Dubbs wrote:
Life Rocks wrote:
I'm hoping that my message to a newspaper in Utah, in the heart of Mormonism will help me. There has to be people who can think clearly beyond what amounts to emotional extortion the LDS Church perpetrates on non-LDS people as it pertains to the weddings of their LDS children.

I had occasion to go to Salt Lake City last January to "attend" my daughters wedding. I didn't actually get to see it, so I have the word "attend" in quotation marks. I sat outside while people my daughter didn't know, or hardly knew go to go to the Temple.

This is the second time since September 2007 this has happened. My first daughter got married at age 19 in the San Diego Temple. I haven't seen those wedding pictures yet since I can't imagine I was able to hide the stress, the emotional pain and anger in my face. Those who got to attend looked away as they walked by me as they entered the temple.

I'm still not sure how my 23 years of service and sacrifice as their father exempts me from attending? Other than their mother, who's got better credentials than me? It really makes the idea of a "temple interview" seem ridiculous when you make that kind of comparison.

I suppose I could understand if my kids didn't want me to be there because I'd been some kind of ogre. But that's not the case. I was super dad! I guess a lot of that had to do with the family I grew up in. My mother died when I was 11. My father was an angry drunk. My stepmother was an abusive person in other ways. I left home when I was 15 or 16 and ended up joining the Church when I was 18. There was no mention of parents not being able to attend the weddings of their children when I was taught by those clean cut missionaries. When I finally got married and had a family I decided to go out of my way to be a good dad.

While at the Salt Lake Temple, I had to preoccupy myself and distract my mind from acknowledging the pain of the situation. I discovered from the matron that the SL Temple performs 30-35 weddings each Friday and Saturday. She was proud to point out that when school lets out the figure can jump to 60-65. On my way back to California, I changed planes in Phoenix. As our plane taxied on the runway, I noticed dozens of planes back to back waiting for their turn. It reminded me of the weddings at the temple one right after the other.

Have those running the Church ever thought about the terrible hurt they're causing people with this silly rule? There are 124 temples...even at 2 weddings a week...there's 12,000 weddings, add 3000 for the SL Temple...that's 15,000 weddings conservatively. I'm guessing, most of the people outside of Utah who are marrying in the Church are converts which means most of their parents don't get to attend the weddings of their kids. Add to that the extended family...aunts, uncles, grandparents...etc. After the incredible hassle and challenge it is to be a parent, then to not even have the opportunity to attend your childs weddings. In every other faith, attending a marriage isn't based upon worthiness.
What that means is hundreds of thousands of people are deeply offended every year by the Church.

On behalf of all the parents who's hearts are broken every year, President Monson, if you read this paper, if you really are a leader, it's time to do something about this. You're in a position to do something about this. This kind of disgusting, heartless practice isn't conducive with the image the Church tries to portray as being about marriage and family.

Not a threat, at least not yet. But to a person, everyone that finds out I've not been able to attend my kids weddings grimaces with anger. They find it incredulous. Some of my close friends actually start crying.

You have to know, the media will have a field day with this. No one outside the Church understands or thinks this is right. Many inside the Church are also hurt by this experience. It's time to get on the phone with God and come up with something different.

And if the Church hierarchy won't respond, I hope the good people of Utah will.

Lucky me. I've got 6 more unmarried children.



So.... your a member of the church, why not get yourself worthy to get to the temple would be a logical question.

I should have placed bets on you making this statement. I would have won a fortune.

Life Rocks wrote:
Thanks for taking your time to comment. I can see we don't agree here, but you're certainly are welcome to your opinion.

You forget, you're not talking just to me as one person. Tell your "you need serious help" advice to the tens of thousands of people who are affected by this practice. That your Church has such a cruel doctrine and that you follow it says more about you than me.

Most people in the world, if they're doing something that offends or hurts another will stop doing it or change something to accommodate the other. I think being able to attend the marriage of your children is something that should not be denied the family. Most people outside your community believe that. Maybe you should notice that.

