.

[Melissa in Australia]

2 minutes ago, Katy said:

 

I'd be with you.  I usually agree with most of your conclusions. Except everyone that's spoken to him about it, including his own father, say Scarlett is in the right and he's being an immature jerk.

I noted that part as well. even the EX who we all know is a big jerk is on Scarlett's side in this. 

[Catwoman]

Just now, Arctic Mama said:

I’M SO CONFUSED!

 

Meanwhile, Scarlett is sitting on her sofa thinking we are all clueless morons! 😁

[Murphy101]

4 minutes ago, Arctic Mama said:

*shares popcorn and chocolate*

 

I've just got black coffee.  Stupid diet.

3 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

I definitely don't think she would do that out of spite, i just am not willing to leap to the conclusion that he did this out of spite, either. 

 

I agree.  I don't think any of the actions necessarily have diddly to do with purposely being mean or whatever.  Person A wants something person B can't give. Both have hurt feelings by this.  Both could be right and both could be not doing it out of maliciousness.  

1 minute ago, Ktgrok said:

She did attend it. He wouldn't, but she did. And it wasn't just that the man was a decade older, and the bride was underage, but also that the adult man had been pursuing her since she was 14 or 15. 

Now, I'm of the "I'll attend almost any wedding" standard, which makes me the odd man out. But attending that one and NOT her son's, even though her denomination allows it, and saying it is about morality...I can see where he'd be confused and hurt. Even if she hadn't attended other weddings at other churches in the past - and really, there is a halfway decent chance that never came up. 

 

Daaaang.  Yeah.  I'd not go to a wedding of a guy who did that and I'd avoid that girls FOO like the plague.  No thanks to the whole grown man attracted to girls that are buying their first training bras with parents who think those men are okay.  Nope. Men like that is why shotguns were invented.

[ktgrok]

1 minute ago, Melissa in Australia said:

hang on - I don't think she said if she did or didn't attend. wasn't that people guessing?

She said it wouldn't be forbiddin, but was a matter of personal conscience. Which to me says she didn't go. And when someone else posted that they know JWs who won't go into other denomination's buildings she said "yup". 

Google tells me the denomination itself allows attendance at funerals and weddings in churches of other denominations, including Catholic ones, but some won't, and many will to but only as far as the entryway, not into the sanctuary proper. 

[ktgrok]

1 minute ago, Murphy101 said:

 

I've just got black coffee.  Stupid diet.

 

I agree.  I don't think any of the actions necessarily have diddly to do with purposely being mean or whatever.  Person A wants something person B can't give. Both have hurt feelings by this.  Both could be right and both could be not doing it out of maliciousness.  

 

Daaaang.  Yeah.  I'd not go to a wedding of a guy who did that and I'd avoid that girls FOO like the plague.  No thanks to the whole grown man attracted to girls that are buying their first training bras with parents who think those men are okay.  Nope. Men like that is why shotguns were invented.

And yet her son knows that attending that wedding was within the bounds of her personal morality, but his wedding - not forbidden by her faith and something other JWs do- was against her personal morality. That's going to smart something fierce. 

Now, again, that's assuming he chose that place for good reason, not just to be a jerk. 

[Joker]

3 minutes ago, Melissa in Australia said:

I noted that part as well. even the EX who we all know is a big jerk is on Scarlett's side in this. 

Yet, suddenly we're all supposed to be on the same side as the big jerk? That's not a ringing endorsement for me. I seriously can't believe some of the language being used here against the OP's son. 

[Katy]

1 minute ago, Ktgrok said:

And yet her son knows that attending that wedding was within the bounds of her personal morality, but his wedding - not forbidden by her faith and something other JWs do- was against her personal morality. That's going to smart something fierce. 

Now, again, that's assuming he chose that place for good reason, not just to be a jerk. 

 

What if he wasn't trying to be a jerk, he's just a headstrong kid who's trying to manipulate his mother's religious decisions because he no longer approves of her church?  So he chose the church to force her to leave her church when he knew she didn't want to?

[ktgrok]

1 minute ago, Katy said:

 

What if he wasn't trying to be a jerk, he's just a headstrong kid who's trying to manipulate his mother's religious decisions because he no longer approves of her church?  So he chose the church to force her to leave her church when he knew she didn't want to?

Pretty sure that's being a jerk. But again, she has stated that attending would NOT force her to leave her church. Her church does not forbid her attending. That was a personal conviction. 

[Murphy101]

8 minutes ago, Melissa in Australia said:

hang on - I don't think she said if she did or didn't attend. wasn't that people guessing?

 

She has not said! But good golly it sure seems so.  Reality tv ain't got nuthin on the hive some nights.  

