and then having a PARTY with family and friends to celebrate their MARRIAGE. Having a fake re-enactment of a wedding with the cake, white dress, etc. is tacky, trite, and an ego-fest.

benefits of marriage (even the apparently "doesn't count" JOP wedding) include:
visitation rights and can make medical decisions, unless otherwise specified in a living will
benefits for federal employees -- many of which are also offered by private employers -- such as sick leave, bereavement leave, days off for the birth of a child, pension and retirement benefits, family health insurance plans
some property and inheritance rights, even in the absence of a will
the ability to create life insurance trusts
tax benefits, such as being able to give tax free gifts to a spouse and to file joint tax returns
the ability to receive Medicare, Social Security, disability and veteran's benefits for a spouse
discount or family rates for auto, health and homeowners insurance
immigration and residency benefits, making it easier to bring a spouse to the U.S. from abroad
visiting rights in jail

I would love to see a PPD'er refuse spousal benefits, god forbid there be a fatal accident. 'No, I'm sorry, we hadn't had our 'real' wedding so I will defer the life insurance policy to his/her family since we weren't 'really' married'

Not sure if you all are aware of this or not, but you can legally will your belongings to anyone you choose and medical power of attorney is not legally limited to spouses. Nor is making a non-spouse your beneficiary for life insurance or outlining your desires in a living will. So if people in committed, but not legally married, relationships fail to protect their rights and assets, it's not because they didn't have options. Can marriage make some of these things easier? Sure. Are all the benefits under the sun that marriage guarantees available to non-marrieds? No. But if you're talking "life and death" yea, there are plenty of ways to plan and be protected.

ETA: boxes are busted.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please don't spread this type of misinformation. Clearly you've never had to deal with a contested will or apparently don't watch the many stories every year dealing with disputes over medical powers of attorneys, living wills and when family members disagree. You can try to use legal instruments to achieve these things, but unless the state has labeled you as someone's next of kin (i.e. your spouse), it's not uncommon for that legal instrument to be disregarded.

mrs4everhart · March 2014

Maggie0829 said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

Maggie0829 said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

Maggie0829 said:

I think you're totally missing my point.

But ok.
She will always miss your point. Which is why you should just stop talking to her and trying to get her to see your side. It is a waste of time.

I didn't miss it. I intentionally ignored it. Her "point" was essentially moot. The fact is that marriage does not always guarantee a tax benefit, which was the most recent discussion on this board. I wasn't disputing that there aren't legal benefits to marriage. Of course there are. But a sweet tax break isn't always amongst them 100% of the time.

@STBMrsEverhart - just drop it...seriously.

I guess the only way that's ever going to happen is if you all quit quoting me or referring to me. Or the day you all quit spouting pure stupidity. Let's see which happens first.

Or you could be the bigger person and stop fucking responding. Actually everyone should just stop fucking responding because this thread has become ridiculous. I don't see the point in the ongoing berating of everyone and everything that is said. It is getting no one anywhere. This thread should just be left to die.

Yea, I could but I'm making a choice not to. In fact, I'm hoping that one day, this whole thread ends up in the trash where it rightfully belongs. But then one of you will inevitably start another sticky that I'll have to muck up for you. So, there's that.

Maggie0829 · March 2014

STBMrsEverhart said:

Maggie0829 said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

Maggie0829 said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

Maggie0829 said:

I think you're totally missing my point.

But ok.
She will always miss your point. Which is why you should just stop talking to her and trying to get her to see your side. It is a waste of time.

I didn't miss it. I intentionally ignored it. Her "point" was essentially moot. The fact is that marriage does not always guarantee a tax benefit, which was the most recent discussion on this board. I wasn't disputing that there aren't legal benefits to marriage. Of course there are. But a sweet tax break isn't always amongst them 100% of the time.

@STBMrsEverhart - just drop it...seriously.

I guess the only way that's ever going to happen is if you all quit quoting me or referring to me. Or the day you all quit spouting pure stupidity. Let's see which happens first.

Or you could be the bigger person and stop fucking responding. Actually everyone should just stop fucking responding because this thread has become ridiculous. I don't see the point in the ongoing berating of everyone and everything that is said. It is getting no one anywhere. This thread should just be left to die.

