The following was published in the Deseret News regarding marriage in a Mormon temple, and non-Mormon and less active family members being unable to attend. This version was cut and revised by the News editor for content, removing criticism of Mormonism for cultural and religious insensitivity. Also, the editor did not respect the abbreviated name I used, but published it in full.
Mr. Smurthwaite's comment (Readers' Forum, June 23) comparing marriage to an operating procedure seems to misunderstand the import of life-celebration events. In Britain, it is legally required that marriages be public to allow for public participation and for the queen to give oversight. Mormons marry there, then have their marriage sealed in the temple.
Why do Mormons in Utah exclude their family from their most
important life event? Why isn't the wedding, not just the
reception, held publicly for their members of other faith
family and friends, then the sealing ceremony after?