[Katy]

1 minute ago, Ktgrok said:

Pretty sure that's being a jerk. But again, she has stated that attending would NOT force her to leave her church. Her church does not forbid her attending. That was a personal conviction. 

 

He's aware her church teaches that this is a matter of conscience - and he's very aware of where her conscience is.  So it is about forcing her to decide between him and her religion.

[Scarlett]

38 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

So wait - your religious denomination says you could go, your son wanted you to go, and you chose not to? 

Your moral code allowed attending the wedding of an underage girl to an adult man, who had been pursing her since she was 14 years old, but that same moral code would not allow you to attend your son's wedding, even though your denomination says it is okay? Not even to stand in the foyer and watch? And you think he shouldn't be upset by that?

It is a little more, well a lot more complicated than that. 

People! Stop comparing the first wedding to my sons.  Even he is not doing that.  Apples oranges.

[ktgrok]

Intent does matter, but so does communication ability, assuming positive intent, etc. So many possibilities. 

Son says, "since I know you can't go, I'm having my wedding at a church! HA!"

Son says, "I know you normally don't go to weddings at churches, but I was hoping you'd make an exception, given the circumstances (xyx). And if you can't, maybe we can do something afterward, some kind of special thing here at the house, to recreate the ceremony for you, what do you think?

Mom says, "If you have it at that church you attend you can just darn well do it without me!"

Mom says, "I wish I could go, but I prayed about it and I can't. Can we come up with some other ideas - maybe two ceremonies, or something? I really want to support you!"

or a million things in between. We don't know. 

[moonflower]

30 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

So not pleasing to God - going into a sanctuary or even standing in the entry way for her only son's wedding

Pleasing to God - attending wedding of an  underage girl to a man who pursued her at 14 

And the son is supposed to understand this?

 

Well, if he knew this was the case before hand, yes.

Similarly, pleasing to God for a Jew - separating mother and child (cows) to harvest the milk, and killing the baby cow.  Not pleasing - eating that milk with a meat product, or having the milk in the same kitchen as a kitchen with a meat product.

It makes no moral sense to me, because I am not a Jew.  But that doesn't mean, if I were married to a Jew, or if my mother were Jewish, that I wouldn't have been able to predict this situation.

[ktgrok]

Just now, moonflower said:

 

Well, if he knew this was the case before hand, yes.

 

But before that other wedding, it seemed he was shocked that she was willing to go. he never thought she would have. So that makes me think he doesn't have as good a grasp on what she will and won't do as she thinks he does. 

 

[maize]

I do not have to agree with a person's moral compass or even understand why it is the way it is. If I know something goes counter to a person's strongly held moral beliefs I will not expect them to breach that for my sake.

 It doesn't matter what moral decision any of the rest of us would have made in Scarlett's place; she has to follow her conscience not mine. I would be profoundly wrong to expect her to follow my conscience instead of her own.

I can understand her son's feelings of hurt and anger; they are legitimate but do not mean that Scarlett was wrong to make the decision she did or that he is right to hold it against her.

[ktgrok]

Of course, there is also the possibility she not only won't attend weddings at churches in general, but also doesn't approve of the marriage itself. 

 

[moonflower]

12 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

And yet her son knows that attending that wedding was within the bounds of her personal morality, but his wedding - not forbidden by her faith and something other JWs do- was against her personal morality. That's going to smart something fierce. 

Now, again, that's assuming he chose that place for good reason, not just to be a jerk. 

 

Yes, but he knew beforehand that her personal morality allowed her to attend the wedding of a younger and older person, but not attend a wedding in another religious house of worship.  Or maybe he didn't know, but surely once he said, hey mom, I can't have the wedding in our current church as I don't trust them, I'm going to have it over at the local Episcopal church (or whatever), then she said ack no, I can't go if you do that! and he then had the option to say oh, well, we're not episcopals anyway, I'll just have it at the state park or to say well we're having it there anyway, wish you could have been there

but instead he said mom you're terrible and awful and unfair for not doing this thing

[moonflower]

1 minute ago, Ktgrok said:

Of course, there is also the possibility she not only won't attend weddings at churches in general, but also doesn't approve of the marriage itself. 

 

 

I'm pretty sure she said she was fine with them as a couple

[ktgrok]

Just now, maize said:

I do not have to agree with a person's moral compass or even understand why it is the way it is. If I know something goes counter to a person's strongly held moral beliefs I will not expect them to breach that for my sake.

 It doesn't matter what moral decision any of the rest of us would have made in Scarlett's place; she has to follow her conscience not mine. I would be profoundly wrong to expect her to follow my conscience instead of her own.

