Sigh, U was trying to stay outta this one, but I finally got hold of
"Meloncholy Baby" and it made me think of some things.

Wade Tritschler wrote:

<snip>

Yes, _some_ do.  _Some_ people around here are curtious enough to let
people take their seat on the bus.  _Some_ people are crazy enough to go
into a school and shoot everyone in sight.  Neither of these are strong
holds (especially not the last) to an action.  Just because your parents
make a decision, even in Japan, you aren't always expected to go allow
blindly with it.

True. But both Ranma and Akane are _very_ tradutuinal. Even if they were
as desperate to break off the engagement as they claim, they would not
do it if it endangered their families' honor. 

Yes, most that do it are in love, and when Ranma says he's in love with
one of the girls then it's an engagement and not before.  I'll also
remember this little point that people forced together can and often do
fall in love.

I'll concede that the issue is muddy until Ranma vocalises his feelings,
however the entire series is full of evidence bashing one over the head
with which girl Ranma loves. And the fact that the love is returned is
also bashed about. (The first ep. on "Meloncholy Baby" coupled with
reading this thread made me really think about this). Personally, I
think that they began to fall for each other fairly early and those
unwanted feelings just made them want to hate each other more.

So, basically, Ranma and Akane ARE engaged, Ranma and Ukyou ARE engaged,

No, they are not!  Not legally at all, and no consent on Ranma's part.
When he consents openly okay, not before.  They have a claim to him, an
honorable claim and see just below....

One quote says it all: "Akane is my fiancee, and she's engaged to ME!"

OK, another quote: "Cute fiancee, meet uncute fiancee"

The series is full of bith Ranma and his father referring to both Akane
and Ukyou as Ranma's fiancees. In front of any number of witmesses at
that. I don;t know how that would stand in Japan, but court cases over
property (like engagement rings and so on) have been won woth less
evidence (if an engagement has enough merit to be recognized in a court
I would say that it is at least marginally official). The real problem
is that they are _both_ legitimate (although one might argue that the
Ukyou engagement was never binding because Akane's engagement predates
it, however others may argue that the later one negates the earlier.
Personally I think that they should sell Genma to the zoo, divide the
cash between the two families in restitution for his acts and let Ranma
marry the one he loves.)

and Shampoo is nothing to do with Ranma, except in her own mind and in
the minds of her people.

Now, honorably speaking Ranma has wronged Shampoo, not once, not twice,
three times.  Taking her prize without premission, embarrising her infront
of the whole village, being basicly response for her curse (this doesn't
even count mental distress caused by his lie of being truly a girl).
Honorably speaking he owes his father something (this is just tradition,
in truth I think Genma should be shot for his upbringing) and thus holds
to the engagement with Akane.  With Ukyo it's very similar save Genma
unofficial dissolved the engagement by running off on her and thus wronged
her.  With Shampoo he wronged her three times and honorably must make
compensation.  Should any of these count as a true engagement, NO!  Do
they all have some claim, yes.

I agree that Ranma should be in trouble for grabbing the prize, but the
defeat in front of the villiage was an attempt to set things right
(although done a bit cavalierly I'll admit), However, this still adds no
validity to Shampoo's claim. Even if it did, Shampoo has wronged Ranma
many times in her pursuit of him. Although Ranma has returned the favor
several times, I think Shampoo is still in the hole with the number of
times she has attacked Akane, tricked Ranma and/or Akane, and tried to
drug/bespell Ranma and/or Akane. 

Ranma and Akane/Ranma and Ukyou are engaged in the minds of ALL the
people.

Not in mine their not.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion of course. ^_~

Plus, how on earth can you blame Ranma for something he didn't know?

He has an obligation to know the Amazon laws since he entered their
society.  I know some cavalierly think otherwise but that is wrong.
You enter a society with it's own laws, even on a short visit, you are
held to the laws.  Ignorance isn't a defense.

To an extent I agree, however I again lay the responsibility on Genma.
The trip was supposed to be for him to train his son, and Ranma was his
responsibility. Ignorance is a defense when one is in the charge of
another (lots of officers have been court martialed for actions they
have ordered, but not too many soldiers have been convicted for
following orders.) If Ranma is guilty of an offence, then it is Genma's
responsibility to pay for it and he also has done a dishonor to his son
for not preparing him. No Ranma is not in the right when he breaks the
Amazons, however Shampoo and Cologne are not in the right to come after
him and use all sorts of underhanded means to get him to marry shampoo.

Amazon Rules that Ranma knew up till that point - Any Amazon who gets
KOed by an outsider is to be killed.

Still, he should have had a working knowledge of the Amazon laws since he
entered their society at one time.  Matter of fact, it was stupid of him
not to check up on the laws after the KOD since he just might have found a
way out of the mess.

What I said before plus the fact that the Guide should have warned them
far in advance and the fact that the Amazon laws are traditions not
binding civil laws. Without any info to the contrary from the Guide
there was no reason for them to be concerned. They were not criminal,
they were a couple of culturally insensitive oafs. I live in a
vacation/military town. If I did what my cultural and local "codes of
behavior", "laws" if you will, declared to every new airman and
vacationer that commited some unwitting offence against me, I'd probably
be spending a lot of my time in jail or in the hospital. Again, those
persons are not in the right to do what they do, but I don't think I'd
be in the right to haul off and hit them. 

So, Ranma could stand with the killing - but he had no idea about the
other law.

Still, he was reckless.  It's quite clear he didn't put any thought into
his action and just went off and did something stupid.  As I said,
carelessness and recklessness do not amount to a defense.

He used the info he was given ("If I beat you, then it's OK, Right?")
Again it was dumb but so is Shampoo's pursuit.

So how, pray tell, is it Ranma's fault?

Simple, he was reckless.

Again, he got no info to the counter from those who were supposed to
guide him. In fact, I would say that the actions of Genma (participating
in the offending action), the words of the guide, and Shampoo's
challenging demeanor and choice of words aided greatly to Ranma's
actions. Again this doesn't justify his actions, but it sure as heck
buys him a lot of leeway in my book.

Maybe if you go to another place, and break a custom that you didn't

This isn't a custom, it's a law.

Did the Chinese government pass it? Or did they give the Amazons their
independence? Then whatever the Amazons call it its a tradition not a
law, period.  

know about, then it's your fault? And that you should be forced to
do the punishment for breaking that custom, even though you didn't
know about it?

Yes, you should be punished.  If you think you shouldn't you're just plain
wrong.  I stated this before, whenever you enter a lawful society you have
an obligation to know and abide by the laws.  Ranma failed to do this, and
therefore committed a reckless or careless action.  He should have known
the laws.

Repeat all the stuff before. He was in China, he didn't brerak any
Chinese laws, he was a jerk and should have gotten his butt kicked and
that's it. 

Now, to repeat myself one last time, I consider _none_ of the so called
engagements valid.  Everyone has claims to Ranma but none amount to a real
engagement.

Again: "Akane is my fiancee and she's engaged to me!" with no negation
from aforementioned fiancee, adding any number of other verbal
admissions on both parties part. If two people telling the world that
they are engaged does not make for an official engagement, I don't know
what does.

Sorry this was so long. I am fighting valiantly to not be doing what I
am supposed to be doing right now so I got carried away.

C-chan