To think people shouldn’t bring babies to weddings full stop?

I’m sorry but why do people think it’s fine to bring very young babies to events like this?

Because the bride and groom,- who are the only ones entitled to decide whether they want babies at their own wedding - have told them it's fine.

If it's not your wedding, you don't get to say whether there should be babies there. It might bother you, but presumably it doesn't bother every bride and groom, and that's up to them.

If a baby screams during the ceremony, then a parent should take them out (and I also think the vicar should have said 'Perhaps you could take the little one outside?' to the parents) but that doesn't mean all children should be banned from all weddings.

Most babies at weddings probably don't scream though do they? It isn't an issue for the couple marrying to invite whoever they want. Parents should be mindful of how their babies or small children may impact other people and sit at the end of the row so they can make an easy and quick exit if the kid becomes a distraction.

Or you could apply the context that the comment was clearly meant for, that of a busy dance floor full of middle aged man doing Kung Fu fighting and everyone doing their best hand jives.

Clearly it wasn’t meant that kids are flying around during a first dance. And in my experience kids love a ceilidh. Why on earth are they bored during the dancing bit of a wedding? Tired, yes, and if the music is too retro for them they can go and run up and down somewhere else instead, but it should be fun and silly and informal and a great place for kids.

All of my family and friends' children were invited to my wedding, both Church and reception, because I love them and was excited to see them. My cousin brought her 3 week old and I was ecstatic to meet him. Weddings are, by definition, about family.

Its a promise before their community to become a family.

The event nature of the first day of a lifetime makes people forget that bit.

And that leads to the current custom of freaking out and spending a fortune on an Event rather than a celebration where the members of the wider family welcome their new member.

You could have kept reading to the end or @ me?

You and your partner promise to be a family unit.

And you end up part of your partners family and she/he ends up as part of yours.
(With all the good or bad that comes with that)

I am childless. I queried it because I felt that “Its a promise before their community to become a family. *felt like an assumption that the couple would have children. That was what I felt was excluding of childless people I accept that I misunderstood, but perhaps if the poster had said “It’s a promise before their community to become part of a bigger family” her meaning might have been clearer.

goady bitchplop and run op
colour me shocked

The OP not been back? Interesting.

YABVVU, OP. Rating a pretty church (and fairy lights ffs) above having families at weddings is such a weird view of what weddings are actually about.

You don’t get it that a family doesn’t have to rely on having children to be considered a family? Very narrow-minded of you. And so excluding of childless people.

I don’t believe ‘most’ people think any such thing.

Lots of nice welcoming comments about children on this wedding thread. It makes a nice change!

It’s down to the parents to be responsible. If they take out the crying baby, then there is absolutely no issue with babies and young children attending weddings. We had loads at our wedding and I have no recollection who cried or didn’t. I am just so glad that everybody came who I wanted to be there. It was a lovely inclusive event.

our wedding was just as much about our guests as it was us. I wouldn’t have had it any other way.

I had a child-free wedding, and I am happily married with kids. HTH

it was fine but the parents should have reacted sooner imo

The wedding party are the ones who have invited the babies at the wedding! So you’d assume that they want them there, as they’ve invited them.

I think babies should stay away if they are likely to cry . It’s not fair on them as much as the wedding party

I assume because babies are people who are allowed to be out in public.

We had exactly this happen at our wedding and the baby and its mother hadn’t even been invited! We married in a church so anyone could attend, mid vows the baby starts screaming and the mother just sat there. Moment ruined.

Double post-

If a couple cant make light of a baby crying mid vow. Then I would wager a bet the marriage wont last a newborn.

So perhaps it should be compulsory. And we can lower the divorce rate.

They become part of a wider family. My son and daughter in laws became part of my family and my son and daughter become part of their spouses families.

Its a promise before their community to become a family.

I don’t get this. Most people don’t think of a married couple as a family until and unless they have children.

I witnessed a celebrant, very lovely, nearly apologising but saying that by law, they must be able to hear the couple 😂

Stupid mother was proudly smiling at little Timmy who was disrupting everything, instead of taking him outside to shut him up. Llittle Timmy wasn't even a baby, was probably old enough to start school.

The celebrant should not have to stop talking, or only just while the parents are quickly and quietly removing the child.

But how do babies "interrupt" the vows? Surely no celebrant is stupid enough to keep talking while a baby is howling? Don't they just pause for a second to let the howling subside or to give parents the hint that it might be time to take the baby out?

Ha ha I thought the same thing. This would be my mother's thinking also.