I can understand her son's feelings of hurt and anger; they are legitimate but do not mean that Scarlett was wrong to make the decision she did or that he is right to hold it against her.

It may be that he feels her morals are just flat wrong or such that he wants nothing to do with her. 

[moonflower]

6 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

Intent does matter, but so does communication ability, assuming positive intent, etc. So many possibilities. 

Son says, "since I know you can't go, I'm having my wedding at a church! HA!"

Son says, "I know you normally don't go to weddings at churches, but I was hoping you'd make an exception, given the circumstances (xyx). And if you can't, maybe we can do something afterward, some kind of special thing here at the house, to recreate the ceremony for you, what do you think?

Mom says, "If you have it at that church you attend you can just darn well do it without me!"

Mom says, "I wish I could go, but I prayed about it and I can't. Can we come up with some other ideas - maybe two ceremonies, or something? I really want to support you!"

or a million things in between. We don't know. 

 

I'm with you in that I think there are a whole range of ways to handle this and I can't believe that they couldn't come to some compromise - and if they couldn't come to a compromise, having discussed it rationally you'd think there wouldn't be a ton of hard feelings.

Like, my dad didn't want to come to my wedding as it wasn't legally official until a few weeks later.  If he'd held out about it, I either A. wouldn't have held it against him or B. would have said, well, let's get the license first and then do the wedding or C. would have invited him to the official part 3 weeks later instead or D. a million other compromises

 

[moonflower]

2 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

It may be that he feels her morals are just flat wrong or such that he wants nothing to do with her. 

 

This is possible, but jeez.  I guess it's an effect of young adulthood.]

My morals are as different from my mother's as you can get, most of the time.  she eats factory farmed bacon and voted for Clinton.  But I don't want nothing to do with her, even if we disagree really fundamentally about a lot of things and on rare occasion those disagreements manifest into logistical impasses or unkind words.

[Scarlett]

8 minutes ago, BusyMom5 said:

Ive typed out a few long responses, but I'll sum up.  I was raised similarly.  My parents sound very much like you.  I feel badly for you, that you think your faith is this rigid.  I do think you are at least 75% in the wrong.  I feel more badly for your son.  You have taught him a "lesson."  The lesson, your silly rules mean more to you than he does.  Do you think he will want to worship who you view as God?  That sounds harsh, but I learned that rule from my parents long ago.  I do love my parents, I see them all the time, but I left their hypocritical church and have never looked back.  I wish their was some way for them to escape bc their faith causes them much hurt (not related to me, church feuds, doctrinal differences that cannot be chucked up to differences in opinion, gossip, ect).  I do not think the view they have of God is right.  Your son may be acting immaturely, but I can see why he is angry.  You admit yourself that things have happened that were not well handled.  I have more I could say, but I'll sum it up by saying that you have inflicted damage.  He is hurting and lashing out.  If you want a future relationship,  you need to reach out and apologize.   

 

I am sorry you are hurting, and this really isn't meant to hurt you more.  I have been in a similar place as your son, though.  I knew my parents view.  I knew how they would react.  At that time (2 years after I'd married), I knew I had no choice but to leave their abusive church.  I'm sorry I hurt them, but I had no choice.

Well, I have no idea about your experience, but I do not believe my religion is abusive.  I believe humans within my religion make   stupid decisions (including me). . If my son feels like you do, it will be a wedge between us that can never be fixed.  That happens. Sometimes.  

[LMD]

2 hours ago, Scarlett said:

They were friends.  But more than that her dad was a mentor to my son. A good one. And this dad just......I don’t know how to explain it....just went off the rails allowing and condoning something he had previously counseled against.  It has been a Very Big Deal.  This father is no longer in his previous position in our congregation, but that is not enough for ds.  He wants a hanging at dawn or something.  

Ah, see his faith in 'the good people who are wise and always will be' has been shaken, which has a knock on effect, because maybe he can't put his faith in you/dad/stepdad/church people etc. Next, he'll have to reckon with himself, that if these godly and wise people can stuff up, he better be careful, pride goeth before the fall. This is hard but necessary, there is only one Jesus. 

[moonflower]

17 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

Pretty sure that's being a jerk. But again, she has stated that attending would NOT force her to leave her church. Her church does not forbid her attending. That was a personal conviction. 

 

This one really gets me, and I'll try to explain why.

I am not religious.  I have strong, black and white moral convictions.  Most of my FOO and extended family (and other people) don't respect them the way they'd respect religious requirements.  somehow my conscience, or morality separate of religious belief, is not as worthy of respect as religious belief.  If I tell people that my kids don't eat eggs or dairy out of conscience, they'll think I'm being picky or uppity or stupid and sometimes won't respect the boundary (will lie to my kids and tell them that something is dairy-free when it isn't, for example).  If I tell them I'm Jewish and so the kids don't eat bacon, I somehow think the response will be different most of the time.

