Iím one of those people who usually thinks itís a hard line: one wedding per marriage, with allowance for the separation of civil and religious services in areas that require them (but not months apart, and I actually wish that such were the case here in the US). And that does, from my perspective, extend to marriages that weren't legally recognized when the wedding was held.
But the caveat to my opinion is that I think people can celebrate whatever they want, whenever they want, so long as they don't expect everyone to give them gifts and expend a ton of effort.
So, I think that a couple who had a wedding in the past is perfectly fine with having a "itís now legal, letís party" type event, but I don't think that should involve a ceremony with vows in front of all the guests. After all, if they made vows in front of people before, even if they weren't part of a legal standing, those vows should still be valid. A party is great, after you go to the courthouse and make it legal. And I think this is true regardless of the gender sameness or difference of the couple.
If a couple chooses to get married at the courthouse with only witnesses and JOP present and then throw a BWW later, I think they're trying to eat their cake and have it too. I don't know that there is a correlation to same-sex relationships, since I doubt many are having a non-legal commitment ceremony with only one or two witnessesóI guess maybe if they go out of state to marry where it is legalóbut if they did, and they presented themselves as married (legally or not) afterward, I think they don't get to decide they want a BWW later.
In the end though, as a guest, I would be there to support and celebrate with my friends, regardless. I may not give them a large gift, particularly if I already had, and would send my regrets to someone I'm not close to, but I would be happy that they are finally afforded the right to marry the person they love, and that is something to celebrate. Iíd just mentally eye-roll at the multiple weddings.