if a woman is engage, are they off-limits?

Marriage always seemed a bit weird anyway. Ok, you can promise to be faithful until you're dead, but can you actually promise to love someone forever? All a bit warped, like nailing yourself into your own coffin, but just my view.jimmyjammer69

I do agree with that :|

[QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"]Marriage always seemed a bit weird anyway. Ok, you can promise to be faithful until you're dead, but can you actually promise to love someone forever? All a bit warped, like nailing yourself into your own coffin, but just my view.zeldaluff

I do agree with that :|

Not that hard to love someone "till death do you part." Try it and see.;)

Let's see... They're in a relationship and they're gonna get married. Need I say more?

You can do some light flirting, but you can't make the first move.

If they make the first move than there's nothing immoral about it. You might get your **** kicked anyway, though :P

[QUOTE="zeldaluff"]

[QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"]Marriage always seemed a bit weird anyway. Ok, you can promise to be faithful until you're dead, but can you actually promise to love someone forever? All a bit warped, like nailing yourself into your own coffin, but just my view.WtFDragon

I do agree with that :|

Not that hard to love someone "till death do you part." Try it and see.;)

Fair game? Yes. Will you seem like a turd? Yes.Oleg_Huzwog

yeah its a pretty big jerk move if you actually try.....but with people now a days nothing is off limits

[QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"]

Sorry, but I'm finding it pretty difficult to agree with most of the views here. The idea of somebody being "off limits" because of a wee bit of metal wrapped around their finger seems kinda extreme. A person isn't a piece of property after engagement and if they choose to continue thinking and feeling for themselves then all the better.

TecmoGirl

I definitely agree.

I personally don't see any particular type of relationship or marriage as a means of off-limits.

I'm with them. Off-limits is just a social, moral idea. You (the OP) could hit on that person all you want, but if they do not reciprocate, then it doesnt change anything. But if they do -- well thats a different story.

I dont think I'd touch them... I wouldnt want to be responsible for destroying someones relationship...SupaBaddy20

Well it would be the other person who is in the relationship who would be responsible -- you would just be an accessory/accomplice to the act.

[QUOTE="SupaBaddy20"] I dont think I'd touch them... I wouldnt want to be responsible for destroying someones relationship...Sajedene

Well it would be the other person who is in the relationship who would be responsible -- you would just be an accessory/accomplice to the act.

well i guess its okay to flirt with them, but they are in a committed relationship, and anyone would feel bad if they ruined that. If you could pull her out of engagement, it could happen to you ;)

btw- A good person respects that committed relationship and doesnt try to ruin things between the two. That is being a good friend.

Sorry, but I'm finding it pretty difficult to agree with most of the views here. The idea of somebody being "off limits" because of a wee bit of metal wrapped around their finger seems kinda extreme. A person isn't a piece of property after engagement and if they choose to continue thinking and feeling for themselves then all the better. People are encouraged to swallow all their doubts about marriage when very often they most need time to seriously think. A very close relative voiced her own doubts to several people, which were then dissmissed as pre-wedding nerves. 6 months after the wedding she is deeply miserable and feels trapped and cheated by those who should have listened most closely.

If a relationship is really so strong, then it won't fall apart because of an outsider's feelings. If it's not so strong, then why on earth are the couple getting themselves into a contract they can't both keep?

jimmyjammer69

Obviously your view of "engagement" is the only thing that is skewed. Engagement is a huge commitment made by a man and a woman who have spent huge amounts of time with each other, invested massive amounts of effort and love in a relationship, and know each other intimately (not sexually, intimately). It is NOT something that is rushed into (or SHOULD NOT BE) or breakable. Two people who are engaged are commited to each other.

This is not to be interfered with by a person who is experiencing lust or jealousy. And if the woman was truely "engaged" she woudl tell this other guy to f off.

Seriously, what ever happened to sacredness and sanctity of marriage. Please stop these stupid comments like a ring doesn't mean anything.

Some people in America still have morals (and yes, we all share morals, some of us just choose to reject them for their own personal gain and forget that a structure of morals deals with not an individual or self, but the feelings and well being of others. Morals are implanted as a way to love each).