Yea, I could but I'm making a choice not to. In fact, I'm hoping that one day, this whole thread ends up in the trash where it rightfully belongs. But then one of you will inevitably start another sticky that I'll have to muck up for you. So, there's that.

Yeah because it is super smart to continually argue in circles knowing that nothing will change. You will continue to think the way you do and the others will continue to think the way they will. So what is the fucking point? You don't like this thread or what people have to say. We got it. The others don't like your point of view. We got it.

Now lets all just drop it and use our time to actually help people who want it instead of someone who doesn't give a shit about what we have to say and vice versa.

mrs4everhart · March 2014

Maggie0829 said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

Maggie0829 said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

Maggie0829 said:

STBMrsEverhart said:

Maggie0829 said:

Jennycolada said:
I think you're totally missing my point.

But ok.
She will always miss your point. Which is why you should just stop talking to her and trying to get her to see your side. It is a waste of time.

I didn't miss it. I intentionally ignored it. Her "point" was essentially moot. The fact is that marriage does not always guarantee a tax benefit, which was the most recent discussion on this board. I wasn't disputing that there aren't legal benefits to marriage. Of course there are. But a sweet tax break isn't always amongst them 100% of the time.

@STBMrsEverhart - just drop it...seriously.

I guess the only way that's ever going to happen is if you all quit quoting me or referring to me. Or the day you all quit spouting pure stupidity. Let's see which happens first.

Or you could be the bigger person and stop fucking responding. Actually everyone should just stop fucking responding because this thread has become ridiculous. I don't see the point in the ongoing berating of everyone and everything that is said. It is getting no one anywhere. This thread should just be left to die.

Yea, I could but I'm making a choice not to. In fact, I'm hoping that one day, this whole thread ends up in the trash where it rightfully belongs. But then one of you will inevitably start another sticky that I'll have to muck up for you. So, there's that.

Yeah because it is super smart to continually argue in circles knowing that nothing will change. You will continue to think the way you do and the others will continue to think the way they will. So what is the fucking point? You don't like this thread or what people have to say.

We got it. The others don't like your point of view. We got it.

Now lets all just drop it and use our time to actually help people who want it instead of someone who doesn't give a shit about what we have to say and vice versa.

What makes you so certain I'm not helping people? I have reason to believe I am. So I'll keep at it. Arguing with y'all is really rather here nor there at this point. If it's tiring you out, by all means, stop.

MobKaz · March 2014

kkitkat79 · March 2014

Maggie0829 said:
Or you could be the bigger person and stop fucking responding. Actually everyone should just stop fucking responding because this thread has become ridiculous. I don't see the point in the ongoing berating of everyone and everything that is said. It is getting no one anywhere. This thread should just be left to die.

One shouldn't tell other people how to post, should they?

lovesclimbing · March 2014

mrshutzler said:

If married people were not able to benefit from being married, they would wait to be married until their real wedding instead of having a PPD. As it stands, I've yet to see a single instance of wedding then "real wedding" where neither party benefited in some way... generally through insurance benefits from a federal of private job. I have no problem with people marrying due to extenuating circumstances and then having a PARTY with family and friends to celebrate their MARRIAGE. Having a fake re-enactment of a wedding with the cake, white dress, etc. is tacky, trite, and an ego-fest.

benefits of marriage (even the apparently "doesn't count" JOP wedding) include:
visitation rights and can make medical decisions, unless otherwise specified in a living will
benefits for federal employees -- many of which are also offered by private employers -- such as sick leave, bereavement leave, days off for the birth of a child, pension and retirement benefits, family health insurance plans
some property and inheritance rights, even in the absence of a will
the ability to create life insurance trusts
tax benefits, such as being able to give tax free gifts to a spouse and to file joint tax returns
the ability to receive Medicare, Social Security, disability and veteran's benefits for a spouse
discount or family rates for auto, health and homeowners insurance
immigration and residency benefits, making it easier to bring a spouse to the U.S. from abroad
visiting rights in jail

I tend to be a PPD lite person. If I know the circumstances, I would go in almost every circumstance although I would still side eye it. But if I found out I was lied to, it would definitely affect my relationship.

