• Images
  • Text
  • Find a Couple + Registry
GO
Etiquette

An acceptable reason to get married before the wedding?

2

Re: An acceptable reason to get married before the wedding?

  • misshart00misshart00 Oklahoma member
    2500 Comments 500 Love Its Fourth Anniversary First Answer
    lyndausvi said:
    I totally understand a religious ceremony being more important to someone than a legal one emotionally.  I just do not understand why the legal one is dismissed as un-important.   

    You rarely hear of people getting the religious or non-legal ceremony before their legal one.  I've never heard of people having a secret religious ceremony.  Why is that?  Oh yeah, the legal one gives them the benefits people so desperately need that is why.

    I'm pretty PPD light, meaning I do not get my panties in a wad if people choose to have 2 ceremonies.   I do get pissed at people who feel the legal one, the one that gives them benefits is not important.  If it wasn't important you would have never done it to begin with.     Be honest and own your choices. 

    Agree with all of this. As long as you're not lying, I don't have a huge problem with much. I almost did have a PPD on accident as the license was lost after it was signed, etc.
  • holyguacamole79holyguacamole79 a taco truck in Houston member
    5000 Comments Fifth Anniversary 500 Love Its 5 Answers
    Our officiant is a family friend who has known me for 30 years.  If something happened where he was no longer qualified to officiate our wedding, I would have found another celebrant.  

    Had this person told her guests the circumstances, fine.  But lying is not cool.
  • thisismynickname2thisismynickname2 City By The Lake member
    5000 Comments Sixth Anniversary 500 Love Its First Answer
    Just a comment. I think a really interesting point was raised that people do the legalities in secret, but not religious or otherwise symbolic ceremonies.  What do people want to see? Many will say they want to see the ceremony that legally binds two people together, given the choice. Others will say witnessing two people vow to share their lives is important- whether that's the legal binding or spiritual binding if not done at the same time.  (I hope this makes sense.)
    In the cases of, "My family member is sick so I'm going to get married at their bedside first," why can't that just be symbolic rather than legal, and leave the legal-symbolic combo to the already-scheduled big event? 
    Frankly, if I had an officiant issue and couldn't find a legal replacement in time (worst case scenario), I'd just go through with my planned event and dash to the courthouse afterwards (like Monday). At least my guests would witness my first attempt at vows and not a re-enactment. 
    ________________________________


    Maggie0829esstee33fwtx5815[Deleted User]
  • Just a comment. I think a really interesting point was raised that people do the legalities in secret, but not religious or otherwise symbolic ceremonies.  What do people want to see? Many will say they want to see the ceremony that legally binds two people together, given the choice. Others will say witnessing two people vow to share their lives is important- whether that's the legal binding or spiritual binding if not done at the same time.  (I hope this makes sense.)
    In the cases of, "My family member is sick so I'm going to get married at their bedside first," why can't that just be symbolic rather than legal, and leave the legal-symbolic combo to the already-scheduled big event? 
    Frankly, if I had an officiant issue and couldn't find a legal replacement in time (worst case scenario), I'd just go through with my planned event and dash to the courthouse afterwards (like Monday). At least my guests would witness my first attempt at vows and not a re-enactment. 
    That's an interesting point. I actually think I would be more bothered by that than the reverse. At least a gift given at a PPD is a gift to a married couple, for some reason this would feel like more a lie to me (even if the couple promised they were going ASAP to make it legal). 
  • thisismynickname2thisismynickname2 City By The Lake member
    5000 Comments Sixth Anniversary 500 Love Its First Answer
    Just a comment. I think a really interesting point was raised that people do the legalities in secret, but not religious or otherwise symbolic ceremonies.  What do people want to see? Many will say they want to see the ceremony that legally binds two people together, given the choice. Others will say witnessing two people vow to share their lives is important- whether that's the legal binding or spiritual binding if not done at the same time.  (I hope this makes sense.)
    In the cases of, "My family member is sick so I'm going to get married at their bedside first," why can't that just be symbolic rather than legal, and leave the legal-symbolic combo to the already-scheduled big event? 
    Frankly, if I had an officiant issue and couldn't find a legal replacement in time (worst case scenario), I'd just go through with my planned event and dash to the courthouse afterwards (like Monday). At least my guests would witness my first attempt at vows and not a re-enactment. 
    That's an interesting point. I actually think I would be more bothered by that than the reverse. At least a gift given at a PPD is a gift to a married couple, for some reason this would feel like more a lie to me (even if the couple promised they were going ASAP to make it legal). 
    Well... You give gifts at a shower to a bride who's engaged and intending to get married. Ah well. All hypothetical for today :)  
    ________________________________


  • I had a similar problem (found out my officiant was not legally allowed to marry us) a few days before the wedding. We ended up getting married about an hour before our planned ceremony at the courthouse, then rushing back. Everything else was as planned. I wouldn't be all up in arms about this.
    aleighbaker
  • dcbride86dcbride86 Washington, DC member
    500 Love Its 500 Comments Second Anniversary First Answer

     

    Just a comment. I think a really interesting point was raised that people do the legalities in secret, but not religious or otherwise symbolic ceremonies.  What do people want to see? Many will say they want to see the ceremony that legally binds two people together, given the choice. Others will say witnessing two people vow to share their lives is important- whether that's the legal binding or spiritual binding if not done at the same time.  (I hope this makes sense.)
    In the cases of, "My family member is sick so I'm going to get married at their bedside first," why can't that just be symbolic rather than legal, and leave the legal-symbolic combo to the already-scheduled big event? 
    Frankly, if I had an officiant issue and couldn't find a legal replacement in time (worst case scenario), I'd just go through with my planned event and dash to the courthouse afterwards (like Monday). At least my guests would witness my first attempt at vows and not a re-enactment. 
    @thisismynickname - for the most part, I agree with you.  But I think it's hard to judge what might be important to either a couple or a dying loved one with respect to a marriage.  It might be important to the dying family member that he/she is there when the couple is legally married.  I don't even know if my family friend was legally married in the ceremony for his mom, but I have a hard time judging or side-eyeing someone for having a private ceremony so his mom could be present - whether it was the legal ceremony or not.
  • Doesn't bother me at all. But I'm also not bothered by people who choose to have a second ceremony anyway. 
    Wedding Countdown Ticker
    aleighbaker
  • KatieinBklnKatieinBkln (NO SLEEP TIL) Brooklyn! member
    2500 Comments 500 Love Its First Answer First Anniversary
    So hold up, the couple from the OP hasn't heard of Google? 


    image
    This baby knows exactly how I feel
    Maggie0829PrettyGirlLostpenguin44ashley8918
  • A day before the wedding? I think that's fine. It's not like they had any opportunity to live like a married couple or reap the legal benefits of being married in that time. (Even most couples who live together spend the night before the wedding apart.) 

