28 Nov 11
Originally posted by googlefudgeYour argument of loving somebody else who doesn't reciprocate that love cannot possibly apply to a relationship, as there is no love relationship. Simple as. It's a dead water thought, and may include infactuation and unreal desires that you relate to there, outside of a relationship.
The OP simply asks 'can you stop loving someone'.
It doesn't ask could Romeo ever stop loving Juliet.
And even if it's love in a 'relationship', my arguments still apply.
I think my question about this 'love' discussion, being in or out of a relationship, is inherently valid.
-m.
You asked about how love can be defined?
http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=143419&page=2#post_2766872
Words don't give true light to love, but these aren't far from it if you live it.
-m.
28 Nov 11
(1 Corinthians 13:4-8) Love is long-suffering and kind. Love is not jealous, it does not
brag, does not get puffed up, does not behave indecently, does not look for its own
interests, does not become provoked. It does not keep account of the injury. It does
not rejoice over unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth. It bears all things,
believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails. . .
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
28 Nov 11
Originally posted by mikelomnonsense.
Your argument of loving somebody else who doesn't reciprocate that love cannot possibly apply to a relationship, as there is no love relationship. Simple as. It's a dead water thought, and may include infactuation and unreal desires that you relate to there, outside of a relationship.
I think my question about this 'love' discussion, being in or out of a ...[text shortened]...
Words don't give true light to love, but these aren't far from it if you live it.
-m.
Consider a mother of an autistic or mentally damaged child, who may not be capable of feeling or expressing love.
In that instance the mother loves someone who doesn't love them back.
Or in a case where one person in the relationship loves the other and unbeknownst to them their partner doesn't
love them back but mearly appears to do so.
Claiming that love ONLY exists inside a relationship where both parties love the other wholly and completely is evidently
wrong.
And even if it did, it still does not preclude one or both people in a loving relationship from losing that love.
And actually I didn't ask how love can be defined, I am not convinced it can, or should be.
28 Nov 11
Originally posted by googlefudgeIt isn't nonsense at all.
nonsense.
Consider a mother of an autistic or mentally damaged child, who may not be capable of feeling or expressing love.
In that instance the mother loves someone who doesn't love them back.
Or in a case where one person in the relationship loves the other and unbeknownst to them their partner doesn't
love them back but mearly appears to do ...[text shortened]...
And actually I didn't ask how love can be defined, I am not convinced it can, or should be.
Bringing in an autistic or mentally damaged child, is becoming semantic and extreme. Let's take the case of a vegetative state child, as you want to go to extremeties.
I said, "Your argument of loving somebody else who doesn't reciprocate that love cannot possibly apply to a relationship, as there is no love relationship. Simple as. It's a dead water thought, and may include infactuation and unreal desires that you relate to there, outside of a relationship."
The mother/father cannot possibly have a loving relationship, it is impossible. A loving relationship has to include live character, for that is how 'real' love develops.
I maintain, even in the vegetative state child, if the child cannot, to QUOTE YOURSELF, "feel or express love" then that, by definition, is not a loving relationship. It is a loving care relation of giving from one side to the other, and even if continously, is an unreal desire for love from, and an infactuation for, the child in question that has no ability to coerce such emotion.
You then point to the view of being in a relationship where you love somebody, but they don't love you back. That's pathetic. That is bad choice as I said, and again a non-loving relationship.
Evidently, you are in a bad mood today. Either that, or you wouldn't know true love if it smacked you in the face!
-m.
28 Nov 11
Well having read all your views, I am beguning to wonder (and hope) that maybe I can stop loving someone and 'move on' eventually. And, more importantly that when this person tells me he loves me no more it dose not mean the last 13 years have been a lie but that he did infact love me and now, for reasons only known to himself, he no longer dose- but that he did once. Thanks for your considered replys everyone.
28 Nov 11
Originally posted by yo its meYou will always love your children, despite events. You will be there to cherish their achievments, and they will reflect a part of you that nothing and nobody can take away.
Well having read all your views, I am beguning to wonder (and hope) that maybe I can stop loving someone and 'move on' eventually. And, more importantly that when this person tells me he loves me no more it dose not mean the last 13 years have been a lie but that he did infact love me and now, for reasons only known to himself, he no longer dose- but that he did once. Thanks for your considered replys everyone.
I'm sure he loves you still, but the question of continuance was never put forward. He will always love you, if he isn't like googleriddance in this thread.