There is one circumstance where I don't judge a PPD. I have a friend who is an extremely conservative Christian. When they got engaged (more like a betrothal), they got legally married and then had a wedding later. The reasoning was because back in Bible times, betrothal was legally binding. You essentially had to get a divorce if you decided not to get married. They wanted their relationship to be similar to that of Biblical relationships. They did not collect any benefits from being married, did not live together, anything.

LDay2014 · March 2014

lovesclimbing said:

mrshutzler said:

If married people were not able to benefit from being married, they would wait to be married until their real wedding instead of having a PPD. As it stands, I've yet to see a single instance of wedding then "real wedding" where neither party benefited in some way... generally through insurance benefits from a federal of private job. I have no problem with people marrying due to extenuating circumstances and then having a PARTY with family and friends to celebrate their MARRIAGE. Having a fake re-enactment of a wedding with the cake, white dress, etc. is tacky, trite, and an ego-fest.

benefits of marriage (even the apparently "doesn't count" JOP wedding) include:
visitation rights and can make medical decisions, unless otherwise specified in a living will
benefits for federal employees -- many of which are also offered by private employers -- such as sick leave, bereavement leave, days off for the birth of a child, pension and retirement benefits, family health insurance plans
some property and inheritance rights, even in the absence of a will
the ability to create life insurance trusts
tax benefits, such as being able to give tax free gifts to a spouse and to file joint tax returns
the ability to receive Medicare, Social Security, disability and veteran's benefits for a spouse
discount or family rates for auto, health and homeowners insurance
immigration and residency benefits, making it easier to bring a spouse to the U.S. from abroad
visiting rights in jail

I tend to be a PPD lite person. If I know the circumstances, I would go in almost every circumstance although I would still side eye it. But if I found out I was lied to, it would definitely affect my relationship.

There is one circumstance where I don't judge a PPD. I have a friend who is an extremely conservative Christian. When they got engaged (more like a betrothal), they got legally married and then had a wedding later. The reasoning was because back in Bible times, betrothal was legally binding. You essentially had to get a divorce if you decided not to get married. They wanted their relationship to be similar to that of Biblical relationships. They did not collect any benefits from being married, did not live together, anything.

Did her family also offer him goats, sheep, and linen for a dowry?

lyndausvi · March 2014

STBMrsEverhart said:

LDay2014 said:

mrshutzler said:

If married people were not able to benefit from being married, they would wait to be married until their real wedding instead of having a PPD. As it stands, I've yet to see a single instance of wedding then "real wedding" where neither party benefited in some way... generally through insurance benefits from a federal of private job. I have no problem with people marrying due to extenuating circumstances and then having a PARTY with family and friends to celebrate their MARRIAGE. Having a fake re-enactment of a wedding with the cake, white dress, etc. is tacky, trite, and an ego-fest.

benefits of marriage (even the apparently "doesn't count" JOP wedding) include:
visitation rights and can make medical decisions, unless otherwise specified in a living will
benefits for federal employees -- many of which are also offered by private employers -- such as sick leave, bereavement leave, days off for the birth of a child, pension and retirement benefits, family health insurance plans
some property and inheritance rights, even in the absence of a will
the ability to create life insurance trusts
tax benefits, such as being able to give tax free gifts to a spouse and to file joint tax returns
the ability to receive Medicare, Social Security, disability and veteran's benefits for a spouse
discount or family rates for auto, health and homeowners insurance
immigration and residency benefits, making it easier to bring a spouse to the U.S. from abroad
visiting rights in jail

I would love to see a PPD'er refuse spousal benefits, god forbid there be a fatal accident. 'No, I'm sorry, we hadn't had our 'real' wedding so I will defer the life insurance policy to his/her family since we weren't 'really' married'

Not sure if you all are aware of this or not, but you can legally will your belongings to anyone you choose and medical power of attorney is not legally limited to spouses. Nor is making a non-spouse your beneficiary for life insurance or outlining your desires in a living will. So if people in committed, but not legally married, relationships fail to protect their rights and assets, it's not because they didn't have options. Can marriage make some of these things easier? Sure. Are all the benefits under the sun that marriage guarantees available to non-marrieds? No. But if you're talking "life and death" yea, there are plenty of ways to plan and be protected.

ETA: boxes are busted.

If that was the case why are gays and lesbians fighting so hard for martial rights? Oh that's right, it's not that easy. Many non-married people have had the POA thrown out the window simply because they are not married.

