It seems like there have been a lot of weddings recently. My spouse and I went to three in August alone.

Over the last several months, I’ve noticed a trend of conversations that revolved around weddings, questioning the value of going through the exercise of the ritual, the ceremony, the sacrament. People wonder if their time and money could better be spent on more pragmatic needs or less pragmatic comforts.

Mostly these days, it will surprise no one; I talk to conservatives. And conservatives are debating the subject with some vigor.

The few progressives I have spoken to on the subject seem naturally inclined to favor the idea of forgoing the party in favor of applying their limited capital to higher priorities. The natural frugality of conservatism may lend itself to this idea as well.

One of the variants of this conversation I’ve had was with a parent whose 80-year-old mother, a rock-ribbed conservative and quite a religious person, objected to the surroundings of her granddaughter’s wedding. This objection was based on the apparent opulence and “conspicuous consumption” of the venue.

The phrase “conspicuous consumption” was coined by the famous sociologist Thorstein Veblen. He defined it as the purchase of various services or goods for the sole purpose of displaying one’s economic power and wealth. It is a way to show your social status by buying expensive things.

Usually, the term is tied to the higher economic classes, but it can occur even among the lowest. Veblen was a harsh critic of capitalism and consumerism; thus, the negative term was established.

In conversations with others, I wondered if there wasn’t something deeper happening at a wedding. I gave some thought to the history and biblical references to marriage.

I looked it up. According to one internet source, the wedding ritual, where bride and groom take vows in front of their family and friends as a demonstration of their lifetime commitment to each other, is more than 4,000 years old. The ceremony spans time and culture.

When a tradition is that old and survives the rise and collapse of cultures and societies, it says that a lot of people, for a really long time, have found value in the institution. I think there’s profound meaning in that.

At my own son’s recent wedding, I included the following paragraph in my speech:

“It’s worth recognizing that what we are taking part in here today, welcoming this young couple into society — AS A COUPLE, for life, is nothing less than the 4,000-year-old traditional basis of the nuclear family and the supporting pillar of human civilization itself. It IS an important and valuable exercise.”

After meditating on these many discussions, my conclusion is that the leftist strategy of devaluing the nuclear family and the institution of marriage itself has quietly crept into the minds of even some of the most conservative, otherwise naturally inclined to support the family and the institution of marriage, but taking it for granted instead.

In my opinion, for the sake of our civilization, we had better give some thought to the origin, the role, and the value of marriage and the family to all of us.

Suppose our culture more broadly makes a habit of over-simplistically characterizing and shunning the practice of having the “party,” and indeed the sacrament, to induct new families into our culture? In that case, we will be unwittingly inflicting unconsidered negative consequences on future generations as they lose the bedrock foundation upon which our society is built.

The final paragraph from my toast:

“So please raise your glass; I want to thank each and every one of you for coming out to celebrate with (us). God bless (the couple) and their union. God bless all families. God bless America.”

If you’re on the fence, have the wedding. It’s good for everybody. And it’s a dang good time!

— Peter Adam represented the Fourth District on the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors from 2013 to 2020. In retirement from public service, he continues to farm with his brothers and son, trains horses and enjoys family time. The opinions expressed are his own.