The Glade 4.0

Just curious.
Would you ever date someone who was married? Do you consider seperation the same as divorce?

For example, I swore I would never EVER date a married man, but then one time I dated someone very briefly who was seperated. His wife and I were friends and she said go for it (I didn't want to but she talked me into it. Weird. Anyway...) ...of course, a couple of months later they reconciled and he moved back in and now they are un-seperated.
I kinda feel like "the other woman" every time I think about that (really guilty) even though she swears its not like that and we're still good friends.

Where do you draw the line?

_________________
"Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." Jesus of Nazareth

They're not separated until the divorce is final. Its a good thing anytime a separated couple gets back together. Until that paperwork comes back saying the divorce is final, I think people around the couple should be exhorting them to work out their problems (excepting abuse and infidelity).

_________________
The Dude abides.

I don't believe there is such a thing as "dating" a married person. I believe it is wrong, period..but I am jaded on this subject. While the worst case is the wife/husband not knowing (black and white for this one)....sometimes there are unusual circumstances, but I still believe it is not the way to have a healthy relationship. Maybe if a relationship is not what you seek..it would work.

Separated is, I believe, a time to take stock and heal. When I was separated, I could have found someone on the rebound and used them to fulfill my clingy needs, but would it last? Prolly not. This is just my opinion, colored by my circumstances. I realize things can be justified in anyones mind,if they so choose. Far be it for me to judge right or wrong (except in my black and white situation). I just advise going in with eyes open and heart guarded.

_________________


Dream as if you'll live forever...
...Live as if you'll die tomorrow

Vivere Senza Rimpianti

Married never, but seperated is ok, especially when you consider it happens frequently that one spouce seems to think it's not over or just simply doesn't want to sign the papers, two of my friends who are dating each other are both technically married to someone else still because both of their ex's are being asses and won't sign the papers, even though they have been seperated for years and did so because they were so un-happy in their marriage and had finally come out of the closet and don't even date men anymore, I think that's pretty ir-reconsolable, so yeah, seperated is a-ok, well provided they didn't just separate a few months or so.

Dating someone who's married is wrong. Period. Hands-down, no questions asked, wrong.

I don't believe dating someone who is separated is wrong, at least in the same sense of the term, but it's definitely unwise. If someone is separated, that means they're still entangled with someone else. There are very few outcomes available here, and the only one that's good for the dater is, I believe, the least likely of them: A) The person is being kept in the marriage by forces outside his/her control, and as soon as that clears up, he or she marries the dater and lives happily ever after. This is unlikely for a whole host of reasons, and the other outcomes are far more likely. B) The person remains separated (not divorced) because in his or her heart, he or she still wants the marriage to work out. This is the most likely scenario. In such a case, the dater will never receive the full attention that is necessary for that relationship to work, and you're doing nothing but being a stumbling block to the healing of that union. Also, you're only setting yourself up for the inevitable pain of seeing the person you've fallen in love with not reciprocate fully, and you'll be torn up when you see him/her leave you to go back to that person with whom they obviously share an attraction that outranks you. There's a reason they were married in the first place, and that is (and should be) a difficult relationship gap for an outsider to transgress. C) The datee may be a great person, but at the very least, the fact that he or she is still married, even if the marriage is vowed to be dissolved by the datee, will cause immense hardship for the dater. Regardless about how happy anyone is with the situation, keep in mind that the person you're dating is still involved, be it for better or worse. That's an immense entanglement for you to be dealing with as a dater, and if the marriage is still in place, chances are that's the reason he or she is seeing people and that's what will always cast a pall over the relationship.

Obviously, all of this changes if any sort of abuse is in the picture.

And don't get me started on the stupidity and arrogance it takes for two married people to cheat on their spouses with each other, then divorce those spouses and marry and expect that union to last.

If you're still friends, and she encouraged you to date her husband while they were separated, I wouldn't worry about it. It doesn't seem like it ruined your friendship. It doesn't seem like it's ruined their marriage. You seem happily married now yourself.

This is what we call a nonissue. Leave it that way.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

Oh I've made my peace with it Coro. I didn't start this thread because of that, I just used it as an example. Something else spurred my curiosity so I just wanted to see what the general consensus was.
And for the record, I believe that dating anyone while married or seperated is wrong.

_________________
"Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." Jesus of Nazareth

For me to give a consistent answer on this one, you'd have to make the assumption that I think all marriages are equal, and I have an equal respect for all marriages. This is not true.

Some marriages are more about societal pressure to fulfill expectations more than anything, rather than actual love. It's just unfortunate most people don't realize that about their marriage until later.

_________________
"It's real, grew up in trife life, the times of white lines
The hype vice, murderous nighttimes and knife fights invite crimes" - Nasir Jones

Do the religious types here find a difference between a church marriage and a non-church marraige

That's an interesting question.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

I have a problem with any manner of betrayal.

Neither a peice of legal paper, nor anachronistic moral standards based on some ancient so-called holy book get to determine what constitutes that betrayal.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

There is no such thing as a non-church marriage. Every marriage is equal in the eyes of the Lord.

_________________

Holy shitsnacks!