Maggie0829 · March 2014

kkitkat79 said:

Maggie0829 said:
Or you could be the bigger person and stop fucking responding. Actually everyone should just stop fucking responding because this thread has become ridiculous. I don't see the point in the ongoing berating of everyone and everything that is said. It is getting no one anywhere. This thread should just be left to die.

One shouldn't tell other people how to post, should they?

_____________________________________________

This is true, but if you have actually been reading the post you will see that it is going around in circles and people are just arguing for the sake of arguing. This is the kind of post that a moderator would have stopped a long time ago, but since mods, for some reason, were taken away, this kind of bullshit just keeps going and going and going and going.

kitsunegari89 · March 2014

kkitkat79 · March 2014

Maggie0829 said:

kkitkat79 said:

Maggie0829 said:
Or you could be the bigger person and stop fucking responding. Actually everyone should just stop fucking responding because this thread has become ridiculous. I don't see the point in the ongoing berating of everyone and everything that is said. It is getting no one anywhere. This thread should just be left to die.

One shouldn't tell other people how to post, should they?

_____________________________________________

This is true, but if you have actually been reading the post you will see that it is going around in circles and people are just arguing for the sake of arguing. This is the kind of post that a moderator would have stopped a long time ago, but since mods, for some reason, were taken away, this kind of bullshit just keeps going and going and going and going.

Alright, I have actually been reading the post, all 31 pages of it and nothing I read negates my point. I agree that the argument is circular at this point however, until there are mods who can close this thread, I think all one can do is either express an opinion re how this thread has ceased to be useful or stop responding. One should not tell other people how to post, should they?

kitsunegari89 · March 2014

quotes aren't working?

Inkdancer · March 2014

sydneyviolet · March 2014

I am originally from Sydney and to be married in the registry office in London before a destination, symbolic ceremony in Italy, where we will be joined by family and friends.

In Italy (when you're not Catholic and to be married in a church) the paperwork is separate from the ceremony. It's a legal document executed at the town hall by the Mayor (no guests) and then you have your ceremony (with guests) elsewhere. I had the option of submitting the required paperwork in Italy but it just meant a whole lot more work. I am still (2 and a half years on) in the midst of finalising my Fathers divorce (he died while separated from his second wife) so I'm not exactly gagging for extra paperwork.

The constant mention of equating a symbolic ceremony to a lie is such a reductive verdict. It really is painful to hear you all go on about this. The broader issue is that there are so many ways to celebrate a union and all of them aren't going to align with your personal values.

Yeah, an entire redo is a bit tacky and I would never go there, but historically (ie: in eastern bloc countries) they would have to do the paperwork in a soviet office and a religious ceremony later on/whenever-it-suited-them (often months after) with friends and family, so it's not exactly a new concept.

Yawn.

chibiyui · March 2014

sydneyviolet said:

I am originally from Sydney and to be married in the registry office in London before a destination, symbolic ceremony in Italy, where we will be joined by family and friends.
In Italy (when you're not Catholic and to be married in a church) the paperwork is separate from the ceremony. It's a legal document executed at the town hall by the Mayor (no guests) and then you have your ceremony (with guests) elsewhere. I had the option of submitting the required paperwork in Italy but it just meant a whole lot more work. I am still (2 and a half years on) in the midst of finalising my Fathers divorce (he died while separated from his second wife) so I'm not exactly gagging for extra paperwork.
The constant mention of equating a symbolic ceremony to a lie is such a reductive verdict. It really is painful to hear you all go on about this. The broader issue is that there are so many ways to celebrate a union and all of them aren't going to align with your personal values.
Yeah, an entire redo is a bit tacky and I would never go there, but historically (ie: in eastern block countries) they would have to do the paperwork in a soviet office and a religious ceremony later on/whenever-it-suited-them (often months after) with friends and family, so it's not exactly a new concept.
Yawn.

The issue is, most brides on here asking for advice are from the states where a religious ceremony can be considerrd legally binding, thus eliminating the need for seperate ceremonies.