    But I admit I'm biased--I believe that the vows a couple makes make them married, not any officiant. So if the couple viewed that as "paperwork" that's their business.
  • PrettyGirlLostPrettyGirlLost A Land Filled with Unicorns and Cat Hair member
    5000 Comments Fifth Anniversary 500 Love Its First Answer
    dcbride86 said:
    Interesting.  I found it to be pretty legit.  My friend was the MOH and actually found out when they were drunk and the bride confessed.  She said they didn't find out about the law change until maybe a couple weeks beforehand, and didn't know what else to do.  I don't know how she didn't know about the law change, though.  I have a google alert for the DC officiant law just in case they repeal the temporary officiant law they inacted in 2013 lol
    So this couple also kept their marriage prior to their planned wedding a secret as well? smh.  And a couple weeks is still plenty of time to find an appropriate officiant.  It seems to me that they didn't want to change their wedding vision or put forth the effort to find an appropriate officiant.
    This, holy hell ><

    Having this friend marry them was more important to them than actually getting married?  That's how I'd feel if I was her MOH. . . who found out via drunken confession.

    And yeah, that's the other thing- when people know they are doing something wrong, or suspect they are doing something wrong, they tend to keep it a secret.

    "Love is the one thing we're capable of perceiving that transcends time and space."


  • I dress up, buy a gift, and take time off to go to a wedding to see friends arrive at a ceremony single and leave married (legally, spiritually, socially). I find it really insulting to people who had JOP weddings. Posters are making it out like you just sign papers. You DO say vows and make lifelong promises in JOP weddings. It doesn't have to be in a church to be meaningful. Of course I understand extenuating circumstances, but if you do not arrive "single" and leave "married" (ie if you cannot turn around halfway through the walk down the aisle and leave without any legal consequences) it isn't a wedding. Doesn't matter if it is the day before or a year before. At least have the decency to let me know so I can decide to go to the reinactment. In many of these cases, I just don't know why they couldn't get married and have a celebration later? Why have a fake white wedding?

     I would marry my Fi in a hessian sack this afternoon and be happy because I'm married to my Fi- I wouldn't want to have a redo because THAT was the moment we became married. Yes, we are planning a big church wedding but I know plans change, why the reinactment?. Why is everyone so entitled to a big white wedding?

    Honestly, it is INCREDIBLY insulting to women who chose to get married outside of the church that anything else is just paperwork. The reasons vows are made legitimate is because they are backed by the legal system in which you live. The spiritual is optional based on your world view. 

    ETA: Any couple who views making their union valid  for all the benefits of being married (legal, taxes, social recognition, all other married benefits) as just "paperwork" is not a couple I would want to be friends with. I have too many friends worldwide who are fighting for that "paperwork" with same-sex marriage (and frankly not to be killed for being gay and living with their partners) to waste my time with people who would be so flippant about a life changing document. A diploma/ citizenship certificate/ passport  are just "paperwork" that have a lot of loaded meaning behind it and give privileges/ benefits. I could take the citizenship oath to the US and vow to be American, but without the paperwork and documentation, it doesn't mean I am an American citizen. 

    Being married is a binary state, one either IS or ISN'T. 
    If the bolded is what you believe happens at all courthouse paper signings, you are not correct. When we signed our license, thus becoming legally married, it went just like this:

    Enter courthouse. Went through metal detector. Found correct department. Took number. Waited in waiting area. Number eventually called. Approached desk. Let clerk know what we needed. She asked if we were taking the license and returning it within 30 days. We said no, we'd be signing it there. She did some stuff on her computer. We chatted about our lunch options. She returned with some paperwork for us to fill out involving contact info, parent's contact info, place and date of birth, etc. She reviewed the documents we were required to bring (ID, my divorce decree). She did more stuff on her computer. We finalized our lunch plans. She left to print something and returned with two copies of the license. She asked for $35. We paid her. She laid both copies of the licenses down and showed us where to sign. We did. She signed her spot. She kept one, we kept one. She bid us nice afternoon, we went to lunch. At no time were any type of vows exchanged. Nothing of the sort took place. At all. So while yes, there are "courthouse ceremonies" not ALL legally binding marriage paperwork comes with a dose of love and vows. Or anything even close. It was as romantic as getting our passports, or changing my name, and required many of the same documents and similar paperwork. 

    So while yes, there are courthouse ceremonies that may bring in elements of let's call them traditional weddings (the vows, the rings, what have you) it's not legally required nor is that type of thing even offered in every jurisdiction. And I know I'm mighty thankful for that. We would have been very uncomfortable with those things taking place that day.  

    newvalley
  • I dress up, buy a gift, and take time off to go to a wedding to see friends arrive at a ceremony single and leave married (legally, spiritually, socially). I find it really insulting to people who had JOP weddings. Posters are making it out like you just sign papers. You DO say vows and make lifelong promises in JOP weddings. It doesn't have to be in a church to be meaningful. Of course I understand extenuating circumstances, but if you do not arrive "single" and leave "married" (ie if you cannot turn around halfway through the walk down the aisle and leave without any legal consequences) it isn't a wedding. Doesn't matter if it is the day before or a year before. At least have the decency to let me know so I can decide to go to the reinactment. In many of these cases, I just don't know why they couldn't get married and have a celebration later? Why have a fake white wedding?