It just drives me crazy.  There's a real bias still against non-religious people.

[Murphy101]

 

1 minute ago, moonflower said:

 

This one really gets me, and I'll try to explain why.

I am not religious.  I have strong, black and white moral convictions.  Most of my FOO and extended family (and other people) don't respect them the way they'd respect religious requirements.  somehow my conscience, or morality separate of religious belief, is not as worthy of respect as religious belief.  If I tell people that my kids don't eat eggs or dairy out of conscience, they'll think I'm being picky or uppity or stupid and sometimes won't respect the boundary (will lie to my kids and tell them that something is dairy-free when it isn't, for example).  If I tell them I'm Jewish and so the kids don't eat bacon, I somehow think the response will be different most of the time.

It just drives me crazy.  There's a real bias still against non-religious people.

 

If that's your experience, then I believe you.  But let me assure you, try explaining Lent or meatless Fridays to people and it doesn't tend to go over well either.  Or even just saying can't do grains or dairy.  Omg what do you eat?!  Um  Y'all know there's like three other entire food groups right? As though the literacy and basic math scores don't convince enough about the state of education, you'd be surprised how many people don't know food groups either.  *grumbling about how people just need to eat their cake and leave cakeless me alone with my broccoli tyvm*

[Katy]

7 minutes ago, Seasider too said:

 

You are assigning motive as though the son is the only one involved in the wedding planning and decision making. 

Goodness knows we’ve seen enough threads here about demanding MILs, and most replies concur about the whole leave and cleave business. If there were a choice to be made, he was a smart, future-minded man to agree to the wife’s (and perhaps the paying-for-the-shindig parents’) choice of venue. My guess is the exhausting debate that’s been going on the past few months has been some attempt at compromise. 

That’s all guesswork, but in this thread that’s what we’ve been left to do. 

 

I'm not assigning motive.  I'm taking Scarlett's claims earlier in the thread (and in other threads about the girlfriend) at face value.  And if you take her comments at face value he's being abusive by trying to control her in ways he has no right to control.

Of course it's possible she is wrong and is taking his words and actions out of context.  But I doubt it, primarily because of the way he is acting.

[Corraleno]

30 minutes ago, Melissa in Australia said:

I noted that part as well. even the EX who we all know is a big jerk is on Scarlett's side in this. 

 

34 minutes ago, Katy said:

...everyone that's spoken to him about it, including his own father, say Scarlett is in the right and he's being an immature jerk.

Well to be fair, the fact that Scarlett claims everyone is totally on her side and thinks her son is acting like a jerk doesn't mean her son really is totally in the wrong, or even that everyone really is on her side. Maybe "everyone" is just telling the kid to get over the fact that his own mother refused to attend his wedding in order to keep the peace. Maybe other people don't think it's a big deal, but maybe it's a huge deal to her son, who feels hurt and angry and betrayed — especially since she had no moral qualms about attending the wedding of an underage girl and a pedophile. This wasn't like missing a birthday party or a performance or something, this kid will have a lifetime of memories about one of the most important days of his life, which his mother refused to be a part of.

There's a reason it took 10 pages of vague-posting before the truth came out — Scarlett knew perfectly well if she started this thread saying she refused to attend her own son's wedding, even though her church didn't forbid it, and he was really hurt and angry about it, she would not get pages and pages of posts validating her victimhood and reassuring her that he was just an immature jerk and none of it was her fault.

[Melissa in Australia]

3 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

 

Well to be fair, the fact that Scarlett claims everyone is totally on her side and thinks her son is acting like a jerk doesn't mean her son really is totally in the wrong, or even that everyone really is on her side. Maybe "everyone" is just telling the kid to get over the fact that his own mother refused to attend his wedding in order to keep the peace. Maybe other people don't think it's a big deal, but maybe it's a huge deal to her son, who feels hurt and angry and betrayed — especially since she had no moral qualms about attending the wedding of an underage girl and a pedophile. This wasn't like missing a birthday party or a performance or something, this kid will have a lifetime of memories about one of the most important days of his life, which his mother refused to be a part of.

There's a reason it took 10 pages of vague-posting before the truth came out — Scarlett knew perfectly well if she started this thread saying she refused to attend her own son's wedding, even though her church didn't forbid it, and he was really hurt and angry about it, she would not get pages and pages of posts validating her victimhood and reassuring her that he was just an immature jerk and none of it was her fault.

but she hasn't said she if she did or didn't attend the wedding ( this was guessing and speculation amongst the posters).  she said it was a lot more complex than that. 

