I have tried to use the most literal translations of the Greek words here for more impact. Some translations use "marriage" or "fall in love" for words in the original that are more raw or carnal. Eros is about sexual desire and even lust. That gets lost, in my opinion, when trying to soften the meanings.
This section of the new translation pulls together excerpts from DL from both sections 118 and 119.
Hicks: As regards women, he will submit to the restrictions imposed by the law, as Diogenes says in his epitome of Epicurus' ethical doctrines.
Yonge: Nor will he marry a wife whom the laws forbid, as Diogenes says, in his epitome of the Ethical Maxims of Epicurus.
Mensch: The wise man will not consort with women in any manner proscribed by law, as Diogenes says in his Epitome of Epicurus' Ethical Doctrines.
Original text: ὥς φησι Διογένης ἐν τῇ ἐπιτομῇ τῶν Ἐπικούρου ἠθικῶν δογμάτων.
Does the original text say anything about marriage? Sexual relations? Consorting? γυναικί τ᾽ οὐ μιγήσεσθαι τὸν σοφὸν ᾗ οἱ νόμοι ἀπαγορεύουσιν… Interestingly, γυναικί is the singular dative case "of, by, for (a) woman"
(οὐ) μιγήσεσθαι - one definition is "to (not) have intercourse with, to be united to, of men and women" but another if simply "to (not) mingle with."
οἱ νόμοι ἀπαγορεύουσιν "the laws/customs forbid"
For a modern application, consider what laws or customs dictate how men and women should behave in establishing a consensual, sexual relationship. This may be the best way to interpret this characteristic for a modern audience.
Hicks: The Epicureans do not suffer the wise man to fall in love;
Yonge: They do not think that the wise man will ever be in love,
What is specifically being discussed here is ἐρασθήσεσθαι to desire passionately, lustfully, in other words to be carried away by sexual passions (eros). Hicks's"suffer" appears overly strong. The original is more "suppose, think, expect" the sage to do this, so Yonge wins on this one. Mensch uses: they "do not think" this will happen.
Hicks: according to them love does not come by divine inspiration: so Diogenes says in his twelfth book
Yonge: nor that love is a passion inspired by the Gods, as Diogenes says in his twelfth book.
Again, this makes perfect sense since all phenomena are the result of atoms and void with no supernatural intervention. And the "love" here is έρως "sexual passion" in keeping with not supposing the sage will "fall in love." I'm also interpreting this to mean that Epicureans believe people are responsible for their actions in this regard since you can't blame it on a god.
Hicks: No one was ever the better for sexual indulgence, and it is well if he be not the worse.
Yonge: Marriage (Attalus's site says "Intercourse", otherwise identical to Yonge), say they, is never any good to a man, and we must be quite content if it does no harm;
So, is it marriage, intercourse, or "sexual indulgence"? The original is συνουσίαν which appears to convey sexual intercourse (and can be used in relation to animals copulating) and seems to be used in the sense of letting one's passions run away with them and not the institution of marriage.
The original is: συνουσίαν δέ φασιν ὀνῆσαι μὲν οὐδέποτε, ἀγαπητὸν δὲ εἰ μὴ καὶ ἔβλαψε.
So, possible literal translation: Sexual intercourse, they say, on the one hand, never profited or benefited (anyone), and, one the other hand, one must be content if it does not disable or distract the mind.
Hicks: Nor, again, will the wise man marry and rear a family: so Epicurus says in the Problems and in the De Natura.
Yonge: and the wise man will never marry or beget children, as Epicurus himself lays it down, in his Doubts and in his treatises on Nature.
Original text: Καὶ μηδὲ καὶ γαμήσειν καὶ τεκνοποιήσειν τὸν σοφόν....
Here marriage is specifically mentioned: γαμήσειν "to be married" and τεκνοποιήσειν "to bear children"
Hicks: Occasionally he may marry owing to special circumstances in his life.
Yonge: Still, under certain circumstances of life, he will forsake these rules and marry.
Yonge: Some too will turn aside from their purpose.
Mensch: He will avert himself from certain persons.
Hicks and Mensch have two completely different interpretations so we turn to the original British Library manuscript which has the following form and punctuation: κατὰ περίστασιν δέ ποτε βίου, γαμήσειν καὶ διατραπήσεσθαί τινας.
In certain circumstances sometimes they will pass their lives, to be married and to turn aside (from their purpose).
What is their purpose but to seek pleasure? But Epicurus "warns" of the pains associated with marriage… but some find pleasure in marriage and so decide to "turn away" from those teachings. Are they turning away from the purpose of Epicureanism? A purpose imposed from a chastising Epicurean writer (here I'm referring to whether DL was using a source that looked unfavorably on those Epicureans who chose marriage)? The word "purpose" is not explicitly in the original text but implied by the meaning of the word διατραπήσεσθαί. I decided to translate this as widely as possible using something like "turning away from the single life."