Would You Attend A Wedding For A SSM?

[cinepro]

1 hour ago, ALarson said:

What is kind of interesting is that my friend told me the parents of his son's partner are refusing to attend or support his marriage (even though they are very fond of my friend's son).  We both commented on that being ironic.  The Mormons in the family are supporting the marriage while the nonmember family members of the partner are not supporting it.

So, would you attend?

.

Hopefully the son's fiancee has been raised in a church that teaches that the presence of parents at the wedding is only incidental.

[consiglieri]

26 minutes ago, smac97 said:

This is a fair question.  A few thoughts:

1. I sustain the Church's position on same-sex marriage.
2. I also sustain the Church's position on demonstrating love and compassion to those who have same-sex attraction.
3. Attendees at a wedding are traditionally construed as witnesses and celebrants of the event.
4. For myself, I do not think I could reconcile myself to "celebrating" (through attendance at) an event that is so at odds with the Restored Gospel in relation to its teachings about marriage and The Law of Chastity.
5. If invited to a same-sex wedding, I would decline.  I would do so privately, preferably in person (and perhaps preceded by an explanatory letter).  I would explain my position, while also expressing love and affection for the individuals.
6. Although I would decline to attend such a wedding, I would thereafter welcome the couple to attend any private or family activities and events to which I would invite others, and would treat them with love, decorum, tolerance and understanding.  I think shunning or ignoring or dissociating such a couple would not be appropriate (and, in fact, largely at odds with the Restored Gospel).

Let me close with a somewhat-related story: I know of an elderly lady who was once visited by a grandson who was obviously under the influence of marijuana (appearing stoned, reeked of MJ, etc.).  She asked the grandson to leave and return for a visit A) after the grandchild sobered up, and B) without the scent of cigarettes and marijuana.  The grandson became upset and angry, and responded: "You should accept me for who I am!"  The grandmother, who was never one to be pushed around, said "I do accept you.  And I love you.  But I do not have to accept or go along with your conduct when I disagree with it.  So please come back when you are sober and showered."  The grandson, still angry, left and did not return.

Thanks,

-Smac

Your position reminds me of what happened with my brother when I got married back in 1985.

I was married in the temple, but we had a ring ceremony afterward at the stake center for the many non-Mormons in both families.

I had invited my brother to attend.

He said he would like to, but if he attended, and somebody saw him there, they might think he agreed with me.

And so he declined.

My brother is a Jehovah's Witness.

When I joined the LDS Church in 1978, there seemed to be all the difference in the world to me between the Mormons and the Jehovah's Witnesses.

Over the years, I have seen the LDS Church become more and more like the Jehovah's Witnesses.

I do not see it as a change for the better.

[mtomm]

I would attend. I don't see it as much different from families who attend an LDS baptism they are less than thrilled about, or non-member parents who are willing to stand outside the temple.  Being high on marijuana is not nearly the same as people trying to make their lives better even if we don't agree with the method of improvement. 

Edited to add that my daughter-in-law's father hasn't spoken to her since he learned that she was expecting a baby. He doesn't see this as a good thing in her life and he is not being supportive. Yet every LDS person who knows is thrilled and couldn't be happier for them. They see children as a blessing. Him not so much. We can choose to alienate ourselves from our friends/family and their choices or we can shake their hands and tell them godspeed. 

 

 

Edited March 16, 2016 by mtomm

[USU78]

Never 

[CV75]

38 minutes ago, smac97 said:

This is a fair question.  A few thoughts:

1. I sustain the Church's position on same-sex marriage.
2. I also sustain the Church's position on demonstrating love and compassion to those who have same-sex attraction.
3. Attendees at a wedding are traditionally construed as witnesses and celebrants of the event.
4. For myself, I do not think I could reconcile myself to "celebrating" (through attendance at) an event that is so at odds with the Restored Gospel in relation to its teachings about marriage and The Law of Chastity.
5. If invited to a same-sex wedding, I would decline.  I would do so privately, preferably in person (and perhaps preceded by an explanatory letter).  I would explain my position, while also expressing love and affection for the individuals.
6. Although I would decline to attend such a wedding, I would thereafter welcome the couple to attend any private or family activities and events to which I would invite others, and would treat them with love, decorum, tolerance and understanding.  I think shunning or ignoring or dissociating such a couple would not be appropriate (and, in fact, largely at odds with the Restored Gospel).