 

[Corraleno]

1 minute ago, Melissa in Australia said:

but she hasn't said she if she did or didn't attend the wedding ( this was guessing and speculation amongst the posters).  she said it was a lot more complex than that. 

 

She said it was not forbidden by her church, it was her choice not to attend.

Edited September 16, 2019 by Corraleno

[moonflower]

Well I'm still happy to validate her victimhood in this case, even though I personally have no qualms about going to a wedding regardless of venue.  I also have no qualms about eating (wild) pork, attending a religious ceremony for another religion, attending the wedding of someone who is underage but not a child (17 is historically not exactly pre-adolescent and I was basically married at 16), celebrating a birthday or Thanksgiving, or going to a funeral wherever it is.

None of that matters, though, because this isn't, for me, about whether Scarlett has the morally correct position - of course I don't think she does, I don't even believe in a concrete God, much less her religion's specific version of him!  It's about whether she has the right to maintain a moral position she's always had, and how hard it is to do that when it causes conflict with and upsets your loved ones, and I can definitely sympathize with those things.

When I told my mom we wouldn't let DD14 (then 5) eat birthday cake at another kid's party, she called me a fanatic and told me I was ruining DD's childhood.  Then when she did take DD to a friend's birthday party, she lied to her and said the cake was dairy-free. It hurt, but we got over it eventually, sort of.  I'm sure it caused her pain too, because these kinds of rifts between parent and child are painful.  I don't have to be a Jehovah's Witness to feel badly for Scarlett anymore than she has to be a vegan to feel badly for me.

Of course I feel bad for her son too, because he wasn't able to come to a compromise with his mom that would have allowed her to be at his wedding, and that has to hurt.  

 

[chiguirre]

58 minutes ago, Scarlett said:

Well, I have no idea about your experience, but I do not believe my religion is abusive.  I believe humans within my religion make   stupid decisions (including me). . If my son feels like you do, it will be a wedge between us that can never be fixed.  That happens. Sometimes.  

So, back to your original question: Can the relationship survive?

Honestly, no, I don't think it can survive. I think it's irreparably altered and there is no way to go back to Thursday. However, I do think that you, as the more mature person, could eventually reconnect and at least have some sort of relationship with your son and dil. Hopefully before you are a stranger to your grandchildren. But, I think the ball is in your court and you'll have to make the first step toward reconciliation. 

Hugs, you're in a tough spot!

[Laura Corin]

7 hours ago, maize said:

This looks like an attempt to impose one's own morality on others by shutting down points of view one disagrees with...

For me, it depends how such statements are phrased.  I'm perfectly fine with 'I believe that gay marriage is bad for society'. Without the 'I believe' it seems in itself to shut down other points of view.

[Tanaqui]

So this has been a long thread. And I've been reading but not commenting (other than that first one) because I didn't want to dwell too much on what happened until we had some idea.

So let me see if I can recap this right. Scarlett didn't attend her son's wedding, but she did attend the wedding of a minor to a significantly older man after dithering about it for, like, a week way back in the day; and now her son is upset about a. her not attending his wedding and b. that underage marriage and c. possibly some other church stuff; and either she or some other people or both have called him inflexible and expressed concern that his rigid "my way or the highway" approach to morality and life might affect his ability to have long-term relationships in the future? Also, Scarlett has compared his decision to get married somewhere she didn't approve (or that she thought God didn't approve) to abortion/murder and joining the KKK. Is that more or less the size of it?

Well, I can't dictate other people's moral codes. But I can say that if Scarlett's son is rigid and inflexible, so are you, Scarlett. The thing is, it's usual for young people to be a bit rigid, especially when it comes to matters of morality. Your son will possibly grow out of this in time.

Can your relationship be repaired? Well... maybe. You both have very rigid moral codes that appear to be pulling in different directions. Your best bet would be to apologize, even if you don't really think you're the one in the wrong. But if you can't do that, your next best bet is to empathize, and listen to your son, and stop trying to justify your actions to him. You can express your sorrow that you hurt him without then adding "but God likes it better this way" or "but you should never have gotten married there, you knew I wouldn't attend" even if you both know you're thinking it.

[Carrie12345]

4 hours ago, Thatboyofmine said:

Trying to say this the right way and not sound jerky... I know that some JW will not associate with non-JWs.  I hope that you aren’t implying that this thing between you and ds is anything like that.  Like if he left the faith, he leaves you, as well. From the JWs I’ve known, they would only associate with fellow JW’s except in cases of work commitments, etc where they *had* to spend time with others.   please, think twice before that route is taken.   (I just got that feeling and I am probably *very* wrong—I can’t imagine that happening here!  But just in case...)

