How many weddings or wedding type ceremonies have you attended?

I was a bridesmaid at 5. I have attended 20+ weddings over my lifetime. I have mixed emotions about weddings at this point in my life and have not attended one in about three years. I never had a large nice ceremony with my Ex husband. We went the Justice of the Peace route so I feel I missed out on a big part of being a gurl. The white dress, the presents, the party, the celebration of love witnessed by family and friends, are all things I long for and will probably never have, so...weddings make me a little sad and jealous. I suppose if they ever legalize same sex marriages in this country I will then be able to live out this little dream but until then I will avoid weddings like the plague.

I've been to both of my sisters' weddings, and a couple other weddings (my parents' friends) when I was younger. I was the flower girl in one of my sisters' weddings.

I'm guessing 6-10 because I don't remember how many I went to as a child. I was a bridesmaid in my sister's wedding and HATED it. I was delighted that she wanted me in it, but I'm just not into dressing up for formal occasions. I'm happy for friends and family when they are getting married, but dislike formal ceremonies.

Having said that, if the day comes when mandy and I can legally marry, I will happily help her plan the biggest most extravagent wedding we can possibly afford, and it would be very special to me, even if I do have to dress up!

..and a funeral.

I have no idea how many weddings I've been to. I've been a guest at probably around twenty friends' & relatives' weddings, but I've helped out at/been around maybe 60-70, possibly more.

I love weddings and am sort of a wedding geek. I'm currently helping a friend to plan her wedding for this September and looking for a site for mine for next September.

I don't know if you've heard, but the Canadian Supreme Court decided last week that Ontario's definition of "spouse" as a person of the opposite sex is discriminatory and unconstitutional and gave Ontario six months to change their laws accordingly. I don't know if it will actually happen, but the odds of same sex marriage soon being legal in Canada have gone up considerably. I know it's not the US, but I still think it's a good sign and quite possibly a step in the right direction.

I've been to more funerals than weddings... I guess that's the benefit of having an extended family generally older than you ;)

Weddings are great. I always have a good time at weddings. I don't understand but its like waving a magic wand, if you know what I mean.

hunter, I might be wrong but I have found that a good test for whether or not something is right is to take its altimate conclusion.Lets go forward to a world where only same sex partners are allowed. Within a very few generations "end of human race". (sometimes I hate science if you know what I mean)..........michael

oh dear, I have just read the rest of the comments........michael

Ommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Om

weddings are generally long and boring. Then you go to the reception where you don't know most of the people and the band plays idiotic songs.

Miykal, who ever said anything about *only* same sex partners being allowed?

mandy and Suebee... Just out of curiosity, (I'm not trying to be offensive, just curious).... Will one or both of you be in a wedding gown? Or would you go for something entirely different?

i had been to a fair amount of weddings when i was younger(family and family friends). i've only been to 3 in the past 7-10 yrs- these were people who were very close friends. the last one was in august of 98 and i was a bridesmaid........ something i never thought i would do in a million years.
i guess this would be the moment i should post a photo of me in my gown......... not!!!!!
i generally don't like weddings or i should say receptions because i am uncomfortable in my clothing and socially(i would feel right at home if i could wear jeans)

*laughs at the thought of Sue in a wedding gown* I think we'd both wear something very formal and classy. Sue would definitely wear some kind of outfit with pants, I'm sure. I would have to wait and see what was "In" for whichever season finally becomes our wedding season. No offense taken.

Hunter....Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act. I fear it will be a long time until I go shopping for a dress.

Miykal- in order to use that sort of ultimate reasoning, you must first understand the issue in a deeper, more complete and sophisticated fashion, so that when you extend said issue forward you do not, inadvertently, stretch it too thin and break any connection to reason what-so-ever.

I hate dresses, They! I haven't worn one for more than 6 years, and don't plan to ever again. So mandy is right...I'd be in pants. She's the *girly* one.

Thanks for the info, Hunter...I hadn't heard. That's definitely a good sign.

Miykal - It is a subtle difference, but rather than thinking of gay marriage as "right", does it help if you just accept that there's nothing wrong with it? I really don't see how it hurts anything. I can't imagine ever having a problem with the human race not procreating. Allowing same-sex marriages is not going to reduce the number of lascivious heterosexuals running around on the planet. I don't think that's a legitimate argument.

gilly, you missed the point of the test. I'll give you another two examples. (1) Lets say we are all murderers, and we murder everyone! End of human race. (2) Lets say we all love one another QED.

Miykal -- I _was_ gonna stay out of this but, like many people before you, the problem with that kinda reasoning is that it sounds great when you tell people not to take even a single stone out of a National Park because "millions of people visit the park every year, and the park would quickly become a mess if every one did it".