     I would marry my Fi in a hessian sack this afternoon and be happy because I'm married to my Fi- I wouldn't want to have a redo because THAT was the moment we became married. Yes, we are planning a big church wedding but I know plans change, why the reinactment?. Why is everyone so entitled to a big white wedding?

    Honestly, it is INCREDIBLY insulting to women who chose to get married outside of the church that anything else is just paperwork. The reasons vows are made legitimate is because they are backed by the legal system in which you live. The spiritual is optional based on your world view. 

    ETA: Any couple who views making their union valid  for all the benefits of being married (legal, taxes, social recognition, all other married benefits) as just "paperwork" is not a couple I would want to be friends with. I have too many friends worldwide who are fighting for that "paperwork" with same-sex marriage (and frankly not to be killed for being gay and living with their partners) to waste my time with people who would be so flippant about a life changing document. A diploma/ citizenship certificate/ passport  are just "paperwork" that have a lot of loaded meaning behind it and give privileges/ benefits. I could take the citizenship oath to the US and vow to be American, but without the paperwork and documentation, it doesn't mean I am an American citizen. 

    Being married is a binary state, one either IS or ISN'T. 
    If the bolded is what you believe happens at all courthouse paper signings, you are not correct. When we signed our license, thus becoming legally married, it went just like this:

    Enter courthouse. Went through metal detector. Found correct department. Took number. Waited in waiting area. Number eventually called. Approached desk. Let clerk know what we needed. She asked if we were taking the license and returning it within 30 days. We said no, we'd be signing it there. She did some stuff on her computer. We chatted about our lunch options. She returned with some paperwork for us to fill out involving contact info, parent's contact info, place and date of birth, etc. She reviewed the documents we were required to bring (ID, my divorce decree). She did more stuff on her computer. We finalized our lunch plans. She left to print something and returned with two copies of the license. She asked for $35. We paid her. She laid both copies of the licenses down and showed us where to sign. We did. She signed her spot. She kept one, we kept one. She bid us nice afternoon, we went to lunch. At no time were any type of vows exchanged. Nothing of the sort took place. At all. So while yes, there are "courthouse ceremonies" not ALL legally binding marriage paperwork comes with a dose of love and vows. Or anything even close. It was as romantic as getting our passports, or changing my name, and required many of the same documents and similar paperwork. 

    So while yes, there are courthouse ceremonies that may bring in elements of let's call them traditional weddings (the vows, the rings, what have you) it's not legally required nor is that type of thing even offered in every jurisdiction. And I know I'm mighty thankful for that. We would have been very uncomfortable with those things taking place that day.  

    Do you honestly expect anyone on here to take you seriously? Really? You lied to you family and friends to pay for an international vanity project. There are really few thing more deceitful and vulgar than that... I know you are going to respond with some silly "you don't know me" response" so it is really just a yawn at what iteration it will be next... It is true, trash always manages to shout the loudest despite not being welcome.
    What is there to take seriously or not? The legal marriage requirements in the city and county of Denver, Colorado are a matter of public policy. You can find the rules and regulations by Googling them. This doesn't have anything to do with knowing me or not. I didn't get to decide the requirements or the procedure of procuring or signing marriage licenses here. It just is what it is. 

  • I dress up, buy a gift, and take time off to go to a wedding to see friends arrive at a ceremony single and leave married (legally, spiritually, socially). I find it really insulting to people who had JOP weddings. Posters are making it out like you just sign papers. You DO say vows and make lifelong promises in JOP weddings. It doesn't have to be in a church to be meaningful. Of course I understand extenuating circumstances, but if you do not arrive "single" and leave "married" (ie if you cannot turn around halfway through the walk down the aisle and leave without any legal consequences) it isn't a wedding. Doesn't matter if it is the day before or a year before. At least have the decency to let me know so I can decide to go to the reinactment. In many of these cases, I just don't know why they couldn't get married and have a celebration later? Why have a fake white wedding?

     I would marry my Fi in a hessian sack this afternoon and be happy because I'm married to my Fi- I wouldn't want to have a redo because THAT was the moment we became married. Yes, we are planning a big church wedding but I know plans change, why the reinactment?. Why is everyone so entitled to a big white wedding?

    Honestly, it is INCREDIBLY insulting to women who chose to get married outside of the church that anything else is just paperwork. The reasons vows are made legitimate is because they are backed by the legal system in which you live. The spiritual is optional based on your world view. 

    ETA: Any couple who views making their union valid  for all the benefits of being married (legal, taxes, social recognition, all other married benefits) as just "paperwork" is not a couple I would want to be friends with. I have too many friends worldwide who are fighting for that "paperwork" with same-sex marriage (and frankly not to be killed for being gay and living with their partners) to waste my time with people who would be so flippant about a life changing document. A diploma/ citizenship certificate/ passport  are just "paperwork" that have a lot of loaded meaning behind it and give privileges/ benefits. I could take the citizenship oath to the US and vow to be American, but without the paperwork and documentation, it doesn't mean I am an American citizen. 

    Being married is a binary state, one either IS or ISN'T. 
    If the bolded is what you believe happens at all courthouse paper signings, you are not correct. When we signed our license, thus becoming legally married, it went just like this:

    Enter courthouse. Went through metal detector. Found correct department. Took number. Waited in waiting area. Number eventually called. Approached desk. Let clerk know what we needed. She asked if we were taking the license and returning it within 30 days. We said no, we'd be signing it there. She did some stuff on her computer. We chatted about our lunch options. She returned with some paperwork for us to fill out involving contact info, parent's contact info, place and date of birth, etc. She reviewed the documents we were required to bring (ID, my divorce decree). She did more stuff on her computer. We finalized our lunch plans. She left to print something and returned with two copies of the license. She asked for $35. We paid her. She laid both copies of the licenses down and showed us where to sign. We did. She signed her spot. She kept one, we kept one. She bid us nice afternoon, we went to lunch. At no time were any type of vows exchanged. Nothing of the sort took place. At all. So while yes, there are "courthouse ceremonies" not ALL legally binding marriage paperwork comes with a dose of love and vows. Or anything even close. It was as romantic as getting our passports, or changing my name, and required many of the same documents and similar paperwork. 

