For the ceremony? Can you just not have them when you get married and maybe get them later. Or are they required?
2006-11-22 14:33:29 · 45 answers · asked by Danielle 4 in Family & Relationships ➔ Weddings
In case ya'll are wondering we're planning a small wedding at the court house. He has brain cancer and can't work. I'm a babysitter. We're both 21. We're just worried that we may not be able to afford rings yet. We'll get them when we can. We're not skanks...just broke and in love
2006-11-22 14:51:46 · update #1
All you need is a marriage license, that's the bare minimum.
2006-11-22 14:35:13 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The ring concept is purely tradition. Many couples wait to purchase their rings for many reasons. Some may not have enough money, others want the spouse to pick out the rings. They are certainly not required for the ceremony. If you are having a ceremony you may want to use a mock ring for the ring placement. Some people view the rings as the best part of the ceremony. MAybe buy some cheap rings to put on at the ceremony and buy real ones later.
2006-11-22 14:39:28 · answer #2 · answered by Blondie98_01 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is no legal requirement to have rings; in fact the wedding ceremony itself has no real legal impact. It's the marriage license or equivalent legal document that makes you married. That said, tradition - and possibly the internal restrictions of your faith - may impose different and additional expectations.
Most people I know of wouldn't get hitched without a ring, but it doesn't have to be a big expensive one. You could get married using simple rings for the symbolic importance and 'trade up' to fancier ones later.
2006-11-22 14:38:34 · answer #3 · answered by dukefenton 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No you don't need wedding rings - there is nothing cement in what you MUST have for a wedding, except each other and the same intentions. Some cultures don't even have wedding rings - a friend of mine who is a Sikh had a beautiful gold necklet type thing that carried the same symbolism as a ring but wasn't actually a wedding ring. You can have your own symbolism instead of the traditional symbols......
2006-11-22 14:38:32 · answer #4 · answered by Kble 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No you don't a marriage at court is is stated by the words "I do" and not by rings, so you can have them or not, deciding is what you want, if you want to get them later, get them later, but you should consider that changing the rings is a very beautiful and emotional tradition, plus you can get rings that are not that expensive (it does not have a thousands of dollars), but in the end it is your decision, I wish you all the best for your hopefully happy future
greets Anne
2006-11-22 21:43:36 · answer #5 · answered by Anne 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Rings are only a symbolic indication of marriage. Some cultures wear the ring on the right hand, and some on the left. The moral bond of the marriage of love is all that is required. Rings are only a symbol to others that you are "comitted" to another. My wife and I celebrate 27 years today, and we started with very simple bands. Each anniversary , I added to the wedding set. The improtant thing...learn to love, care, and be considerate of each other. May you have many years of being together.
Greg
Read your update...rings are not necessary...your love is all that is needed. As menitoned, may you have many years to come.
2006-11-22 14:48:45 · answer #6 · answered by Greg 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, it doesn't have to be expensive and you do not even have to have a ring. Wedding rings are a symbol. As long as you have your marriage license. Even if it is cubic zarconia you know it is the heart. At least until you can get money for your ring. :) I would have been happy with a cracker jack ring had he given me one. When we first got married it was a cheap ring but when my hubby got the money to pay for a real one it was gorgeous and more of a surprise than you can imagine. We had spent alot of money on our wedding and dad paid for the honeymoon. It doesn't make you skanky in the least.
2006-11-22 15:46:34 · answer #7 · answered by Kelly s 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You do not have to have rings to get married. You need a marriage license and the desire to spend your life together. Long ago rings were not used and people gave each other gifts. The ring became popular because it is a circle, never ending or broken and symbolizes eternity. You can get rings at a later date when you can afford to.
2006-11-22 14:40:00 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you are in love , things like that are not going to matter to you. It is just a symbol and in your heart you already know that you are married you do not necessarily need a reminder. Later on maybe you could pick up some wedding bands quite cheap
2006-11-22 15:40:01 · answer #9 · answered by perrisgal 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
All you need is the legal marriage license signed by two witnesses or a judge, then it is filed with the circuit clerk. The rings are optional...
That being said, if y'all can't afford a couple of cheapo wal-mart, sears, jc penney, etc. rings; you have NO business getting married. That bs about 'two can live as cheaply as one' is totally wrong. If somebody is pg, then maybe, but even then, if money is tight then you two better grow up in a hurry...
2006-11-22 15:24:20 · answer #10 · answered by bongfuel 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
no they are not required. In fact, in some religions they are not even normal:) Traditionally, rings are exchanged as a symbol of the commitment made - if you wanted to still have that symbolism, try exchanging something else - maybe a watch, a small charm, etc - something inexpensive but a symbol of the commitment.
2006-11-22 14:46:37 · answer #11 · answered by Chrys 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