About to cross the wall

Hello Rabbi,
 
I read the column published today about Rama Burstein’s film,
I tried to examine myself with a critical eye regarding the set of assumptions.
A. Do I think her wedding is objectively good? It’s not at all clear to me why I should take that for granted. I can think of endless reasons why the wedding at that time would not maximize her happiness and that of those around her.
And then there’s the minor detail that we need a groom whose happiness will also be charmed.
B. God is good? True, but it never occurred to me that this was the only parameter that motivates Him to action.
We have accepted that leadership is based on thirteen virtues, which means that there are more parameters, the simplest of which is ‘truth’.
In the simplest interpretation, if she doesn’t deserve it, then it’s not real to bring it to her, and that’s a great reason why she won’t accept it.
C. Everything is in the hands of Heaven, not to say that in any action the Almighty breaks nature, we have accepted that this is a parameter that God weighs,
For example, breaking the laws of nature has a cost. So it’s true that we don’t have proof of this, but there’s no reason to simply assume that we all don’t attach importance to breaking the laws of nature.
That’s why I see Breslau as a kind of religious thing that’s pretty ridiculous, and I don’t think I live in some denial of my basic set of values.
I would love to understand which of my translations of the assumptions you disagree with and think do not meet the test of plausibility.