This is the temple wedding announcement of a female relative. I will reserve my opinion until you've given some of yours.

http://www.campersandhb.com

Seems fine.

Will be married in the temple while wearing silly clothing and lookig like fools......and will promise themselves to the crutch of Joe the Ho, no to each other.

Yeah, I'm not going to rag on a couple's private wedding stuff. It's meant for them and their family to enjoy.

The photographer could have told him to turn this way or that to make a better photo. My first impression was that they don't look like two people who would hook up. But, that's their business not mine. Doesn't affect my life either way.

ew! I think they are dressed gross and look like they need to get a room. It's definitely an ugly picture in any circumstances. Their faces look smushed and she needs to get her hand off his stomach. What's she trying to do, rub the Buddah's stomach?

Is this the new thing? Internet Evites? Open houses BEFORE the wedding? I also don't want to rag too much since you shared their IRL info. I'm just out of the Mormon wedding loop and wonder if this is the new tacky trend. Wedding protocol is still very formal here in the South.

I guess I'm just old. But it turns me off big time.

The only thing that jumped out at me was the info under "ceremony...". I suppose that they only have active LDS friends and family. Because if this went to a nevermo, they might not realize that they aren't allowed to attend the ceremony without an LDS temple recommend. They could show up at Boise Temple at the appropriate time and have to be turned away. :(

Is he loaded?

My thoughts are they are really looking for some gifts. Three open houses?

Other than the obvious "y'all can wait outside"



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/19/2014 10:40AM by Levi.

Nice picture of some roses, but the photographer should have got those people out of the way. Ruined a good shot!

Endowment ceremony - in the garden of Eden. A spoof on the temple! Why didn't everyone get it?

I didn't get their personal stuff on the link, but I did get the picture of them in the tall flowering bushes. It made me think of Adam and Eve in the garden with only the top of them showing.

Kind of funny for the photographer to pick that shot, the couple was not dressed romantically for it. They looked much more preppy, maybe if they were in front of a large fountain with a statue or a set of stairs on a campus somewhere?

Boise has a very nice park with a zoo that would have yielded some nice shots. Just sayin'.

Here are my impressions.

- They need a better photographer
- He works at a desk job and needs more exercise
- He's into her more than she's into him
- They need a better photographer

* I put that photographer one in there twice on purpose

He must have been a really diligent missionary. ;)

Two things that jump out at me -- the "grand tour" of receptions is a change from my youth, when most people had one reception and called it good. Also, Mormons seem to shop late via gift registries. Nevermos tend to get going early so they can snatch up all the good gifts.

Interesting color scheme that they've got going. Red and blue in the kitchen; chrome yellow, blue and grey elsewhere. I'm not feeling it but I trust that it looks better in person than it does online.

Longfellow park. Longfellow wrote "The Courtship of Myles Standish". So, who was the competition for the bride? And why not all the fixings with the civil authority present as part of the wedding? I suspect the couple may never have read the poem.

What I see is an announcement where the wedding, the TEMPLE wedding is the star of the show and the engaged couple are featured in a few blurry photos as accessories to the crime. They don't even shoot Joan Rivers through that much gauze and that far away.

My next thought--perhaps shallow this time--was that the woman had taken Spencer W. Kimball's advice and decided it was okay to marry any worthy member at all if she is "willing to pay the price."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/19/2014 10:31AM by blueorchid.

blueorchid Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My next thought--perhaps shallow this time--was
> that the woman had taken Spencer W. Kimball's
> advice and decided it was okay to marry any worthy
> member at all if she is "willing to pay the
> price."


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oShTJ90fC34

blueorchid Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What I see is an announcement where the wedding,
> the TEMPLE wedding is the star of the show and the
> engaged couple are featured in a few blurry photos
> as accessories to the crime. They don't even
> shoot Joan Rivers through that much gauze and that
> far away.

After looking more closely at the non-temple receptions, the people who will attend those in Spokane and Boston will be going to public parks. I don't know how the weather is in Spokane in August, but I can personally vouch that it can get unpleasantly hot and sticky in Boston even in early September. Unless you're wearing skimpy clothes or there to get hot and sweaty in a game of touch football, it's not the most comfortable setting for an outdoor wedding reception. In other words, the only reception venue with any ability to retreat into comfortable air-conditioning if needed would appear to be the reception after the temple at a country club type clubhouse.

People get married outdoors in summertime Massachusetts all the time, frogdogs. But, factoring in a high-neck gown with sleeves over garmies, and you do have a challenge for the deodorant!

Anyway, it seems to me that Mormons are making appropriate adjustments as they try to balance their temple requirements and include non-LDS guests. There's a bit of piling on here that makes me uncomfortable. The target should be TSCC, not a couple who are starting out a new life.

Suppose they learn of this thread, and could identify "will be anon for this." How would you feel? And what harm would be done?

I'm a little bit disappointed at my parents lack of creativity in naming me.

The kissing photo could have used a little tongue to make the chemistry more convincing. Perhaps the caressing hand could also have been strategically lowered.

Two separate wedding receptions and a third (the 'open house') seems excessive. Wonder if the wedding invitees from Spokane and Boston just can't see themselves spending the money to travel to Boise when they can't be present for the ceremony.

