what is wroung in this?
Your answer is yes - Tell me how?
Your answer is No - Tell me why?
2007-01-02 07:05:25 · 21 answers · asked by ===== AA == care of urs === 1 in Family & Relationships ➔ Weddings
sure that is wrong look gentle man if v prepare well for the exam but we can't written the exam immediate see we prepare a morning break fast 6 am but v can't eat at the same time
we have a time for b fast ,lunch,dinner like that engagement may be finish b4 but after u r marry with that girl u have all rights and sex with her
2007-01-02 07:17:45 · answer #1 · answered by sampath k 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It depends on what your beliefs are. For the same reason that sex without commitment would be wrong, an engagement is not a true commitment, it's just another step in that direction.
For those who believe pre-marital sex is wrong, then being engaged is still pre-marital. Since there is always a chance of pregnancy anytime there is sex, then the baby would still be conceived without a father technically.
For those who believe that you don't have to be married to be committed, then either before or after the engagement would be fine, because if a baby is produced, then the committment would be the same as it ever would be.
The choice is up to you and your partner, but of course, it has to be mutually consensual if it's to happen.
2007-01-02 07:18:22 · answer #2 · answered by Goyo 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Though it is a matter of choice and your (both) desire, I would answer it in a pro-con way:
Generally, YES - If you are major & consenting, you can go for it even without engagement. As you are engaged, you have even more reasons for the same. NO HARM IF YOU ARE COMMITTED TO SPEND YOUR LIFE TOGETHER AND IF YOU HAVE BECOME IMPATIENT ABOUT IT AND IF YOU TAKE SAFETY MEASURES TO AVOID CONCEPTION.
But NO - If you are really committed and you have decided to get married, you must wait a little more. The 'first night' shall be the appropriate time to induldge in the act. More so, if you are Indian or South Asian becuase same is not approvable there and you would be doing it in a state of guilt or shame. It may not be very enjoyable on that account. I believe that the 'first' one should be a very special and memorable one.
2007-01-02 17:00:29 · answer #3 · answered by sharma.kulbhushan 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The standard practice when judges or juries come up against a question of law, is to go back to basics. Back to the original intent of the founding fathers. And that's all "acceptable standards of conduct" are, really -- LAWS. So you're asking a question of law.
The original intent of the founding Father who gave us the institution of the family, laid it out this way: He brought one wife to Adam. He outlined that families were one man, one woman, for life. He designed it that way. He also spelled out that usurping the privileges of the husband-wife relationship, when you are not husband and wife, was gross sin (adultery) that was punishable by the two parties being publicly stoned to death. It is still sin. God's law doesn't change. He's still the same yesterday, today and forever (Hebrews 13). All sin will be judged, if not earlier, then later. Some men's sins go before them to judgment (the saved), and others they follow after (the lost). I pray that you are of the former category. I hope this helps. If you care about God's law, it'll make sense: prior to taking those wedding vows, you're SINGLE and you stay out of the other's bedroom.
2007-01-02 07:21:18 · answer #4 · answered by JackN 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely NOT!!!!!!! Save yourself for the wedding night. Make the commitment to each other first. Don't listen to the people that say you need to see if you work together in bed (see "don't eat me" above they said just what I was talking about). That is just an excuse for the guy to get your pants off. Besides, if you are giving him sex, why should he marry you? He is already getting what he wants!
Learn about this special area of marriage together, after marriage. I have been married 28 years and we waited. We were both virgins and it was worth it.
2007-01-02 07:15:34 · answer #5 · answered by Dizney 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
if you waited this far, you can wait a little longer. make it special on your wedding night. if this is a temporary wedding 1st out of 3, then go right ahead. if you're spiritual that's a whole other can of worms. depends, what do you want. if it's lust and curiosity, remember curiosity killed the cat. if your lookin for "good" sex then that's your only goal. it doesn't matter who they are, you could do it with anyone so just do it. in the end you make the decision. personally i'd wait, because that'd be my gift to my hottie hub. you decide. good luck :)
2007-01-02 07:59:25 · answer #6 · answered by Halleigh F 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
U r a indian then u will be knowing why ?
Yes - if there is mutual understanding and that ur sure that ur getting married then fine ok...
No - something happens between you or someone dies then what will be his/her life. If u had started loving her then that would be a great loss right. Then this society will kill them talking about them .
2007-01-02 07:22:12 · answer #7 · answered by rathu s 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It all depends on what you believe in. If you were doing it before things shouldn't be different now however, if you have held out this long you might as well wait for the big day!
2007-01-02 08:09:31 · answer #8 · answered by sjlova86 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. I would not marry a guy who I did not have sex with. It's such an important part of a relationship and if you are not compatible, it could make it very difficult to have a happy marriage. Of course, sex is high on my list of priorities for a relationship.
2007-01-02 07:09:15 · answer #9 · answered by schweetums 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
arif its totally depends on you both r u willing or not if yes go ahead but do take precaution for not to make Ur fiance pregnant
if she or you r not comfortable then just live it till marriage
sex is sweet feeling every one have right to enjoy it unless its regrets u later
god bless you
2007-01-02 17:43:30 · answer #10 · answered by shabana o 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