    So while yes, there are courthouse ceremonies that may bring in elements of let's call them traditional weddings (the vows, the rings, what have you) it's not legally required nor is that type of thing even offered in every jurisdiction. And I know I'm mighty thankful for that. We would have been very uncomfortable with those things taking place that day.  
    I'm confused.  The city of Denver forced you to talk about your lunch plans instead of taking a minute while she stepped away from her desk or was busy with the data entry to express a few loving sentiments to each other and make a vow?
  • jacques27 said:
    I dress up, buy a gift, and take time off to go to a wedding to see friends arrive at a ceremony single and leave married (legally, spiritually, socially). I find it really insulting to people who had JOP weddings. Posters are making it out like you just sign papers. You DO say vows and make lifelong promises in JOP weddings. It doesn't have to be in a church to be meaningful. Of course I understand extenuating circumstances, but if you do not arrive "single" and leave "married" (ie if you cannot turn around halfway through the walk down the aisle and leave without any legal consequences) it isn't a wedding. Doesn't matter if it is the day before or a year before. At least have the decency to let me know so I can decide to go to the reinactment. In many of these cases, I just don't know why they couldn't get married and have a celebration later? Why have a fake white wedding?

     I would marry my Fi in a hessian sack this afternoon and be happy because I'm married to my Fi- I wouldn't want to have a redo because THAT was the moment we became married. Yes, we are planning a big church wedding but I know plans change, why the reinactment?. Why is everyone so entitled to a big white wedding?

    Honestly, it is INCREDIBLY insulting to women who chose to get married outside of the church that anything else is just paperwork. The reasons vows are made legitimate is because they are backed by the legal system in which you live. The spiritual is optional based on your world view. 

    ETA: Any couple who views making their union valid  for all the benefits of being married (legal, taxes, social recognition, all other married benefits) as just "paperwork" is not a couple I would want to be friends with. I have too many friends worldwide who are fighting for that "paperwork" with same-sex marriage (and frankly not to be killed for being gay and living with their partners) to waste my time with people who would be so flippant about a life changing document. A diploma/ citizenship certificate/ passport  are just "paperwork" that have a lot of loaded meaning behind it and give privileges/ benefits. I could take the citizenship oath to the US and vow to be American, but without the paperwork and documentation, it doesn't mean I am an American citizen. 

    Being married is a binary state, one either IS or ISN'T. 
    If the bolded is what you believe happens at all courthouse paper signings, you are not correct. When we signed our license, thus becoming legally married, it went just like this:

    Enter courthouse. Went through metal detector. Found correct department. Took number. Waited in waiting area. Number eventually called. Approached desk. Let clerk know what we needed. She asked if we were taking the license and returning it within 30 days. We said no, we'd be signing it there. She did some stuff on her computer. We chatted about our lunch options. She returned with some paperwork for us to fill out involving contact info, parent's contact info, place and date of birth, etc. She reviewed the documents we were required to bring (ID, my divorce decree). She did more stuff on her computer. We finalized our lunch plans. She left to print something and returned with two copies of the license. She asked for $35. We paid her. She laid both copies of the licenses down and showed us where to sign. We did. She signed her spot. She kept one, we kept one. She bid us nice afternoon, we went to lunch. At no time were any type of vows exchanged. Nothing of the sort took place. At all. So while yes, there are "courthouse ceremonies" not ALL legally binding marriage paperwork comes with a dose of love and vows. Or anything even close. It was as romantic as getting our passports, or changing my name, and required many of the same documents and similar paperwork. 

    So while yes, there are courthouse ceremonies that may bring in elements of let's call them traditional weddings (the vows, the rings, what have you) it's not legally required nor is that type of thing even offered in every jurisdiction. And I know I'm mighty thankful for that. We would have been very uncomfortable with those things taking place that day.  
    I'm confused.  The city of Denver forced you to talk about your lunch plans instead of taking a minute while she stepped away from her desk or was busy with the data entry to express a few loving sentiments to each other and make a vow?
    My point was that the city of Denver didn't have any fucks to give about what we did or didn't discuss. We just happened to be hungry so we discussed where we were heading for lunch. The fact is LondonLisa is incorrect when she states that ALL j.o.p. weddings / license signings require vows, or any type of promises be spoken. They do not. Other than swearing that the information we provided was correct to the best of our knowledge we could have remained silent. We made "loving sentiments and vows" at our subsequent wedding ceremony. That's why we had one. Self-solemnization doesn't require any form of verbal speech or ceremony, whether at the courthouse or not. I didn't write the laws of Colorado. But I sure do appreciate them! 

  • plainjane0415plainjane0415 The hills of Tennessee member
    500 Love Its 1000 Comments First Anniversary Name Dropper

     

    jacques27 said:
    I dress up, buy a gift, and take time off to go to a wedding to see friends arrive at a ceremony single and leave married (legally, spiritually, socially). I find it really insulting to people who had JOP weddings. Posters are making it out like you just sign papers. You DO say vows and make lifelong promises in JOP weddings. It doesn't have to be in a church to be meaningful. Of course I understand extenuating circumstances, but if you do not arrive "single" and leave "married" (ie if you cannot turn around halfway through the walk down the aisle and leave without any legal consequences) it isn't a wedding. Doesn't matter if it is the day before or a year before. At least have the decency to let me know so I can decide to go to the reinactment. In many of these cases, I just don't know why they couldn't get married and have a celebration later? Why have a fake white wedding?