If you're American, having a DW in a place that requires two veremonies, just do the "paperwork" when you get back. Or be honest. It's not that hard.

sydneyviolet · March 2014

Honestly exhausting ^^

cruffino · March 2014

sydneyviolet said:
Honestly exhausting ^^

Yet you've found the energy to reply. How selfless of you considering your exhaustion.

chibiyui · March 2014

sydneyviolet said:

Honestly exhausting ^^

^^Honestly butthurt.

sydneyviolet · March 2014

I don't recall stating a relationship between the two - bloc countries, just one of many examples over time where peeps held multiple ceremonies - GASP - some of which are not of legal requirement.

Check out this Vogue one. This happens people.

http://youtu.be/n1Mj2Fnwj7A

crunchymamaof2 · March 2014

@syndneyviolet I love how the responses towards your post have been in your favor, basically saying what you're doing is fine due to the laws of where you live/will be married. And they also pointed out that this thread is specifically for areas where the laws are different. Yet you still feel the need to respond in such a bitchy way. @addiel73 I think someone needs some cake over here.

lovesclimbing · March 2014

LDay2014 said:

lovesclimbing said:

mrshutzler said:

If married people were not able to benefit from being married, they would wait to be married until their real wedding instead of having a PPD. As it stands, I've yet to see a single instance of wedding then "real wedding" where neither party benefited in some way... generally through insurance benefits from a federal of private job. I have no problem with people marrying due to extenuating circumstances and then having a PARTY with family and friends to celebrate their MARRIAGE. Having a fake re-enactment of a wedding with the cake, white dress, etc. is tacky, trite, and an ego-fest.

benefits of marriage (even the apparently "doesn't count" JOP wedding) include:
visitation rights and can make medical decisions, unless otherwise specified in a living will
benefits for federal employees -- many of which are also offered by private employers -- such as sick leave, bereavement leave, days off for the birth of a child, pension and retirement benefits, family health insurance plans
some property and inheritance rights, even in the absence of a will
the ability to create life insurance trusts
tax benefits, such as being able to give tax free gifts to a spouse and to file joint tax returns
the ability to receive Medicare, Social Security, disability and veteran's benefits for a spouse
discount or family rates for auto, health and homeowners insurance
immigration and residency benefits, making it easier to bring a spouse to the U.S. from abroad
visiting rights in jail

I tend to be a PPD lite person. If I know the circumstances, I would go in almost every circumstance although I would still side eye it. But if I found out I was lied to, it would definitely affect my relationship.

There is one circumstance where I don't judge a PPD. I have a friend who is an extremely conservative Christian. When they got engaged (more like a betrothal), they got legally married and then had a wedding later. The reasoning was because back in Bible times, betrothal was legally binding. You essentially had to get a divorce if you decided not to get married. They wanted their relationship to be similar to that of Biblical relationships. They did not collect any benefits from being married, did not live together, anything.

Did her family also offer him goats, sheep, and linen for a dowry?

No, not as far as I know.

BritLady · March 2014

@grumbledore

Bravo!!! This needed to be written, although I doubt that it will reach those who truly need to read it. I am delighted to see so much common sense.

classyduck · March 2014

To those of you who feel that either legal or religious sanction is the only legitimate recognition of marriage... how do you respond to gay couples who can receive neither?

antoto · March 2014

classyduck said:
To those of you who feel that either legal or religious sanction is the only legitimate recognition of marriage... how do you respond to gay couples who can receive neither?

I think most of us would respond that it's b.s. they can't get married. Then we would respond that situation is MASSIVELY different from a couple regretting their jop wedding, lying to their guests, and throwing a fake wedding. To compare the two is frankly insulting to the gay community. Many gay couples would jump at the chance to have a jop wedding, and these PPDs throw it away as if it counts for nothing.

pinkshorts27 · March 2014

antoto said:

To those of you who feel that either legal or religious sanction is the only legitimate recognition of marriage... how do you respond to gay couples who can receive neither?
I think most of us would respond that it's b.s. they can't get married. Then we would respond that situation is MASSIVELY different from a couple regretting their jop wedding, lying to their guests, and throwing a fake wedding. To compare the two is frankly insulting to the gay community. Many gay couples would jump at the chance to have a jop wedding, and these PPDs throw it away as if it counts for nothing.

And if a gay couple gained the right to get married legally, I would not hesitate to attend a ceremony for them (even if I had already attended a commitment ceremony for them). And I would not side-eye it one bit. I'd want to freaking celebrate.