Fudged thread, - you let the side down man....... 🙁
-m.
28 Nov 11
Originally posted by mikelomInteresting conclusion you made Mikelom!
You will always love your children, despite events. You will be there to cherish their achievments, and they will reflect a part of you that nothing and nobody can take away.
I'm sure he loves you still, but the question of continuance was never put forward. He will always love you, if he isn't like googleriddance in this thread.
Fudged thread, - you let the side down man....... 🙁
-m.
I think it is possiable to stop loving someone after considering the possiable future with that not being so.
28 Nov 11
Originally posted by yo its meNobody just acts like they are loving you for 13 years (unless you were paying them to do so).
And, more importantly that when this person tells me he loves me no more it dose not mean the last 13 years have been a lie but that he did infact love me and now, for reasons only known to himself, he no longer dose- but that he did once.
But I must also point out that love does not have to be reciprocated. If your love was genuine for 13 years then whatever his feelings, then that should be enough.
Love has both selfish and selfless components. If you have selfless love, then you can love someone whether they love you back or not, and even if they lied about it.
But you are not required to keep loving someone.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
28 Nov 11
Originally posted by mikelomPost sense, and stop attacking me for no reason with no basis.
You will always love your children, despite events. You will be there to cherish their achievments, and they will reflect a part of you that nothing and nobody can take away.
I'm sure he loves you still, but the question of continuance was never put forward. He will always love you, if he isn't like googleriddance in this thread.
Fudged thread, - you let the side down man....... 🙁
-m.
The OP question asked in the abstract, whether it is possible for love to die.
The answer is and must be yes.
All evidence points to this being true.
This says nothing about any particular set of real life circumstances, which should probably
not be discussed on an open internet forum.
Getting annoyed at me for answering the question and defending my position with reasoned
arguments is pointless and stupid, as was the other thing you did.
You are evidently highly emotionally caught up in this, to which I would point out, with no body
language or tone of voice, it's impossible to tell, unless you specifically say so.
This is a forum for discussion spiritual/philosophical/religious ideas and you should expect any
post/thread to contain reasoned analysis of the OP.
If you want something else you should specifically say so, or not post here.
As for love only existing where it's reciprocated.... This is so evidently wrong it doesn't even merit refuting.
And you would see that if you were in a different frame of mind.
Chill, take a deep breath, and come back.
Incidentally, The OP seems to have had a name change, which is leaving me confused as to whom I
am talking.
29 Nov 11
Originally posted by yo its me&feature=related
Well having read all your views, I am beguning to wonder (and hope) that maybe I can stop loving someone and 'move on' eventually. And, more importantly that when this person tells me he loves me no more it dose not mean the last 13 years have been a lie but that he did infact love me and now, for reasons only known to himself, he no longer dose- but that he did once. Thanks for your considered replys everyone.
29 Nov 11
Originally posted by yo its meOf course you can.
What do you think, based on your spiritual thinking, can - if you really loved them in the first place- can you ever stop loving that person?
For me, the answer is no.
How about dogs? Dogs are man's best friend. Loyal to the last. I saw an article on Yahoo the other day about a dog that is refusing to leave his master's gravesite. However, if you take the dog that loves you and you mistreat him by beating him all the time, he will start to fear you and eventually start growling at you and it's very hard to regain his trust.
Same with humans. If the person you love mistreats you constantly, love turns to hate given enough time. Granted, the mistreatment usually must be severe and prolonged, but given duration and severity, the love is lost, and if the mistreatment continues eventually turns to hate. This is almost inevitable.
Normally, this doesn't happen, of course. Usually the mistreatment is nowhere this severe. But your question was "CAN you stop loving someone?" Clearly you can, but not under usual circumstances.
29 Nov 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIDEALLY this is what love is. Usually, it's not.
(1 Corinthians 13:4-8) Love is long-suffering and kind. Love is not jealous, it does not
brag, does not get puffed up, does not behave indecently, does not look for its own
interests, does not become provoked. It does not keep account of the injury. It does
not rejoice over unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth. It bears all things,
believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails. . .
29 Nov 11
Originally posted by googlefudgeIf abused, love can surely die.
Love is only 'immortal' (metaphorically speaking) if it's maintained, and cherished.
If neglected or abused it can die like anything else.
Neglected, eh, not so much. It can be attenuated, surely. Perhaps transformed into mere "warm feelings", such as remembering a lost love. In those cases, you don't love them the same way you once did, so perhaps you're right after all.