     I would marry my Fi in a hessian sack this afternoon and be happy because I'm married to my Fi- I wouldn't want to have a redo because THAT was the moment we became married. Yes, we are planning a big church wedding but I know plans change, why the reinactment?. Why is everyone so entitled to a big white wedding?

    Honestly, it is INCREDIBLY insulting to women who chose to get married outside of the church that anything else is just paperwork. The reasons vows are made legitimate is because they are backed by the legal system in which you live. The spiritual is optional based on your world view. 

    ETA: Any couple who views making their union valid  for all the benefits of being married (legal, taxes, social recognition, all other married benefits) as just "paperwork" is not a couple I would want to be friends with. I have too many friends worldwide who are fighting for that "paperwork" with same-sex marriage (and frankly not to be killed for being gay and living with their partners) to waste my time with people who would be so flippant about a life changing document. A diploma/ citizenship certificate/ passport  are just "paperwork" that have a lot of loaded meaning behind it and give privileges/ benefits. I could take the citizenship oath to the US and vow to be American, but without the paperwork and documentation, it doesn't mean I am an American citizen. 

    Being married is a binary state, one either IS or ISN'T. 
    If the bolded is what you believe happens at all courthouse paper signings, you are not correct. When we signed our license, thus becoming legally married, it went just like this:

    Enter courthouse. Went through metal detector. Found correct department. Took number. Waited in waiting area. Number eventually called. Approached desk. Let clerk know what we needed. She asked if we were taking the license and returning it within 30 days. We said no, we'd be signing it there. She did some stuff on her computer. We chatted about our lunch options. She returned with some paperwork for us to fill out involving contact info, parent's contact info, place and date of birth, etc. She reviewed the documents we were required to bring (ID, my divorce decree). She did more stuff on her computer. We finalized our lunch plans. She left to print something and returned with two copies of the license. She asked for $35. We paid her. She laid both copies of the licenses down and showed us where to sign. We did. She signed her spot. She kept one, we kept one. She bid us nice afternoon, we went to lunch. At no time were any type of vows exchanged. Nothing of the sort took place. At all. So while yes, there are "courthouse ceremonies" not ALL legally binding marriage paperwork comes with a dose of love and vows. Or anything even close. It was as romantic as getting our passports, or changing my name, and required many of the same documents and similar paperwork. 

    So while yes, there are courthouse ceremonies that may bring in elements of let's call them traditional weddings (the vows, the rings, what have you) it's not legally required nor is that type of thing even offered in every jurisdiction. And I know I'm mighty thankful for that. We would have been very uncomfortable with those things taking place that day.  
    I'm confused.  The city of Denver forced you to talk about your lunch plans instead of taking a minute while she stepped away from her desk or was busy with the data entry to express a few loving sentiments to each other and make a vow?
    My point was that the city of Denver didn't have any fucks to give about what we did or didn't discuss. We just happened to be hungry so we discussed where we were heading for lunch. The fact is LondonLisa is incorrect when she states that ALL j.o.p. weddings / license signings require vows, or any type of promises be spoken. They do not. Other than swearing that the information we provided was correct to the best of our knowledge we could have remained silent. We made "loving sentiments and vows" at our subsequent wedding ceremony. That's why we had one. Self-solemnization doesn't require any form of verbal speech or ceremony, whether at the courthouse or not. I didn't write the laws of Colorado. But I sure do appreciate them! 
    So she literally had you sign some papers and boom you're married? No words were exchanged other than"sign here"?  I don't believe that for a second.
    image
    butterscotchjbeans
  • mrs4everhartmrs4everhart member
    1000 Comments 500 Love Its First Anniversary First Answer
    edited November 2014



     




    jacques27 said:





    I dress up, buy a gift, and take time off to go to a wedding to see friends arrive at a ceremony single and leave married (legally, spiritually, socially). I find it really insulting to people who had JOP weddings. Posters are making it out like you just sign papers. You DO say vows and make lifelong promises in JOP weddings. It doesn't have to be in a church to be meaningful. Of course I understand extenuating circumstances, but if you do not arrive "single" and leave "married" (ie if you cannot turn around halfway through the walk down the aisle and leave without any legal consequences) it isn't a wedding. Doesn't matter if it is the day before or a year before. At least have the decency to let me know so I can decide to go to the reinactment. In many of these cases, I just don't know why they couldn't get married and have a celebration later? Why have a fake white wedding?

     I would marry my Fi in a hessian sack this afternoon and be happy because I'm married to my Fi- I wouldn't want to have a redo because THAT was the moment we became married. Yes, we are planning a big church wedding but I know plans change, why the reinactment?. Why is everyone so entitled to a big white wedding?

    Honestly, it is INCREDIBLY insulting to women who chose to get married outside of the church that anything else is just paperwork. The reasons vows are made legitimate is because they are backed by the legal system in which you live. The spiritual is optional based on your world view. 

    ETA: Any couple who views making their union valid  for all the benefits of being married (legal, taxes, social recognition, all other married benefits) as just "paperwork" is not a couple I would want to be friends with. I have too many friends worldwide who are fighting for that "paperwork" with same-sex marriage (and frankly not to be killed for being gay and living with their partners) to waste my time with people who would be so flippant about a life changing document. A diploma/ citizenship certificate/ passport  are just "paperwork" that have a lot of loaded meaning behind it and give privileges/ benefits. I could take the citizenship oath to the US and vow to be American, but without the paperwork and documentation, it doesn't mean I am an American citizen. 

    Being married is a binary state, one either IS or ISN'T. 

    If the bolded is what you believe happens at all courthouse paper signings, you are not correct. When we signed our license, thus becoming legally married, it went just like this:

    Enter courthouse. Went through metal detector. Found correct department. Took number. Waited in waiting area. Number eventually called. Approached desk. Let clerk know what we needed. She asked if we were taking the license and returning it within 30 days. We said no, we'd be signing it there. She did some stuff on her computer. We chatted about our lunch options. She returned with some paperwork for us to fill out involving contact info, parent's contact info, place and date of birth, etc. She reviewed the documents we were required to bring (ID, my divorce decree). She did more stuff on her computer. We finalized our lunch plans. She left to print something and returned with two copies of the license. She asked for $35. We paid her. She laid both copies of the licenses down and showed us where to sign. We did. She signed her spot. She kept one, we kept one. She bid us nice afternoon, we went to lunch. At no time were any type of vows exchanged. Nothing of the sort took place. At all. So while yes, there are "courthouse ceremonies" not ALL legally binding marriage paperwork comes with a dose of love and vows. Or anything even close. It was as romantic as getting our passports, or changing my name, and required many of the same documents and similar paperwork. 