Emilykaett · March 2014

I'm going to cut in here because I have a question. I have been trying to go through all the pages of this topic but I can't seem to find someone with the same situation as me. I sincerely apologize if this is a repetition--if it is, could you direct me to roughly which page of the topic it is on and I'll leave you all in peace?

I got married two years ago in Barcelona, Spain. I consider that my wedding day and I'm trying hard not to have a PPD. My husband is from Barcelona so we had to figure out what was the best way for us to get married, and also where would we want to live after we got married? We decided we wanted to move to the U.S. for many reasons so then we had to figure out what was the best for us legally and emotionally (what did we want from our wedding day?). We did tons of research. And I mean tons.

We planned to have the legal wedding here and then move to the U.S. and have a vow exchange ceremony and reception (NOT a "wedding" not a "do-over" but a chance to exchange vows, which was NOT an option at our JOP/courthouse wedding). We chose this way because most of the family from Spain wouldn't be able to travel to the U.S. and none of the U.S. family could travel to Spain (except my mother). We thought this was the best way so that everyone we love could somehow be included in a part of the marriage (I consider the legal part and vows to be the whole marriage ceremony..).

So we had our civil ceremony and had a lovely family lunch afterwards. From my side of the family, only my mother could come.

After the civil ceremony we started to do our paperwork for my husband to come to the U.S. Only now, two years later (1.5 years of paperwork processing etc.) do we have permission to go to the U.S. Now, why did we wait to have the U.S. side of the wedding so long? Because 1) They changed the immigration laws and we no longer could use the 3 month process we had planned on. 2) Once you begin immigration paperwork, the intending immigrant is NOT allowed to travel to the U.S.

So, now we are planning the vow exchange ceremony and reception for our family and friends in the U.S. We are not "re-enacting" anything. We never got to exchange any vows and we think that is an integral part of getting married. No one will pronounce us "Husband and Wife", no one will announce "for the first time I present Mr. & Mrs. soandso". The ceremony will consist of a pastor saying a prayer, a few short readings or speeches, and our vows.

Our invitations say, "Together with their familes, Jane and John, request the pleasure of your company at the celebration of their marriage" And I certainly don't expect anyone to bring a gift or even a card--their presence at this ceremony and celebration is what we are looking forward to. We won't be registering anywhere.

I don't believe we "aren't married yet". I know we are. I wear the ring and I call him my husband because he is. But, I don't think this is a PPD because if we wanted each of our families to be a part of our wedding, this was the only way we could do it.

So my questions are these:
1) Am I really having a PPD and don't know it? Bleh, I don't want to be that girl.
2) Is there something I can do to make sure my guests aren't rolling their eyes behind their programs? (we won't actually have programs but..you get the point)
3) Again--if there is a similar situation just tell me which page of the thread and I'll stop bothering you!

Thanks..and please be nice? I'm truly trying to do this in the best way possible.

Simply Fated · March 2014

@Emilykaett
But, I don't think this is a PPD because if we wanted each of our families to be a part of our wedding, this was the only way we could do it.

The thing is, they won't really be a part of your wedding because what you're having isn't a wedding.
It sucks that your whole family couldn't be there for your wedding, but sometimes the choices we make (like getting married) often results in things not working out exactly the way we had envisioned or hoped.

It is, essentially a vow renewal, which, by etiquette standards is fine. It does seem like a grey area seeing as how you weren't allowed to exchange vows when you got married, though. Do you mean you weren't allowed to exchange personalized, verbal vows? I'm unfamiliar with
I only suggest you wait a few years, maybe until a milestone anniversary for a vow exchange? I'm not a fan of vow renewals, but that seems to be the popular suggestion around here.

Legally married, now having a "real" wedding? Stop here first! (AKA, the PPD FAQ thread)

Re: Legally married, now having a "real" wedding? Stop here first! (AKA, the PPD FAQ thread)

Choose Another Board

Search Boards

Legally married, now having a "real" wedding? Stop here first! (AKA, the PPD FAQ thread)

Re: Legally married, now having a &quot;real&quot; wedding? Stop here first! (AKA, the PPD FAQ thread)

Choose Another Board

Search Boards

Re: Legally married, now having a "real" wedding? Stop here first! (AKA, the PPD FAQ thread)