AIBU to think that barring children from RELIGIOUS weddings misses the point about what religious weddings are for?

[Wamster]

A couple of disclaimers first:

Not religious myself. Am agnostic verging on atheist.

If the couple marry in a secular ceremony (NOT involving religion), well I don't think they are being unreasonable not to invite children. After all, all they say is the legal bits with perhaps a few personal words in their vows. Fair enough.

But given the fact that most religions are based upon concepts of community, family life, why do people think it OK to bar children from such events when they are a vital part of what a religious wedding is supposed to be about?

Also, is it practically possible to ban children during wedding service (it obviously IS for private party/functions after wedding)? Cannot anybody walk in off the street to witness a church wedding? I've been to a lot of weddings where casual passers-by are at back of church just looking. Or can the Vicar lock the door?
Isn't the fact that everybody (not just guests) can witness vows a vital part of it for most religions, anyway?

Lol I was more meaning the people who say they want to get married in the sight of God but it's expensive but they will only marry somewhere expensive because of their pictures. Sounds like their photographer is the priority not God. I'm marrying in Christian service at a civil venue, nice little exploit of the law that allows me to and a minister who's used to beach weddings who doesn't see a problem with not being in a particular building. Marrying in the sight of God shouldn't be about where if it's important He's there and that's the priority. My church isn't the most picturesque location and it'd be dangerous to have pictures outside for too long so people generally move to a park for their pictures.

But confuddled, if you marry in a civil venue, you aren't allowed to have any religious elements at the ceremony, eg blessings, readings hymns etc. It all has to be non-religious by law.

ScroobiousPip, it can be done. I know from personal experiecnce.

Like I said, a nice little exploit I found. Will have everything, worship, prayers etc. A civil venue is allowed those things because otherwise they wouldn't be able to have services in them - like churches that meet in community halls or carol services - so we're not doing anything illegal what we have planned is even included in official pages about civil venues.

A lot of people get married in church purely because they have a cultural connection to Christianity, not because they actually believe in God. If only people who believed in Christianity supported the CofE, it would have difficulty surviving. It couldn't run all its school, have some political power and so on without the cultural support of non-believers. So it is a bit misleading to make out that people get married in church for spiritual reasons; it is an established church so we should all have a right to use it (although I got married in a registry office!) for a first marriage.

OP, it sounds to me like you're trying to emotionally blackmail people just to get you and your kids some freebie vol-au-vents! It comes across as really off-putting. I certainly would not want you at my wedding if I knew this was your attitude.

Yes, anybody CAN 'walk in off the street', but WOULD you? I'm imagining someone walking in 'off the street' into my wedding, or turning up invited, but with uninvited kids, and puffing around the place quoting bits out of a book on common law to anyone who glares at them.

It's their wedding. It's a ceremony between two adults, and it's their special day. Legally, you might be 'entitled' to all sorts, but in the real world, you're 'entitled' to fig-all at another person's wedding!

I'm not religious either, but GOD help me not become one of those mums who's convinced the world is one massive playground just for her and her bouncing bundles.

Confuddled, are you getting married in a registered building then, ie a building that has been designated as a place of worship? If so, that makes sense as it would be a religious ceremony. If it were a civil venue OTOH, ie an approved building, then religious elements are not permitted.

Actually most churches have their regular wedding goers. Those people who go to the church just to watch the wedding of someone they probably don't know. They probably spend far more time in church than those there getting married half the time.

all wedding ceremonies have to be open to the public - civil and religious

www.tameside.gov.uk/licensing/marriagepremises

Marriages must be solemnized in premises with open doors, which the Registrar general interprets to mean that the public must have unfettered access to witness the marriage and make objections prior to or during the ceremony

clickable [[http://www.tameside.gov.uk/licensing/marriagepremises
]]

InPraiseOfBacchus, that's OK, I don't want to go to anyone's wedding. I personally do not like weddings.

This is not about that; this is about what I feel to be hypocrisy and cherry-picking. Saying vows that concern a religion that is supposed to be about family life then banning children from said wedding is all wrong.
They are also seriously misguided; because as many have pointed out here, the wedding ceremony MUST be viewable by all.
For example, an extreme example of this may be that the groom is a bigamist and his 'real' wife finds out about the wedding. She must have the option to stand up and say 'I know of reasons why this couple cannot marry' when vicar/registrar asks.
I also know of people -particularly in villages- who drop by in the church (usually at back) to have a look at what is going on within.

Also, I AM very much entitled to view another person saying their wedding vows. Goodness knows I wouldn't take up this option- but I CAN if I wish.

the whole POINT of a wedding is that it's in public.
if you want to exchange your own private vows in private, that's nice.... but it's not a wedding.

IMO weddings are family occasions and children are part of the family, hence they come!