Just like when the Church was baptizing for the dead for the Jewish Holocaust victims. The relatives were outraged and hurt by the practice. The Church recognized that their practice was pretty callous and insensitive so they stopped. The same insensitivity is occurring here on a much larger scale and involving many more people.

I don't know if the Church did it voluntarily or if there were Jewish groups who put some serious media pressure on the Church. Seems like that's what it takes to get the "true Church" to reconsider it's stance on things.

Given the recent situation with the FLDS Church, seems that had the Church not been forced to change it's attitude about polygamy, it wouldn't have done so willingly.

If that's what it takes, then that's what it takes. Let the court of public opinion decide this one.

I guess this is some of the meat they were referring to when I was investigating the Church years ago that they figured I'd discover later.

Got a good reference for a shrink to give me the help I need?

The LDS church has every right to practice the marriage ceremony as they see fit. You have every right to choose to let that infuriate you, which apparently it has. I would recommend you find a way to deal with it, as apparently it was important for your child and that is really what would be important to me where I the parent involved. Why are you taking something so important to your child and making it something so negative and self-centered? Yes, it sucks for you, I don't think anyone would say it doesn't. But in the end, who was this for, you or your child.

The LDS take the temple marriage ceremony very, very seriously. It is extremely unlikely they will change it - but hey, maybe they will. If you want to make that your personal crusade then by all means that is your decision but ask yourself why you are doing it. You can say it is for the parents that don't get to attend the ceremony but if someone is choosing to marry in the LDS temple chances are they understand what they are doing and have made their choice and are happy about it. Why should the parent have the right to step into that ceremony and force it to change for them? It is NOT about them...or is it?

Betz wrote:
Dubbs wrote:
Life Rocks wrote:
I'm hoping that my message to a newspaper in Utah, in the heart of Mormonism will help me. There has to be people who can think clearly beyond what amounts to emotional extortion the LDS Church perpetrates on non-LDS people as it pertains to the weddings of their LDS children.

I had occasion to go to Salt Lake City last January to "attend" my daughters wedding. I didn't actually get to see it, so I have the word "attend" in quotation marks. I sat outside while people my daughter didn't know, or hardly knew go to go to the Temple.

This is the second time since September 2007 this has happened. My first daughter got married at age 19 in the San Diego Temple. I haven't seen those wedding pictures yet since I can't imagine I was able to hide the stress, the emotional pain and anger in my face. Those who got to attend looked away as they walked by me as they entered the temple.

I'm still not sure how my 23 years of service and sacrifice as their father exempts me from attending? Other than their mother, who's got better credentials than me? It really makes the idea of a "temple interview" seem ridiculous when you make that kind of comparison.

I suppose I could understand if my kids didn't want me to be there because I'd been some kind of ogre. But that's not the case. I was super dad! I guess a lot of that had to do with the family I grew up in. My mother died when I was 11. My father was an angry drunk. My stepmother was an abusive person in other ways. I left home when I was 15 or 16 and ended up joining the Church when I was 18. There was no mention of parents not being able to attend the weddings of their children when I was taught by those clean cut missionaries. When I finally got married and had a family I decided to go out of my way to be a good dad.

While at the Salt Lake Temple, I had to preoccupy myself and distract my mind from acknowledging the pain of the situation. I discovered from the matron that the SL Temple performs 30-35 weddings each Friday and Saturday. She was proud to point out that when school lets out the figure can jump to 60-65. On my way back to California, I changed planes in Phoenix. As our plane taxied on the runway, I noticed dozens of planes back to back waiting for their turn. It reminded me of the weddings at the temple one right after the other.