I don’t see how that can be the case in her situation since she’s expressing that she wants to reconcile. 

[Wheres Toto]

I'm still really confused because Scarlett did say both her son and his new wife are still JW's.  So I don't think they would have gotten married in a different church.  But maybe they just didn't have a Temple wedding?   Maybe a JOP or someplace secular?  I think that might fit better with the 'not against the faith' and makes more sense with how quick this seems to have happened.  

[ktgrok]

7 hours ago, Katy said:

 

I'm not assigning motive.  I'm taking Scarlett's claims earlier in the thread (and in other threads about the girlfriend) at face value.  And if you take her comments at face value he's being abusive by trying to control her in ways he has no right to control.

Of course it's possible she is wrong and is taking his words and actions out of context.  But I doubt it, primarily because of the way he is acting.

She hasn't said why he married where he did, or even where he married, or if that is the reason for the fall out. As to the way he's acting, there is such a thing as righteous angers nd being hurt and lashing out, and that doesn't mean you were the one in the wrong to start with. 

7 hours ago, Thatboyofmine said:

Trying to say this the right way and not sound jerky... I know that some JW will not associate with non-JWs.  I hope that you aren’t implying that this thing between you and ds is anything like that.  Like if he left the faith, he leaves you, as well. From the JWs I’ve known, they would only associate with fellow JW’s except in cases of work commitments, etc where they *had* to spend time with others.   please, think twice before that route is taken.   (I just got that feeling and I am probably *very* wrong—I can’t imagine that happening here!  But just in case...)

This! I'm wondering if he has left the church and if there is an element of disfellowshipping here? If so, that adds a whole other layer to this, and as to who is rejecting who. 

2 hours ago, Carrie12345 said:

I don’t see how that can be the case in her situation since she’s expressing that she wants to reconcile. 

Well, by reconcile she could mean he comes back to the church. 

28 minutes ago, Where's Toto? said:

I'm still really confused because Scarlett did say both her son and his new wife are still JW's.  So I don't think they would have gotten married in a different church.  But maybe they just didn't have a Temple wedding?   Maybe a JOP or someplace secular?  I think that might fit better with the 'not against the faith' and makes more sense with how quick this seems to have happened.  

She said they were raised in it, she didn't say they still were in it. And JW are usually okay with attending secular weddings. 

[ktgrok]

I'm definitely now wondering if the bit about it being more complicated has to do with it not being him marrying in another faith, but him leaving the church. If he has done that, I believe he would be disfellowshipped, and she wouldn't be able to attend a dinner at mcdonald's with him, let alone his wedding. https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1102008083

For those saying it is spiritually abusive of a son to want his mother at his wedding no matter what, I'd say it is even more so to say someone has to follow your religion or you won't even say hello to them. 

 

Edited September 16, 2019 by Ktgrok

[Murphy101]

29 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

For those saying it is spiritually abusive of a son to want his mother at his wedding no matter what, I'd say it is even more so to say someone has to follow your religion or you won't even say hello to them. 

 

I’d agree.  I’d be pretty upset if my kids left our faith and I’d be pretty upset if they started hating on my faith. But I wouldn’t disown them.

[ktgrok]

2 minutes ago, Arctic Mama said:

Okay I change my opinion based on my current confusion.  If she didn’t attend his wedding even if it was in an allowable venue, that’s a jerk move.  Unless it was completely disallowed by the religion I do think it’s the least damaging to make every effort to attend.

I thought we were saying it was in a venue she couldn’t attend in good conscience, not that she was just being stubborn and disowning him for this or that reason.  This whole thing is super super weird. What the heck?

Gotta say Scarlett, I kind of feel like you lied to us to get comfort under false pretenses, to be validated in areas you know we wouldn’t have done so if we’d known all the facts.  That’s deceptive and gross 😞

Well, I do think it is a matter of conscience for her, but I'd think with something of this magnitude given that the religion does allow it, I'd reexamine my conscience, or at the very least speak with my spiritual leaders about it for guidance. Which maybe she did. I don't know. 

As for feeling misled, she did the same thing in the thread about the underage girl's wedding. She started out with a genera "is it okay to attend a wedding if you don't like one of the spouses or don't approve of the marriage " or something general like that, and then later admitted the whole adult grooming and pursing a 14 year old girl, marrying off an underage girl, etc parts. 