The information they gave about the wedding ceremony was elegantly and sensitively worded. My translation follows:

"Friends and family who have been disqualified from witnessing the sterile and bizarre ritual we will endure inside the temple are invited to either fuck off and go to one of the receptions, or they can hang their heads in shame outside the temple and wait until after we're done with our wedding, when we can then all play make-believe together that taking pictures for posterity at the scene of their humiliation is just as meaningful as their having been present at the ceremony."

We have a winner!

@Frogdogs, you nailed it with this.... "Friends and family who have been disqualified from witnessing the sterile and bizarre ritual we will endure inside the temple are invited to either fuck off and go to one of the receptions, or they can hang their heads in shame outside the temple and wait until after we're done with our wedding, when we can then all play make-believe together that taking pictures for posterity at the scene of their humiliation is just as meaningful as their having been present at the ceremony."

That translation was impeccable. You must be in possession of a seer stone or something.

Thanks gentlemen, or gentlepersons ;-)

I actually *do* have a little polished agate given to me by my best friend around the time we met in junior high.

Perhaps its being stored close to several hats in my closet has, over the years, yielded some unexpected side effects, kind of like a proximity high or something.

One never knows...

This is exactly how it's done in the religious culture of Mormonism. Just what I would expect.
It's their traditions.
I congratulate the happy couple.
Nice that they can visit all of the family and have a reception and open houses.

Except the Mormon traditions you are extolling or at the very least giving deference to are a slap in the face to many family members, often even including the parents. I do not share your cavalier acceptance of the Mormon Temple Wedding Exclusion Ceremony.

There isn't even a formal announcement or invitation under the ceremony tab. It looks tacky. The only positive is that it's saving paper.

To each their own but as an editor I would say my professional opinion is:

1.) Not enough information nor is it worded in a way that makes people feel invited to an event. It doesn't make people feel wanted or welcomed - just the blunt facts.

2.) Not a good photographer - and I'm assuming that the pictures they took are the best ones available.

3.) The invitation for people to be in the pictures outside the temple even if they are not going to the temple ceremony was probably meant kindly but comes across the exact opposite.

4.) The whole idea of internet invitations is tacky beyond belief in my opinion and I hope it doesn't catch on. Please let this be an aberration. Hopefully the sent out real invites too.

5.) The OP of this thread, hopefully, checked to make sure that the website in question can't monitor where all the hits are coming from. Once I linked to a friend's photography business blog because I wanted to discuss missionary portraits and how silly it was for parents to make these glorified portraits of their kids who were leaving on missions, looking off into the distance, holding a BoM. I didn't know her blog tracked where the hits came from nor that people would start discussing what a bad photographer they thought she was. My friend traced the hits back here and was really hurt by what she read. I e-mailed Susan and begged her to take the whole thread down, which she promptly did. I still owe her a drink for saving my butt like that. If the bride and groom-to-be see a bunch of hits from RfM on their wedding invitation page, someone may get busted.

If she is sexually attracted to him then Joe Smith is a prophet. This woman needs to get into witness protection and get a new life.

I thought it was very strangely minimalist and obviously in mormon code speak. It leaves the 'invitees' to decode what's going on. This seems to exacerbate the feeling of who's on the inside of the group and who's on the outside.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/19/2014 12:02PM by Devoted Exmo.

The engagement photo that was mailed sends out huge red flags.

I could hardly sleep last night worrying about it. Some of you nailed my concerns, exactly.

Susan IS, feel free to take this down, if you so choose.

The Morg, the gift that keeps on taking. :-(

I guess this is the wave of the future, internet evites. Convenient, but the pic and all the info looked more like a website, complete with links, instead of a wedding invitation.

I thought it was cold and completely tacky, regardless of whether they were Mo's or not.


JMHO>

I will presume that formal invitations were sent out about a month in advance.
This is just a web site with some info.
This is not a formal invitation.

SusieQ#1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I will presume that formal invitations were sent
> out about a month in advance.
> This is just a web site with some info.
> This is not a formal invitation.

And you know this, how?

I have nevermo friends who have had two receptions because some of their family and friends like on the East Coast, and some live on the West. The receptions have lasted waaay longer than two hours. Some people can't afford to travel to the ceremony (be it in a temple or not). I think they're just trying to make it convenient for others to share time with them as a couple.

I took a look at the registries. Target and Crate and Barrel. They are not out to take anyone to the cleaners. The most expensive thing they requested at C&B was ~$70.

Meh.

I hope they're happy.

IMO online announcements are tacky. The only exception would be if they'd sent out real announcements first.

My daughter sent out paper announcements with a web address so people could see their engagement pics, print out a map, get reservations for hotels etc.

Best of all, everyone was invited. Nobody was told to wait outside until it was over. That is beyond horrid.

I just want to say, STOP CRITIQUING THEIR CHOICE.

This is their special occasion, their choice, their life. Live and let live. Just be happy for them.

al-iced Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I just want to say, STOP CRITIQUING THEIR CHOICE.
>
>
> This is their special occasion, their choice,
> their life. Live and let live. Just be happy for
> them.


I agree. It is not our place to find fault with what kind of marriage people what, how and where they do it. That is totally the choice of the couple.

We certainly would not want other people, total strangers taking issue with us and a web site we put up.

This is totally inappropriate!

But we're not judgmental and self-righteous, right?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/19/2014 01:02PM by Beth.

Unless it's password protected, very little on the web is truly private. Most of my students look me up on Facebook (and no, I have a policy of not friending them.) I don't think that people should be surprised when their publicly-accessible site is, well, found (and perhaps critiqued) by the public. If you don't want the information out there, then don't put it out there.