Ask yourself this original poster - if you were engaged to a woman, would you want her cheating on you with another guy?

Uh, serious question?

I hope not.

1. lern too spel

2. Yes, why would you do something like that? Find a girl who isn't commited to someone.

[QUOTE="TecmoGirl"][QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"]

Sorry, but I'm finding it pretty difficult to agree with most of the views here. The idea of somebody being "off limits" because of a wee bit of metal wrapped around their finger seems kinda extreme. A person isn't a piece of property after engagement and if they choose to continue thinking and feeling for themselves then all the better.

Sajedene

I definitely agree.

I personally don't see any particular type of relationship or marriage as a means of off-limits.

I'm with them. Off-limits is just a social, moral idea. You (the OP) could hit on that person all you want, but if they do not reciprocate, then it doesnt change anything. But if they do -- well thats a different story.

I will beat the living crap out of any man who tries to flirt with my future wife and I hope she'll get mad when a girl tries to flirt with me.

[QUOTE="Sajedene"][QUOTE="TecmoGirl"][QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"]

Sorry, but I'm finding it pretty difficult to agree with most of the views here. The idea of somebody being "off limits" because of a wee bit of metal wrapped around their finger seems kinda extreme. A person isn't a piece of property after engagement and if they choose to continue thinking and feeling for themselves then all the better.

battlefront23

I definitely agree.

I personally don't see any particular type of relationship or marriage as a means of off-limits.

I'm with them. Off-limits is just a social, moral idea. You (the OP) could hit on that person all you want, but if they do not reciprocate, then it doesnt change anything. But if they do -- well thats a different story.

I will beat the living crap out of any man who tries to flirt with my future wife and I hope she'll get mad when a girl tries to flirt with me.

Flirting can be innocent and totally healthy for a relationship.

[QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"]

Sorry, but I'm finding it pretty difficult to agree with most of the views here. The idea of somebody being "off limits" because of a wee bit of metal wrapped around their finger seems kinda extreme. A person isn't a piece of property after engagement and if they choose to continue thinking and feeling for themselves then all the better. People are encouraged to swallow all their doubts about marriage when very often they most need time to seriously think. A very close relative voiced her own doubts to several people, which were then dissmissed as pre-wedding nerves. 6 months after the wedding she is deeply miserable and feels trapped and cheated by those who should have listened most closely.

If a relationship is really so strong, then it won't fall apart because of an outsider's feelings. If it's not so strong, then why on earth are the couple getting themselves into a contract they can't both keep?

seabiscuit8686

Obviously your view of "engagement" is the only thing that is skewed. Engagement is a huge commitment made by a man and a woman who have spent huge amounts of time with each other, invested massive amounts of effort and love in a relationship, and know each other intimately (not sexually, intimately). It is NOT something that is rushed into (or SHOULD NOT BE) or breakable. Two people who are engaged are commited to each other.

This is not to be interfered with by a person who is experiencing lust or jealousy. And if the woman was truely "engaged" she woudl tell this other guy to f off.

Seriously, what ever happened to sacredness and sanctity of marriage. Please stop these stupid comments like a ring doesn't mean anything.

Some people in America still have morals (and yes, we all share morals, some of us just choose to reject them for their own personal gain and forget that a structure of morals deals with not an individual or self, but the feelings and well being of others. Morals are implanted as a way to love each).

Ask yourself this original poster - if you were engaged to a woman, would you want her cheating on you with another guy?

four months is long?

[QUOTE="battlefront23"][QUOTE="Sajedene"][QUOTE="TecmoGirl"][QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"]

Sorry, but I'm finding it pretty difficult to agree with most of the views here. The idea of somebody being "off limits" because of a wee bit of metal wrapped around their finger seems kinda extreme. A person isn't a piece of property after engagement and if they choose to continue thinking and feeling for themselves then all the better.

Sajedene

I definitely agree.

I personally don't see any particular type of relationship or marriage as a means of off-limits.

I'm with them. Off-limits is just a social, moral idea. You (the OP) could hit on that person all you want, but if they do not reciprocate, then it doesnt change anything. But if they do -- well thats a different story.