    So while yes, there are courthouse ceremonies that may bring in elements of let's call them traditional weddings (the vows, the rings, what have you) it's not legally required nor is that type of thing even offered in every jurisdiction. And I know I'm mighty thankful for that. We would have been very uncomfortable with those things taking place that day.  

    I'm confused.  The city of Denver forced you to talk about your lunch plans instead of taking a minute while she stepped away from her desk or was busy with the data entry to express a few loving sentiments to each other and make a vow?



    My point was that the city of Denver didn't have any fucks to give about what we did or didn't discuss. We just happened to be hungry so we discussed where we were heading for lunch. The fact is LondonLisa is incorrect when she states that ALL j.o.p. weddings / license signings require vows, or any type of promises be spoken. They do not. Other than swearing that the information we provided was correct to the best of our knowledge we could have remained silent. We made "loving sentiments and vows" at our subsequent wedding ceremony. That's why we had one. Self-solemnization doesn't require any form of verbal speech or ceremony, whether at the courthouse or not. I didn't write the laws of Colorado. But I sure do appreciate them! 


    So she literally had you sign some papers and boom you're married? No words were exchanged other than"sign here"?  I don't believe that for a second.

    ----------------------SIB--------------------------------------

    That's what self solemnization means: no officiant needed, no witnesses needed, no ceremony needed.

    The only words "exchanged" were between us and her (the clerk) when we affirmed the information we gave her was true to the best of our knowledge.

    Had we not wanted to sign it / file it then and there that was as far as we would have needed to go with the clerk. She would have signed her line then we could have left with the license. We would have had 30 days to sign it ourselves, bring it back and file it.

    You don't have to believe me. You can Google self-solemnized marriage license / Colorado marriage licensing if you're so inclined.

    I'm used to being an assumed "liar" on TK and I still sleep just fine, but I really can't imagine a good reason to make up the details of self-solemnized marriage licenses. Especially since all one has to do is Google it!

    So yes, we literally filled some stuff out, paid the fee, signed, then as you said, boom, we were legally married.


    newvalley
  • edited June 2015

    I'm out.
  • mrs4everhartmrs4everhart member
    1000 Comments 500 Love Its First Anniversary First Answer
    edited November 2014
    Yes, no ceremony was required in front of the clerk, but you could have easily had one. You could take the time to make vows that are important to you and just as meaningful, either in front of others at a big ceremony or by yourself, then returned the certificate. Instead you chose to discuss your lunch, lie to your family, and make them pay for a fake wedding abroad. Lying, entitled brats are not people I want in my life, especially ones who are the living embodiment of the Dunning Kruger Effect.
    *******************Boxes have taken Thanksgiving off************************************

    No, we couldn't have. That wasn't at all what we wanted for our wedding and we weren't interested in multiple vow exchanges, etc. We had several discussions leading up to signing our license to figure out how to achieve exactly what we still wanted while compensating for life throwing us a curveball. At the time of the license signing we weren't ready to consider ourselves married. We weren't giving up our wedding plans, that simply wasn't an option and since we weren't interested in living life as a married couple at that point there was zero reason to mention it beyond those who already knew and understood where we were coming from. Signing the license made us legally responsible for each other. We had already been obligated in similar ways for so long it didn't feel any different. Our marriage license was far from the first legally binding contract we'd ever entered in to. 

    If one chooses to think of marriage as a multi-faceted institution, one with legal, social, possibly religious, possibly with familial aspects, signing the license was only part of getting married. We weren't interested in fulfilling the rest on that date or time or in that location. We were always going to sign our license before we left, we weren't interested in fulfilling the legal aspects abroad. The exact date when we did it ended up being what changed and we knew in our hearts that wouldn't change anything else about getting married or having the wedding of our dreams. And, it didn't.

    But that's not really the point here at all. We made the very best out of a complicated situation and ended up with the wedding we wanted. No regrets to be had. The point was, and still is, not all marriage license signings are required to have any type of vows, readings, ceremonial aspects or kind and loving words exchanged, whatsoever. Whether we could have said any type of vows, or talked about the weather, or whatever, has nothing to do with the fact that it wasn't legally required. So please do not get it all twisted and state that all do. Many might and I suppose that's where y'all get this whole "re-do" idea, but I know we've only said vows to each other once, and it wasn't on the same day as we signed our license. No big deal.

  • thisismynickname2thisismynickname2 City By The Lake member
    5000 Comments Sixth Anniversary 500 Love Its First Answer
    I was curious enough to look up Colorado laws and sure enough, a couple can self-solemnize. It's literally just signing the license in a certain way. I learn something new every day. 

    I can't help but stir the pot, sorry, sorry!---- I don't see how you can be not "ready to consider ourselves married" but yet be "legally responsible for each other."  I just don't think you get to choose. Insurance? Married! In an accident and on a death bed in a hospital? Married!  Everything else? Not married!  I just don't get it. 


    ________________________________


    esstee33
  • Fran1985 Fran1985 Narnia member
    Fifth Anniversary 500 Love Its 500 Comments Name Dropper

     

    jacques27 said:
    I dress up, buy a gift, and take time off to go to a wedding to see friends arrive at a ceremony single and leave married (legally, spiritually, socially). I find it really insulting to people who had JOP weddings. Posters are making it out like you just sign papers. You DO say vows and make lifelong promises in JOP weddings. It doesn't have to be in a church to be meaningful. Of course I understand extenuating circumstances, but if you do not arrive "single" and leave "married" (ie if you cannot turn around halfway through the walk down the aisle and leave without any legal consequences) it isn't a wedding. Doesn't matter if it is the day before or a year before. At least have the decency to let me know so I can decide to go to the reinactment. In many of these cases, I just don't know why they couldn't get married and have a celebration later? Why have a fake white wedding?