Have those running the Church ever thought about the terrible hurt they're causing people with this silly rule? There are 124 temples...even at 2 weddings a week...there's 12,000 weddings, add 3000 for the SL Temple...that's 15,000 weddings conservatively. I'm guessing, most of the people outside of Utah who are marrying in the Church are converts which means most of their parents don't get to attend the weddings of their kids. Add to that the extended family...aunts, uncles, grandparents...etc. After the incredible hassle and challenge it is to be a parent, then to not even have the opportunity to attend your childs weddings. In every other faith, attending a marriage isn't based upon worthiness.
What that means is hundreds of thousands of people are deeply offended every year by the Church.

On behalf of all the parents who's hearts are broken every year, President Monson, if you read this paper, if you really are a leader, it's time to do something about this. You're in a position to do something about this. This kind of disgusting, heartless practice isn't conducive with the image the Church tries to portray as being about marriage and family.

Not a threat, at least not yet. But to a person, everyone that finds out I've not been able to attend my kids weddings grimaces with anger. They find it incredulous. Some of my close friends actually start crying.

You have to know, the media will have a field day with this. No one outside the Church understands or thinks this is right. Many inside the Church are also hurt by this experience. It's time to get on the phone with God and come up with something different.

And if the Church hierarchy won't respond, I hope the good people of Utah will.

Lucky me. I've got 6 more unmarried children.



So.... your a member of the church, why not get yourself worthy to get to the temple would be a logical question.

I should have placed bets on you making this statement. I would have won a fortune.

Did not anyone wonder that? He said he was a member. Call me crazy.

KitKat wrote:
truthhurts wrote:
Not an easy thing to go through, and I have always, even when I was active LDS, thought the stance odd. In fact, I find it very perplexing for a Church that likes to extol itself as pro-family, etc. The Church gives conditional use recommends (not sure if that is the name, but it is the purpose) to youth in order to perform baptisms for the dead, otherwise they could not get in. So, it could be done regarding weddings, which makes one wonder if something else is the real motive, like....

money, aka tithing. Yes, money talks.

That said, I think your children have a say as well. They could simply do a civil wedding and do the Temple thing in a year, and I believe if more did that, the Church's stance might change. The Church frowns on that, but tough. Let 'em frown. So, go ahead and blame the Church if it makes you feel better, but realize that your kids are complicit in it.
Money talks? I'm not so sure. When I married in the temple, my parents weren't tithe payers due to a temporary financial difficulty. They were given a conditional temple recommend, good for my wedding only. I don't know if that's still done or what, but in my case, money DIDN'T talk.
One question. Were your folks endowed, i.e. had they been through the Temple before? Sounds like the answer is yes, and if they had a sympathetic Bishop and SP, then I can see that happening and I think it is great. Other Bishop's and SP's might not be so lenient.

The ladies situation is completely different than that.

Dubbs wrote:
truthhurts wrote:
Not an easy thing to go through, and I have always, even when I was active LDS, thought the stance odd. In fact, I find it very perplexing for a Church that likes to extol itself as pro-family, etc. The Church gives conditional use recommends (not sure if that is the name, but it is the purpose) to youth in order to perform baptisms for the dead, otherwise they could not get in. So, it could be done regarding weddings, which makes one wonder if something else is the real motive, like....

money, aka tithing. Yes, money talks.

That said, I think your children have a say as well. They could simply do a civil wedding and do the Temple thing in a year, and I believe if more did that, the Church's stance might change. The Church frowns on that, but tough. Let 'em frown. So, go ahead and blame the Church if it makes you feel better, but realize that your kids are complicit in it.

The children are members of the church, and have been given a recommend based on worhtiness.
Yes, Dubby, I am aware they are members and have had an interview. I believe the lady is a member, and did I say she would not have to have an interview?

Well, did I?

BTW, Welcome back. Will the third fourth fifth sixth seventh time be a charm?

Dubbs wrote:
Betz wrote:
I should have placed bets on you making this statement. I would have won a fortune.

Did not anyone wonder that? He said he was a member. Call me crazy.

Who are you to tell him to get worthy. Weren't you whining at other posters for making assumptions without knowing every detail of a situation?