Let me close with a somewhat-related story: I know of an elderly lady who was once visited by a grandson who was obviously under the influence of marijuana (appearing stoned, reeked of MJ, etc.).  She asked the grandson to leave and return for a visit A) after the grandchild sobered up, and B) without the scent of cigarettes and marijuana.  The grandson became upset and angry, and responded: "You should accept me for who I am!"  The grandmother, who was never one to be pushed around, said "I do accept you.  And I love you.  But I do not have to accept or go along with your conduct when I disagree with it.  So please come back when you are sober and showered."  The grandson, still angry, left and did not return.

Thanks,

-Smac

This reflects my views. I would RSVP plenty of time ahead and not alter any of my usual congenial interactions and activities with anyone involved before, during or after the event. If asked, I would express my love and affection for all involved but that I do not recognize the institution. most people know me well enough already, but if needed I would take extra care to smooth any ruffled feathers.

[ALarson]

7 minutes ago, mtomm said:

Being high on marijuana is not nearly the same as people trying to make their lives better even if we don't agree with the method of improvement. 

Yes, I agree.  

[bluebell]

29 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

By the way, for those that say yes, would you also attend a wedding if it were the son of a very close friend who was marrying a plural wife?

 

I admit that one gives me more pause than the SSM marriage, but, in the end I think I would also attend.

Yes, I would attend that as well.

[ALarson]

6 minutes ago, CV75 said:

This reflects my views. I would RSVP plenty of time ahead and not alter any of my usual congenial interactions and activities with anyone involved before, during or after the event. If asked, I would express my love and affection for all involved but that I do not recognize the institution. most people know me well enough already, but if needed I would take extra care to smooth any ruffled feathers.

Would you send a gift?  Just wondering... (Do  you normally still send a gift even if you RSVP "no"?).... since you stated that you would not alter your "usual" interactions with those involved after sending the RSVP

(And, I like your answer above.)

Edited March 16, 2016 by ALarson

[rpn]

2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

 They aren't married, so why pretend they are?

I think the question is a tough one.    But I strongly disagree with the quoted statement because they are married according to law, in a secular manner.  

I don't think I could attend the ceremony, but I could probably attend a reception if the couple still wanted me to attend it.

Those who post here who say "what parent wouldn't want their child to find someone to love" are suggesting that acting on ssa in relationships is the only way/the best way to happiness.   It seems to me that if we believe God, then we would want our children to live the faith, even when doing so does not result in a life long intimate companion: in THAT would be real happiness.

Having said all that, I trust that immediate family members who decide to attend such events, weigh another intangible that could legitimately result in cheerful attendance at all festivities:   they know their family member's heart and surely they are entitled to confirm that family means standing up for each other even when one does not agree with behavior or feelings, or belief.

Edited March 16, 2016 by rpn

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, ALarson said:

Yesterday, I learned from a very close friend of mine that his son is getting married.  His son is gay and is marrying his partner of several years.  My wife and I are going to be invited to the wedding (a couple hours away).  My friend is an extremely active member of the church and is in full support of their son getting married as they really love his partner and are happy for their son.  He (their son) served a full time mission and is an incredible young man (I've known him since he was very young).  He is no longer active in the church, but has no hatred or animosity towards the church (that I know of or have heard from him).

All of his (the son's) siblings are very active in the church, have temple marriages, etc.  They all live out of the area and will be flying home to attend the wedding too.  They are thrilled for their brother and want to support him. My friend is very happy that all of his children will be there for the wedding.  That was interesting to learn as I wondered if they would be coming back home and attending the wedding (I haven't pried or asked how they felt about their brother and his partner).

It sounds like this will be a small wedding and will include only family and close friends.  