Now fast forward *everything* into that kinda thinking and you know what, *no one* can go to the Ben&Jerry's anymore, because if everyone goes to B&J's on Thursday evening it will be a disaster. Well, duh, yeah. But it doesn't happen that way. Not to mention that if everyone *doesn't* go to B&J's then it'll disappear. So now what?, you can't go and you can't not go. Well, I know I'm being silly, but I hope you get the gist of what I'm trying to say.

pcpr or is that r2d2, still I like your handle. Yes I do get the gist of what you are saying but I don't think you get the point of what I am saying. Its common sense that not everyone is going to be homosexual, and that not everyone is going to become a murderer or take a stone each from a national park. The point of the test is if a hypothesis is taken to the altimate conclusion and ends in human disaster, then the action under consideration is not in the best interests of mankind. However that is not to say that the best interest for mankind is necessarily the best interest of the universe. You never know we might be an undesirable virus as far as the universe is concerned................................michael
PS if you can provide me with what would be considered a desirable human condition, other than truth and honesty, then I would be delighted to give it the test. I've got broad shoulders. I have to have, because I'm so often wrong. But its the way to learn from others.

miykal - Your test for a hypothesis is entirely invalid, to wit: If everyone ate all the food they wanted to eat, we'd destroy ourselves very soon by running out of food (or the energy to produce it, which amounts to the same thing). According to your test, therefore no one should eat because eating is "not in the best interests of mankind."

In math, there's the concept of limit functions such as "as X approaches some value N, value Y approaches infinity". Even though that is true, the equations that cover acceleration under gravity still work to describe the arc of a thrown ball. The same sort of thought can be applied to all of your other examples.

I now no longer go to weddings. Any.

I never know what to do at weddings... my wedding was a lot easier in that respect as I had a lot to do.

SueBee, thank you for your thoughtful comment. My use of the word 'right', would imply that I believed that a same sex partnership is wrong. I do not consider that same sex partnerships are right or wrong. I believe they are legitimate relationships. As you rightly pointed out I to doubt that it will affect human procreation. But I still maintain the test applies to test rightness of human actions. The fact it does not pass the test does not mean its wrong.
jonathan's example of food does not fail the test, because he changed another parameter ie economics. When the test is applied all other considerations are considered as being normal, therefore for everyone to eat all the food they wanted to eat everyone would would have to have a sizeable income, which is currently not the norm.

miykal, let me see if I understand you correctly. In the case of homosexuality, based on the one test of "if everyone is a homosexual then humanity would die off", you've determined that homosexuality is a wrong action, but homosexual relationships are legitimate? This sounds to me like it's in the same vein as various Xtians who "hate the sin, forgive the sinner".

In any case, I still disagree with you regarding your test, because you're purposefully ignoring other variables to come up with one "right or wrong" result. In the case of homosexuality, one theory of the origin of homosexuality is that it's due to population constraints - nature or nurture guides some people to a "non-procreative" lifestyle, though the same can be said for heterosexual people as well. On the flip side, I know of a number of homosexuals who are living a procreative lifestyle.

mikyal: Excuse me, but your form of "logic" is quite illogical, and it really bothers me that you seem to be touting it as such (or at least as "science). FLAME ON You assume that any given action has only one "ultimate conclusion." This conclusion is then somehow linked with the "rightness" of the action for humans (no explanation is given for the putative correlation - is it empirical? ontological? something else?). Then you say that "But I still maintain the test applies to test rightness of human actions. The fact [an action] does not pass the test does not mean its wrong." Excuse me, but if the fact that an action doesn't pass the test doesn't mean it's wrong, then presumably it means it's right, in which case the test doesn't work, or it doesn't mean anything, in which case what use is the test? And then, to address the original issue to which you applied the test, I see absolutely no reason to conclude that because only same sex partners are allowed, people will stop procreating, or even stop having partners of the opposite sex. Prohibition has never stopped anything before.

Ain't THAT the truth!

jonathan and eris, thanks for your guidance, I think I lost my way somewhere. That's it 'I lost the plot', at least I think I lost the plot. That's it, isn't it................................michael

(1) Lets say we are all air breathers, and we breath all the air! End of human race.

we are all survey takers, and we take all the surveys...

romkey: ...then bill needs to buy disk space.

I was the FlowerGirl But I'm a boy and they Made me wear a dress. It was very Fun wearing silk!!!

One of the most surreal weddings I attended and was a part of was my Aunt's wedding in Las Vegas. This was in one of those "Quickie" wedding places complete with electric fake candles, video cameras mounted on the walls to record the event, and bored blue beehive hairdo, horned-rimmed glass wearing women (hello, gary larson where are you?) playing "Here comes the bride" on a synthesizer.

To top things off, I end up giving the bride away because my uncle (her brother-in-law) was too chicken to do so.

jzp, actually it's romkey's disk.

My best friend is getting married June 6th. She's 5 days younger than me. I can't believe it.

Pandora - I got married at the age of 19. Everybody said I was too young, but I knew what I wanted and couldn't be dissuaded. Well, they were right. As we grew up, we grew apart. I'm sure it works for some young people, but for most it ends in divorce. Sometimes it's unfortunate, but we all have to learn from our own mistakes. Luckily I had some good times, didn't have any children to disrupt by divorcing, and don't really have any regrets. Good luck to your friend!

Thanks, I think she'll need it.