[Melissa in Australia]

31 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

I'm definitely now wondering if the bit about it being more complicated has to do with it not being him marrying in another faith, but him leaving the church. If he has done that, I believe he would be disfellowshipped, and she wouldn't be able to attend a dinner at mcdonald's with him, let alone his wedding. https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1102008083

For those saying it is spiritually abusive of a son to want his mother at his wedding no matter what, I'd say it is even more so to say someone has to follow your religion or you won't even say hello to them. 

 

you can leave the JW church without being disfellowshiped. Disfellowshiped is a form of punishment, a casting out. you can leave or even just become inactive. it would not have any of the  shunning by family

[Scarlett]

9 hours ago, Katy said:

 

Yes, that's what I'm saying.  If you were raised knowing your mother would never go in the sanctuary of another church, got angry at her church and then planned a wedding at the one place you knew she would not go?

Many or most JW's get married in civil ceremonies.  The choice of a different church was for manipulative effect only.

In my experience that is not accurate. Some do, it is still a valid marriage but I don’t think most do. 

[Scarlett]

8 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

And yet her son knows that attending that wedding was within the bounds of her personal morality, but his wedding - not forbidden by her faith and something other JWs do- was against her personal morality. That's going to smart something fierce. 

Now, again, that's assuming he chose that place for good reason, not just to be a jerk. 

He hasn’t mentioned the other wedding in comparison to this other thing.  They aren’t the same thing.  He knows that.  

[hjffkj]

3 minutes ago, happysmileylady said:

Scarlett, perhaps I am missing something else (I mean obviously, I am missing a lot here lol) but what is the reason for the complete and total lack of clarity here?  Are the people involved on the board here and going to read it?  None of us can really figure out what is going on and there are bazillion assumptions being thrown around in this thread, and it's pretty much impossible for actual advice to be given when we don't know what the h@ll is going on.  

Well she said something along the lines of the specifics aren't important and she know many wouldn't agree with her decision.

I think what she really wants is comfort and advice that their relationship is salvageable. But the truth is no one can actually give her that since we don't know the specifics.

She is painting her son's actions in a very negative light but to me it just sounds like to rigid people having a huge disagreement that one person can't seem to live with and made the decision to cut ties with the other person. Whether out of immaturity or not I think his decision won't change because of the rigid personality of both people.

[Melissa in Australia]

5 minutes ago, happysmileylady said:

 

ETA: Did you skip your kid's wedding because someone ELSE attending had been disfellowshiped?  Like the bride's mother or something?

you can attend a wedding  of a relative who has another relative who is disfellowshiped who is  present.  I had this happen to me. My brother married someone who's father was disfellowshiped. He was at the wedding, he was not part of the wedding party and nobody not directly related to him spoke to him. 

[Catwoman]

This is getting ridiculous. 

I feel like we are all on some kind of perverse game show where we have to keep making more and more outlandish guesses before we are given even a tiny crumb of actual additional information, and then we have to try to figure out what that tiny crumb means and how it fits in to the overall situation. And then we have to start guessing all over again.

As far as I can tell, the only things we know for sure are:

Scarlett’s son got married and she didn’t attend the wedding.

Scarlett’s son has been angry for the past three years about the situation where his 17yo friend was allowed to marry the guy who was in his late 20s, and that the girl’s father had been a mentor to Scarlett’s ds, and Scarlett’s ds felt that the man had lied to him about whether or not he would allow the girl to date and marry the guy, so he still feels that the man should be severely punished for approving the wedding. But that situation is completely unrelated to the current issue, and has nothing to do with her son’s wedding or why she didn’t attend. Scarlett related that story just to show us how rigid her son is, and how he obsesses over past perceived injustices.

Scarlett’s son is very angry with her. The assumption seems to be that he is angry because she refused to attend his wedding, but are we 100% sure that’s the reason why he is angry, or was the anger about something else and the result was that she ended up not attending the wedding? Do we know?

There has been speculation that maybe the son was married in a different religion, but that seems odd because both her son and new DIL are JW... but if a civil service is not against JW rules, it doesn’t make sense that she would have refused to attend on that basis. Her son would still be married. (Or would he still be living in sin according to JW rules? I don’t know! But if he took the time to get married instead of just moving in with his girlfriend, wouldn’t the venue be the couples’ choice? Why would a mother stay away from her child’s wedding just because she didn't approve of the venue?)

I am probably still getting most of this wrong! Feel free to correct me!

Clearly, I will not be winning any prizes on this game show. But I would like to know what’s really going on, because this rift between Scarlett and her son is not a game, and I know that many of us would like to help talk her through it and try to think of ways to help her mend their relationship.

 

[moonflower]

59 minutes ago, Dotwithaperiod said:

Why are we saying it took place in a different faith venue? She wrote the above...do JW’s get offended if their child marries in a different JW building??

