There’s been a lot of reporting about the cost of the wedding, as if there’s something unseemly about throwing an expensive party during an economic downturn. Reporters and entertainment gossips who’ve been involved in this kind of coverage should put a sock in it. At the end of the day, this is a private event. Bride and groom are free to spend as much as they want to celebrate their union. The cost of the meal, the price of the dress, the grand total requested on the bridal register is really no one’s business.
Chelsea Clinton has a right to be a private person if she wishes. Except for a handful of campaign appearances on her mother’s behalf, she’s led a private life. She had no choice about becoming a public figure… she lived in the White House at age 12. As a 30-year-old adult, she has a right to seek as much or as little of the spotlight as she wishes. If that includes a private wedding, there’s no reason why her wishes shouldn’t be respected.
I’m done now… as of this weekend she has a husband to ride to her defense.
If I was a minister or a rabbi, I would have declined to officiate at the Clinton-Mezvinski wedding. Inter-faith couples who opt for a religious ceremony almost always create a muddle. If the Christian-bride is devout in her faith, she believes that her husband must come to know Christ for his salvation. If the Jewish-husband is devout in his faith, he believes his wife has been duped by a false messiah. And if neither takes their faith so seriously that they don’t see the contradiction, then the religious aspects of the wedding ceremony are meaningless.
Confusing for the guests. Even more so for their eventual kids. And ultimately, it’s none of my business. A higher power will sort it all out.
And to think Ruth Bader Ginsberg or Sonya Sotomayor would have gladly presided over a civil ceremony.
Operations Manager, Midwest Communications-Wausau