I will beat the living crap out of any man who tries to flirt with my future wife and I hope she'll get mad when a girl tries to flirt with me.

Flirting can be innocent and totally healthy for a relationship.

Betwen the married couple, yes.

[QUOTE="Sajedene"][QUOTE="battlefront23"][QUOTE="Sajedene"][QUOTE="TecmoGirl"][QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"]

Sorry, but I'm finding it pretty difficult to agree with most of the views here. The idea of somebody being "off limits" because of a wee bit of metal wrapped around their finger seems kinda extreme. A person isn't a piece of property after engagement and if they choose to continue thinking and feeling for themselves then all the better.

battlefront23

I definitely agree.

I personally don't see any particular type of relationship or marriage as a means of off-limits.

I'm with them. Off-limits is just a social, moral idea. You (the OP) could hit on that person all you want, but if they do not reciprocate, then it doesnt change anything. But if they do -- well thats a different story.

I will beat the living crap out of any man who tries to flirt with my future wife and I hope she'll get mad when a girl tries to flirt with me.

Flirting can be innocent and totally healthy for a relationship.

Betwen the married couple, yes.

hey anyone without a marriage ring is fair game yah! ciaxhieu

oh yah! :P

[QUOTE="zeldaluff"]

I'd say yeah.

She's going to get married!

Oleg_Huzwog

But she isn't married, yet.

it's not like some sort of game where someone got starting dating someone else just because the marriage is tomorrow

Engaged/Married = off limits

Relationship = it's still on, baby... depending on if: you can kick her boyfriend's ass, if she's with a total moron, not with a friend.

I've got a wife you can take off my hands.

Juuuuuust kidding. Anyways, engaged is not "off-limits". The "engaged" period is a time to really think about all your doubts and decide if it's definitely what you want. If you hit on her and she accepts, then you're saving both the guy and the girl. The girl won't have to be miserable being married to someone she's not in love with. And, the guy doesn't have to be miserable being married to a ho. Just don't be surprised by any consequences. (i.e.-getting your ass kicked)

On the flip side, if she rejects you, then be a man and let it drop. It means she's decided and if you decide to continue to pursue you're just going to cause problems. It's ultimately her decision, but you'd both have to be prepared for consequences.

she voiced her opinion about her relationship and it sounds like its out of guilt because the guy left his family to stay with her. she sometimes think it was a mistake.virtuas

Go for it, dude.

Too many people screaming about the sanctity of marriage. If 2 people love each other they will do so regardless of a ring's absence or presence. If someone is so insecure of their partners possible feelings (for eg. other men), then the last thing they should do is get into a lifelong contract with them. Marriage is not for everyone and a ring should not be treated as a chastity belt.

jimmyjammer69

You sir are an ignorant person. The original poster talks nothing about the "happiness" or security of the relationship or the fact that one person has "feelings for another person." He only talks about pursuing those about to be married (see the difference - the woman isn't pursuing him, he is stalking...ahem....pursuing her). That is pathetic of him to think about. If they did choose marriage, you should respect the fact that they CHOSE to be together. Whether or not they spent the necessary time pre marriage getting to know each other and actually being ready is irrelevant because it has nothing to do with the original post.
Engaged people are off limits. That is a commitment to marriage. You don't say yes unless you mean it (that is what is implied) and if you said yes, than people should respect your decision and NOT HIT ON YOU!!!

Douchebags can't get it through their heads that marriage still means something to some people.

And it disgusts me when

No, it's not a game. It's a time when she should be thinking very seriously about what she's committing herself to. If she falls for someone else during her engagement, it doesn't bode well for her next 50yrs. She needs that freedom to consider!jimmyjammer69

The woman isn't making a decision in this case. The OP is choosing to pursue a woman who is engaged. For all we know, that person is happily engaged and by saying yes, you are encouraging the OP to go and stalk an engaged person. If we see a rape/murder/suicide of an engaged woman and the OP stops posting for the next....ever....I'll blame you (hehe kidding of course)

i'll respect their engagement.