Is the woman perhaps no longer a JW, but once was? Is she a JW but perhaps her own parents aren’t so they chose a different venue? 

I think the son has every right to marry where he wants. I think a man has the right to put the wishes of his bride’s venue choice above his mother’s. I think young adults often lose patience and say hurtful things to their elders.

Since we’re all throwing out guesses while the OP refuses to say the truth about the situation( which I find odd because she’s always been upfront, honest, and  vocal about describing her life’s stories on this board) I’m going to say her beef with the son concerns the new daughter in law. Maybe she’s pregnant! Maybe she’s got a non JW parent! Maybe she’s got two moms!

See how ridiculous this is? She leaves out the one truth that is neede so you all can help ease her pain or anger or whatever she’s writing about on a public message board. 

Kudos to the boy’s marriage, OP! In your own religious fortitude, you have perhaps lost the relationship of a child and possibly grandchildren. Of course you’ll say it’s worth it. I hope your son and future family feel the same.

 

She said specifically (I think) that she was fine with the DIL and their relationship.  She didn't leave that truth out.

I will admit that I am rarely entirely forthcoming on this board, because often I want support or advice for a situation that I know people have probably experienced in similar forms, but if I describe the exact situation or request, the thread will focus on that and how (bigoted, stupid, evil, crazy, fanatic, patriarchal, anti-woman, etc.) I am.  So I can sympathize with Scarlett on this one.

[Slache]

I stopped early on in page 2.

The thing about faith is that it's individual. You are supposed to do what God has called you to do and what I say doesn't matter. What this person says doesn't matter. God matters. I would absolutely choose my faith over my kids if the situation required it. I owe it to them to set that example.

I agree that this person is being manipulative. I don't expect it will stop.

[Catwoman]

6 minutes ago, Melissa in Australia said:

you can attend a wedding  of a relative who has another relative who is disfellowshiped who is  present.  I had this happen to me. My brother married someone who's father was disfellowshiped. He was at the wedding, he was not part of the wedding party and nobody not directly related to him spoke to him. 

 

Wow. I feel so sorry for that poor man. But good for him for attending his dd’s wedding despite knowing that most of the attendees wouldn’t talk to him, because it was more important for him to be there for his dd.

I can’t relate to the shunning thing at all. (I don’t know if the JWs call it that — sorry for not knowing the proper terminology.) If I was getting married and a lot of the guests were going to refuse to talk to my dad, I would choose my dad above all of them and tell them that they weren’t welcome to attend my wedding. I would choose my family over church members. (And ok, I wouldn’t be a part of a faith that would do something like that to someone in my family — or to anyone else, now that I think about it — so I guess I can’t relate to the situation at all.)

[Scarlett]

Good grief people.  I swear I was only trying to not give out too much personal info.  No lying going on.  I don’t understand why everyone insists on me discussing the details.  I followed my conscience and my son is angry about it.  Period.  I said in my very first post the reason I posted.  I wondered if others had been through something similar and managed to regain the relationship.  A few people answered. (The poster who told about her sister trying to get her to watch an R rated movie and becoming angry when she refused—that was similar to my situation).  Most have only demanded to know the details before they could say.  I am not going to say the details.  I am not going to comment further on this thread.  Thanks for all who told their own  stories and also for the rabbit trails which I always enjoy.  

 

[moonflower]

25 minutes ago, Arctic Mama said:

Okay I change my opinion based on my current confusion.  If she didn’t attend his wedding even if it was in an allowable venue, that’s a jerk move.  Unless it was completely disallowed by the religion I do think it’s the least damaging to make every effort to attend.

I thought we were saying it was in a venue she couldn’t attend in good conscience, not that she was just being stubborn and disowning him for this or that reason.  This whole thing is super super weird. What the heck?

Gotta say Scarlett, I kind of feel like you lied to us to get comfort under false pretenses, to be validated in areas you know we wouldn’t have done so if we’d known all the facts.  That’s deceptive and gross 😞

 

I think that for some people in some religions, there's an area of morality where the Law (that is, the absolute religious requirements) may be either unclear or left up to the conscience of the follower.  I'm not like 100% sure about Mormons, but the missionaries we had come visit us for a couple of months were pretty explicit about prayerful consideration of what is right in a certain situation, and I got the idea that while they adhered to the tenets of their religion, a lot was left up to this ongoing sort of conversation they were having with God.

I don't know why religious requirement would be seen as a more valid constriction of behavior than conscience (that is to say, morality without religious requirement).  Are you saying that non-religious people should just do whatever because there's no religious requirement for them to follow, so they have no excuse not to do whatever other people want them to do in any scenario?  I mean it makes no sense.