What is kind of interesting is that my friend told me the parents of his son's partner are refusing to attend or support his marriage (even though they are very fond of my friend's son).  We both commented on that being ironic.  The Mormons in the family are supporting the marriage while the nonmember family members of the partner are not supporting it.

So, would you attend?

.

No.

 

[ALarson]

9 minutes ago, rpn said:

I think the question is a tough one.    But I strongly disagree with the quoted statement because they are married according to law, in a secular manner.  

I don't think I could attend the ceremony, but I could probably attend a reception if the couple still wanted me to attend it.

Those who post here who say "what parent wouldn't want their child to find someone to love" are suggesting that acting on ssa in relationships is the only way/the best way to happiness.   It seems to me that if we believe God, then we would want our children to live the faith, even when doing so does not result in a live long intimate companion: in THAT would be real happiness.

Having said all that, I trust that immediate family members who decide to attend such events, weigh another intangible that could legitimately result in cheerful attendance at all festivities:   they know their family member's heart and surely they are entitled to confirm that family means standing up for each other even when one does not agree with behavior or feelings, or belief.

Nice post.  

I know for a fact that all of this young man's siblings (who are flying in to attend) are going to be there because they love their brother and want to support him and be there on a day that is very important to him.  He wants his family there with him.  

However, my friend shared with me that his siblings have differing opinions regarding SSM (and this has been discussed openly).  It's just tough when it's a son...a daughter....or a sibling who is getting married (or even a close friend).  

For those saying "no", would you feel the same way if it was your son or daughter?  Would you not attend their wedding either?

.

Edited March 16, 2016 by ALarson

[Scott Lloyd]

3 minutes ago, ALarson said:

For those saying "no", would you feel the same way if it was your son or daughter?  Would you not attend their wedding either?

 

I don't take part in celebration of illicit sexual activity. And no, I wouldn't even do it for a family member, however close.

 

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, toon said:

I try to avoid going to weddings at all costs, but same sex doesn't play into that.

Words to live by.

From a TV show:

"Mommy, I'm bored."

"It's a wedding honey, we are all bored."

[smac97]

33 minutes ago, cinepro said:

Hopefully the son's fiancee has been raised in a church that teaches that the presence of parents at the wedding is only incidental.

Quite so.  All the more reason why Latter-day Saints needn't be censured if they decline to attend.  Their non-attendance is both A) immaterial to the event, and hence generally harmless to the couple getting married, and B) congruent with the Latter-day Saint's conscience, and hence harmless to the Latter-day Saint.

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

34 minutes ago, consiglieri said:

Your position reminds me of what happened with my brother when I got married back in 1985.

I was married in the temple, but we had a ring ceremony afterward at the stake center for the many non-Mormons in both families.

I had invited my brother to attend.

He said he would like to, but if he attended, and somebody saw him there, they might think he agreed with me.

And so he declined.

My brother is a Jehovah's Witness.

When I joined the LDS Church in 1978, there seemed to be all the difference in the world to me between the Mormons and the Jehovah's Witnesses.

Over the years, I have seen the LDS Church become more and more like the Jehovah's Witnesses.

I do not see it as a change for the better.

With respect, I decline to enter into substantive discussion with you.

Thanks,

-Smac

[The Nehor]

36 minutes ago, cinepro said:

Hopefully the son's fiancee has been raised in a church that teaches that the presence of parents at the wedding is only incidental.

We need people from this faith to join our church more often.

[smac97]

10 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Nice post.  

I know for a fact that all of this young man's siblings (who are flying in to attend) are going to be there because they love their brother and want to support him and be there on a day that is very important to him.  He wants his family there with him.  

However, my friend shared with me that his siblings have differing opinions regarding SSM (and this has been discussed openly).  It's just tough when it's a son...a daughter....or a sibling who is getting married (or even a close friend).  

For those saying "no", would you feel the same way if it was your son or daughter?  Would you not attend their wedding either?

.