     I would marry my Fi in a hessian sack this afternoon and be happy because I'm married to my Fi- I wouldn't want to have a redo because THAT was the moment we became married. Yes, we are planning a big church wedding but I know plans change, why the reinactment?. Why is everyone so entitled to a big white wedding?

    Honestly, it is INCREDIBLY insulting to women who chose to get married outside of the church that anything else is just paperwork. The reasons vows are made legitimate is because they are backed by the legal system in which you live. The spiritual is optional based on your world view. 

    ETA: Any couple who views making their union valid  for all the benefits of being married (legal, taxes, social recognition, all other married benefits) as just "paperwork" is not a couple I would want to be friends with. I have too many friends worldwide who are fighting for that "paperwork" with same-sex marriage (and frankly not to be killed for being gay and living with their partners) to waste my time with people who would be so flippant about a life changing document. A diploma/ citizenship certificate/ passport  are just "paperwork" that have a lot of loaded meaning behind it and give privileges/ benefits. I could take the citizenship oath to the US and vow to be American, but without the paperwork and documentation, it doesn't mean I am an American citizen. 

    Being married is a binary state, one either IS or ISN'T. 
    If the bolded is what you believe happens at all courthouse paper signings, you are not correct. When we signed our license, thus becoming legally married, it went just like this:

    Enter courthouse. Went through metal detector. Found correct department. Took number. Waited in waiting area. Number eventually called. Approached desk. Let clerk know what we needed. She asked if we were taking the license and returning it within 30 days. We said no, we'd be signing it there. She did some stuff on her computer. We chatted about our lunch options. She returned with some paperwork for us to fill out involving contact info, parent's contact info, place and date of birth, etc. She reviewed the documents we were required to bring (ID, my divorce decree). She did more stuff on her computer. We finalized our lunch plans. She left to print something and returned with two copies of the license. She asked for $35. We paid her. She laid both copies of the licenses down and showed us where to sign. We did. She signed her spot. She kept one, we kept one. She bid us nice afternoon, we went to lunch. At no time were any type of vows exchanged. Nothing of the sort took place. At all. So while yes, there are "courthouse ceremonies" not ALL legally binding marriage paperwork comes with a dose of love and vows. Or anything even close. It was as romantic as getting our passports, or changing my name, and required many of the same documents and similar paperwork. 

    So while yes, there are courthouse ceremonies that may bring in elements of let's call them traditional weddings (the vows, the rings, what have you) it's not legally required nor is that type of thing even offered in every jurisdiction. And I know I'm mighty thankful for that. We would have been very uncomfortable with those things taking place that day.  
    I'm confused.  The city of Denver forced you to talk about your lunch plans instead of taking a minute while she stepped away from her desk or was busy with the data entry to express a few loving sentiments to each other and make a vow?
    My point was that the city of Denver didn't have any fucks to give about what we did or didn't discuss. We just happened to be hungry so we discussed where we were heading for lunch. The fact is LondonLisa is incorrect when she states that ALL j.o.p. weddings / license signings require vows, or any type of promises be spoken. They do not. Other than swearing that the information we provided was correct to the best of our knowledge we could have remained silent. We made "loving sentiments and vows" at our subsequent wedding ceremony. That's why we had one. Self-solemnization doesn't require any form of verbal speech or ceremony, whether at the courthouse or not. I didn't write the laws of Colorado. But I sure do appreciate them! 
    So she literally had you sign some papers and boom you're married? No words were exchanged other than"sign here"?  I don't believe that for a second.
    ----------------------SIB-------------------------------------- That's what self solemnization means: no officiant needed, no witnesses needed, no ceremony needed. The only words "exchanged" were between us and her (the clerk) when we affirmed the information we gave her was true to the best of our knowledge. Had we not wanted to sign it / file it then and there that was as far as we would have needed to go with the clerk. She would have signed her line then we could have left with the license. We would have had 30 days to sign it ourselves, bring it back and file it. You don't have to believe me. You can Google self-solemnized marriage license / Colorado marriage licensing if you're so inclined. I'm used to being an assumed "liar" on TK and I still sleep just fine, but I really can't imagine a good reason to make up the details of self-solemnized marriage licenses. Especially since all one has to do is Google it! So yes, we literally filled some stuff out, paid the fee, signed, then as you said, boom, we were legally married.
    Actually it does need a ceremony or an observence- it can just be as small as you want it. Colorado is one of the only states that has a self-solemnizing marriage allowance but you still have to solemnize- there is a reason its not called the self signing marriage or even a self uniting marriage- by definition there is a ceremony or obsevence.  Your ceremony was about lunch but there is no definition of what has to make up the ceremony to count- there doesn't have to be words or vows but there is a serious aspect to it. By law it is not just signing like at the DMV even if it felt like it.

    image
  • mrs4everhartmrs4everhart member
    1000 Comments 500 Love Its First Anniversary First Answer
    edited December 2014

     

    jacques27 said:
    I dress up, buy a gift, and take time off to go to a wedding to see friends arrive at a ceremony single and leave married (legally, spiritually, socially). I find it really insulting to people who had JOP weddings. Posters are making it out like you just sign papers. You DO say vows and make lifelong promises in JOP weddings. It doesn't have to be in a church to be meaningful. Of course I understand extenuating circumstances, but if you do not arrive "single" and leave "married" (ie if you cannot turn around halfway through the walk down the aisle and leave without any legal consequences) it isn't a wedding. Doesn't matter if it is the day before or a year before. At least have the decency to let me know so I can decide to go to the reinactment. In many of these cases, I just don't know why they couldn't get married and have a celebration later? Why have a fake white wedding?