Raf and Riov, for the purposes of this thread, I am defining marriage as a lifelong commitment made before some sort of higher power whether court or God, and requiring some sort of higher power to dissolve the union.

OR

Take Taly and Arays' above comments and combine the two!

_________________
"Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." Jesus of Nazareth

So...people who have no belief in any higher power, nor any automatically-given respect or obedience to secular authorities...cannot be married?

Anyway, in case it wasn't clear, my answer to the OP will be "Other," since...




It is not betrayal if your marriage partner condones/approves/gives permission. There are, indeed, happy, committed relationships that are not exclusively monogamous.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

Maybe for religious people that may be the case, but for others no, and there are in fact non-church marriages, heck my father's marriage was a non-church one, out in the woods, done by a justice of the peace, no religion involved.

Don't pick an argument with me. That's not what I'm saying. I lack the grace, wit, knowledge, and style to form all of these "argument guidelines" that you all use. I was merely attempting to loosely define marriage as I meant it for the purposes of answering the question.

You and Arafys worded it much better. You made the point that it doesn't have to be a marriage to constitute betrayal, and Arafys pointed out that all marriages are equal in God's eyes. (Which I believe, whether he was joking or not.)

_________________
"Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." Jesus of Nazareth

I had an issue with your definition. I consider myself married (as does the law, for almost 15 years now, but i don't really give a **** about that), but didn't really qualify under your description.



And in that respect, it not about marriage. One can commit biblical adultery without betraying one's mate/life partner, and one can betray one's mate/life partner without committing adultery. Betrayal need not even be sexual, and any type of relationship is "sacred" in that way. One can betray a trust to a friend or a husband. My moral standard on the matter is simple: "Betrayal is wrong," and we can go back to the old wiccan rede I still believe is good council, "An it harm none, do as thou wilt." The problem is, this makes your original question, about dating while married/separated/etc., too complicated...and in many cases, irrelevant. It's the wrong question. If it's not a betrayal, and if you're not hurting anyone, don't worry about it. Do what you will.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

Whether in the prescense of a massive gathering of soon-to-be-drunk witnesses, a national tv audience, etched into the history books or just between two people and whatever gods they pray to, if any at all, I don't find any marriage to be equal.

The institution of the marriage isn't as important to me as the quality of the marriage. Like I said before, there are some marriages I have no respect for, and that has nothing to do with whether or not it was "religious" or "godly" in nature, as much as some people probably want that to be the case so they can hold that against me. If I don't have respect for their covenant, how do you expect me to care whether or not they are engaged in an activity that may, under that specific marriage, be regarded as betrayal?

_________________
"It's real, grew up in trife life, the times of white lines
The hype vice, murderous nighttimes and knife fights invite crimes" - Nasir Jones

I feel that any commitment is a bond between the people involved that should not be violated; except for extenuating circumstances. (Such as an open relationship,swingers,bisexuality, etc.)

I do; however, feel that if you take the bond to be a couple, exclusive to each other.. then you have obligated yourself to faithfulness and until that union is officially terminated, there is no excuse for infidelity.

Of course, I am biased on this since the cocksmith brother I have been saddled with needs to be beaten with a bar of soap in a sock for violating that vow he took....

_________________
Darksiege
Traveller, Calé, Whisperer
Lead me not into temptation; for I know a shortcut

Taly, if I altered the wording in my definition a little bit, you would fit...I should have sad a commitment that is recognized by a higher power, whether a court or God instead of a commitment made before a higher power.

Anyway, I can understand the basing of decisions off of "An it harm none, do as thou wilt," but what if the "harm" is not immediate or obvious? I guess what I'm saying is that there is more reasons that I think dating married/seperated people is wrong than just betrayal.

_________________
"Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." Jesus of Nazareth

Kate,

the problem with "do as thou wilt" is that it is commonly misused as a way to get away with anything the person saying it tries to do. They are misusing it...



as such anyone using it an excuse for infidelity is grossly misunderstanding what harm can be done and the spirit of Thelemic Law.

_________________
Darksiege
Traveller, Calé, Whisperer
Lead me not into temptation; for I know a shortcut

Anything can be harmful--which makes the rede somewhat subjective; we cannot see all ends. However, so long as no betrayal is involved, I have no moral issues with it. Does that mean it's a good idea? No, it does not. I see no moral issues with drinking a glass of something without knowing the contents, either--but it's still **** stupid. There are some complications people probably don't need or want in their lives.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

blah blah blah, everything is subjective and relative.

_________________
The Dude abides.

I'd be more worried about tarnishing someone's trust and ruining their life, than I would about breaking some ceremony.

That said, I don't think there is anything sacred about marriage. I see it merely as the "next step" of a relationship, life commitment.

It depend.

If the separation is being used as a trial, or as a punishment, absolutely not (and I wouldn't date an *** who would do that anyway)

If the separation is a sign that the marriage is Over and the coming divorce is just a technicality, go for it!

In my mind the key is whether the couple thinks of themselves as married anymore. both of them. If the divorce has already happened in their hearts and minds (which I feel G/god cares more about than s/he does about secular authorities) then why should they go on pretending they are married on a technicality?

Marriage isn't sacred. Love, trust, and honestly are sacred.