That's a tough question.  I think probably not, though I'll wait to get to that bridge before definitively deciding whether or not to cross it.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited March 16, 2016 by smac97

[Scott Lloyd]

2 minutes ago, smac97 said:

That's a tough question.  I think probably not, though I'll wait to get to that bridge before definitively deciding whether or not to cross it.

Thanks,

-Smac

It would be a heartbreaking situation, but not a tough decision -- not for me.

[ALarson]

3 minutes ago, smac97 said:

That's a tough question.  I think probably not, though I'll wait to get to that bridge before definitively deciding whether or not to cross it.

Thanks,

-Smac

I think that's a very honest answer.  I believe it would be a heartbreaking decision to have to make for those who oppose SSM.

[CV75]

19 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Would you send a gift?  Just wondering... (Do  you normally still send a gift even if you RSVP "no"?).... since you stated that you would not alter your "usual" interactions with those involved after sending the RSVP

(And, I like your answer above.)

I would not send a gift in this case since that would be tied too closely to the wedding. They would just figure I'm being cheap as usual... LOL... But our relationship is stronger than gifts and I would preserve it in other ways.

[JLHPROF]

1 minute ago, ALarson said:

For those saying "no", would you feel the same way if it was your son or daughter?  Would you not attend their wedding either?

No, I would not.
The issue is not supporting a loved one.  It's supporting a loved one in a wrong choice.
There are limits to how much we support our loved ones.  I wouldn't buy drugs for an addicted relative.  I wouldn't leave my children alone with a relative who was a reformed and repented molester.

• "I have heard President Joseph F. Smith say on several occasions that he would rather take his children one by one to the grave in their innocence and purity, knowing that they would come forth to inherit the fulness of celestial glory, than to have them marry outside of the Church, or even outside the temple of the Lord.  Why should he have been so emphatic? Because he had perfect knowledge of what marriage, according to the law of the Lord, means; and because he knew the consequences attending the rejection of this covenant in the house of the Lord. For those who refuse to receive this ordinance, as the Lord ordained, cannot enter into the fulness of celestial glory." (Joseph Fielding Smith - Doctrines of Salvation, Vol.2, p.76)

There are limits to love and support.  This is the same principle as I raised in the "unforgivable sins" thread.  It is possible to be too forgiving, too accepting, when faced with correct principle.  Following correct principle doesn't make you any the less loving.

[Boanerges]

3 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

No, I would not.
The issue is not supporting a loved one.  It's supporting a loved one in a wrong choice.
There are limits to how much we support our loved ones.  I wouldn't buy drugs for an addicted relative.  I wouldn't leave my children alone with a relative who was a reformed and repented molester.

• "I have heard President Joseph F. Smith say on several occasions that he would rather take his children one by one to the grave in their innocence and purity, knowing that they would come forth to inherit the fulness of celestial glory, than to have them marry outside of the Church, or even outside the temple of the Lord.  Why should he have been so emphatic? Because he had perfect knowledge of what marriage, according to the law of the Lord, means; and because he knew the consequences attending the rejection of this covenant in the house of the Lord. For those who refuse to receive this ordinance, as the Lord ordained, cannot enter into the fulness of celestial glory." (Joseph Fielding Smith - Doctrines of Salvation, Vol.2, p.76)

There are limits to love and support.  This is the same principle as I raised in the "unforgivable sins" thread.  It is possible to be too forgiving, too accepting, when faced with correct principle.  Following correct principle doesn't make you any the less loving.

But they are committing the sin whether they are legally married or not - they're still living together and having sex. Marriage doesn't change that. Where do you draw the line?

[Rock_N_Roll]

Absolutely.  I would gladly attend. 

[Rock_N_Roll]

19 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I don't take part in celebration of illicit sexual activity. And no, I wouldn't even do it for a family member, however close.

 

Shiver!  That's cold man, that's cold. 

[Scott Lloyd]

7 minutes ago, Boanerges said:

But they are committing the sin whether they are legally married or not - they're still living together and having sex. Marriage doesn't change that. Where do you draw the line?

If you object to the behavior, why would you take part in a celebration of it, thus implying endorsement, consent or, at the very least, acquiescence?