     I would marry my Fi in a hessian sack this afternoon and be happy because I'm married to my Fi- I wouldn't want to have a redo because THAT was the moment we became married. Yes, we are planning a big church wedding but I know plans change, why the reinactment?. Why is everyone so entitled to a big white wedding?

    Honestly, it is INCREDIBLY insulting to women who chose to get married outside of the church that anything else is just paperwork. The reasons vows are made legitimate is because they are backed by the legal system in which you live. The spiritual is optional based on your world view. 

    ETA: Any couple who views making their union valid  for all the benefits of being married (legal, taxes, social recognition, all other married benefits) as just "paperwork" is not a couple I would want to be friends with. I have too many friends worldwide who are fighting for that "paperwork" with same-sex marriage (and frankly not to be killed for being gay and living with their partners) to waste my time with people who would be so flippant about a life changing document. A diploma/ citizenship certificate/ passport  are just "paperwork" that have a lot of loaded meaning behind it and give privileges/ benefits. I could take the citizenship oath to the US and vow to be American, but without the paperwork and documentation, it doesn't mean I am an American citizen. 

    Being married is a binary state, one either IS or ISN'T. 
    If the bolded is what you believe happens at all courthouse paper signings, you are not correct. When we signed our license, thus becoming legally married, it went just like this:

    Enter courthouse. Went through metal detector. Found correct department. Took number. Waited in waiting area. Number eventually called. Approached desk. Let clerk know what we needed. She asked if we were taking the license and returning it within 30 days. We said no, we'd be signing it there. She did some stuff on her computer. We chatted about our lunch options. She returned with some paperwork for us to fill out involving contact info, parent's contact info, place and date of birth, etc. She reviewed the documents we were required to bring (ID, my divorce decree). She did more stuff on her computer. We finalized our lunch plans. She left to print something and returned with two copies of the license. She asked for $35. We paid her. She laid both copies of the licenses down and showed us where to sign. We did. She signed her spot. She kept one, we kept one. She bid us nice afternoon, we went to lunch. At no time were any type of vows exchanged. Nothing of the sort took place. At all. So while yes, there are "courthouse ceremonies" not ALL legally binding marriage paperwork comes with a dose of love and vows. Or anything even close. It was as romantic as getting our passports, or changing my name, and required many of the same documents and similar paperwork. 

    So while yes, there are courthouse ceremonies that may bring in elements of let's call them traditional weddings (the vows, the rings, what have you) it's not legally required nor is that type of thing even offered in every jurisdiction. And I know I'm mighty thankful for that. We would have been very uncomfortable with those things taking place that day.  
    I'm confused.  The city of Denver forced you to talk about your lunch plans instead of taking a minute while she stepped away from her desk or was busy with the data entry to express a few loving sentiments to each other and make a vow?
    My point was that the city of Denver didn't have any fucks to give about what we did or didn't discuss. We just happened to be hungry so we discussed where we were heading for lunch. The fact is LondonLisa is incorrect when she states that ALL j.o.p. weddings / license signings require vows, or any type of promises be spoken. They do not. Other than swearing that the information we provided was correct to the best of our knowledge we could have remained silent. We made "loving sentiments and vows" at our subsequent wedding ceremony. That's why we had one. Self-solemnization doesn't require any form of verbal speech or ceremony, whether at the courthouse or not. I didn't write the laws of Colorado. But I sure do appreciate them! 
    So she literally had you sign some papers and boom you're married? No words were exchanged other than"sign here"?  I don't believe that for a second.
    ----------------------SIB-------------------------------------- That's what self solemnization means: no officiant needed, no witnesses needed, no ceremony needed. The only words "exchanged" were between us and her (the clerk) when we affirmed the information we gave her was true to the best of our knowledge. Had we not wanted to sign it / file it then and there that was as far as we would have needed to go with the clerk. She would have signed her line then we could have left with the license. We would have had 30 days to sign it ourselves, bring it back and file it. You don't have to believe me. You can Google self-solemnized marriage license / Colorado marriage licensing if you're so inclined. I'm used to being an assumed "liar" on TK and I still sleep just fine, but I really can't imagine a good reason to make up the details of self-solemnized marriage licenses. Especially since all one has to do is Google it! So yes, we literally filled some stuff out, paid the fee, signed, then as you said, boom, we were legally married.
    Actually it does need a ceremony or an observence- it can just be as small as you want it. Colorado is one of the only states that has a self-solemnizing marriage allowance but you still have to solemnize- there is a reason its not called the self signing marriage or even a self uniting marriage- by definition there is a ceremony or obsevence.  Your ceremony was about lunch but there is no definition of what has to make up the ceremony to count- there doesn't have to be words or vows but there is a serious aspect to it. By law it is not just signing like at the DMV even if it felt like it.
    SIB, as usual........................................................................................................................


    Yea, if you consider standing at a counter in a clerk's office signing  paperwork a ceremony, go nuts with that. I didn't. Neither did he. So if saying nothing at all is considered a ceremony, it's easily the loosest definition of "ceremony" I've yet to come across. If the state considers standing at a clerk's counter signing paperwork a ceremony, that makes me chuckle, this place really does have some lax rules and regulations. Probably why I love it so much.


    I was curious enough to look up Colorado laws and sure enough, a couple can self-solemnize. It's literally just signing the license in a certain way. I learn something new every day. 

    I can't help but stir the pot, sorry, sorry!---- I don't see how you can be not "ready to consider ourselves married" but yet be "legally responsible for each other."  I just don't think you get to choose. Insurance? Married! In an accident and on a death bed in a hospital? Married!  Everything else? Not married!  I just don't get it. 


    To the bolded: It wasn't up for debate. We made the choice to continue on with our engagement regardless of what the state classified us. So, yea, we chose. It was really a simple process, but it's not for everyone, and I can't say I'd advise to it everyone I meet. But regardless, yes, that's how it can be done here. So no repeat ceremonies for us. Just as we intended. 

This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards