violetrose
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2010
- Messages
- 1,189
Obviously a strike has no consequences, just as a blessing has none. Many people who think the tradition is great have said they would ignore the answer if they didn't agree with it.
One way or the other, it could affect a potential inlaw relationship and cause the parent to harbor some concerned feelings about the union.
Clearly the person who considers it a "strike" is just stating their feelings, just as the people who consider it great are when they want that tradition followed.
My gut feeling is that most people don't care that much, and would try to take it in the spirit it is presented.
I'm one for whom it would be a "strike." That doesn't mean I'd foam from the mouth and refuse to come to the wedding. I'd simply tell the groom to be that I won't be talking with him about a potential wedding unless they both come to me having made that decision because I believe that's a decision they should make together.
Actually, before I read this thread it would never have occurred to me that there are people out there who would care that much. Most people who did oppose such a tradition would just do as you said, tell the FSIL that it's the couple's decision to make and that you weren't comfortable granting a blessing without both parties involved. That seems perfectly reasonable to me.
However, you have people on this thread saying they would not want their daughter marrying someone who would ask beforehand. I find that incredibly closed minded truth be told, and a sweeping generalization. I'm not sure how that is any better than someone who would ask for a woman's hand in marriage - actually it seems a whole heck of a lot worse. JMO!