by rip van winkle 239 Replies latest members private
It hasn't been mentioned but it's critical as to who the conditions apply to.
If an individual places moral conditions on himself as to how and to whom he extends love . . . that is quite different from placing conditions on the recipient, as to whether or not they will be deemed worthy of love . . . very different.
ooops- Zid may have stated above there's no such thing as unconditional love and I agree. Science agrees w/this last time I checked my notes from the late 60's. The loving parent loves no matter so that's what I refer to as 'unconditional' love. The closest love to unconditional is that from our dogs. It's late/ or early a.m. need to sleep.
Gee, wishing for the good of the serial killer is really going to help his victims, isn't it...?
Not particularly, Zid. But we were talking about love toward the hypothetical killer, weren't we?
If I found out my hubby OR CHILD was a serial killer, I'd turn them in so fast it'd make their head spin - or more likely, I'd kill them myself, in 'ahem - cough' - "self"-defense...
OK. Well, turning them in is the best thing for them, you see? Obviously, allowing this behavior harms them, even if they think they like to kill. I hope you can see the difference, though I am beginning to doubt.
When my partner (alcoholic) was drinking. I though t I loved him unconditionally. I confused this at the time with putting myself second, allowing and accepting mentally abusive behaviour. THAT is NOT unconditional love. That was co dependency.Indeed so, ST.
When my partner (alcoholic) was drinking. I thought I loved him unconditionally. I confused this at the time with putting myself second, allowing and accepting mentally abusive behaviour. THAT is NOT unconditional love. That was co dependency.
It is also known as "relationship addiction" because people with codependency often form or maintain relationships that are one-sided
At least some measure of equality & respect is required for unconditional love to work.
Still thinking, I absolutely agree with your views here
The truth is this: love is not determined by the one being loved but rather by the one choosing to love.” ~Caliber
I agree with this.
The one who loves another also chooses how to give/show that love. Some people show it in a genuine, healthy way, and because they truly love the person, want the best for that person....
In contrast, someone may claim to love another, but show this love in a warped way. Example: My jw family shuns me, showing 'tough love'. I believe that they still love me, but are uncapable at this time of showing it in a healthy way due to their mindless following of the religious precepts. To them, shunning is showing love....to me it feels the opposite (but, intellectually I know better). Of course we all know the shunning is abusive and extreme. A person may genuinely love another, but display it in a backwards way....due to many different factors. Not saying it is ok, just acknowledging that they can still feel love. And I never stopped loving my family...the difference is that I stepped out of the mind-control. So, on the rare occasions that we speak, I assure them that I love them all and that it's just a shame that the religion has made a division between us. I have repeated to them that it's always a choice for them to speak to me, I am not shunning them...just living my own life. They are the ones choosing to play by those rules.
Someone can love another, and be clueless on how to be loving. And that is where it is up to the recipient of the behaviors to create and enforce healthy boundaries.
Another example~ my ex-husband. I made the painful decision to leave him after my boundaries had been crossed countless times and in countless ways. Yet, he would simultaneously say adoring things. I loved him, but was learning to love myself again first...which meant not tolerating his behaviors aftere repeated discussions about how it needed to change. Unfortunately no change, it only escalted. I can say now that I have a certain love for him, a sadness for him really... I don't see how someone can treat someone in the ways that he has and be a happy individual. But, I do hope he does some work on himself and can have peace. But hell no would I ever want to be his emotional punching bag ever again. So, my love for him changed from a romantic love to a general humanity sort-of love. And this where I'm comfortable. Now he holds no power over me...I can think clearer outside of that dysfunction.
Accepting another's expressions of love should be conditional. Because their displays of love may not be healthy.
Wow, this has really turned out to be a great discussion!
Thanks to RVW for starting the thread and everyone else for adding to it.
So many great, thought-provoking comments.
To Zid, my favorite dragon: You're overthinking this.
As Farkel said, unconditional love is self-explanatory. That doesn't mean you just give it away to anyone and everyone indiscriminately. It simply means that, if YOU LOVE SOMEONE, then there isn't anything they have to do, or any CONDITION(S) SET BY YOU that they must meet to continue receiving that love.
You're such a smart dragon. I think you'll figure it out when you stop confusing codependent relationships with the ideal.
00DAD
Nonexistent. All love or action has some self serving component even if it is miniscule.
Nonexistent. All love or action has some self serving component even if it is miniscule.
I have also heard it said that in someones death the mourning you do is for your own loss....
the loss of them in your life
However this seems like a very morbid and unfulfilling attitude to me ..as if no actual love and
caring is somehow felt for the deceased loved one.
"To Zid, my favorite dragon: You're overthinking this. ..." 00Dad, page #3
Hee hee hee hee!!
Actually, I was mulling this thread over while I fed the critters this morning, and I realized that most of the posters on this thread are approaching the subject with the Watchtower corporation's restrictions upon love, in mind.
On the other hand, I am approaching it from a viewpoint that sees that all love must be "conditional", in one way or another.
Take for example my sickly kitty, Minx, who I loved deeply. I gave her the best medical care that I could afford, fed her the best food - human baby food in addition to the highest quality cat food, pampered and cared for her in every way possible, to keep her alive as long as possible.
Ultimately my love for her HAD to change, when the REALITY of the CONDITION of her body intervened - and it finally began to fail. She had to be put to sleep.
My love for her, though absolute, HAD TO BE CONDITIONAL - as in, based upon the ever-changing conditions of life itself.
However, most of the posters here have used the Watchtower Corporation's stifling, dictatorial micromanagement as a basis for comparison when referring to "unconditional" love, as in...
Rip Van Winkle's opening post:
"Unconditional love is about acceptance and respect of an individuals thoughts, opinions, perspectives, behaviours and lifestyles. ..." Rip Van Winkle, OP
The very issue of respect of an individual's thoughts, opinions, perspectives, behaviors and lifestyles is inevitably raised as a result of the stultifying atmosphere of the Watchtower's micro-management of its followers.
And many more comments followed in the same vein:
"First off, as we all know, they give a lot of lip-service to love being an identifying mark of true Christians. But their form of "love" is so completely contingent on the individual's complete and total compliance to following the mind-numbingly long list of written and unwritten rules, regulations, practices, policies and procedures that what results is not love at all. ...: 00Dad, page 1, post #3907
Again, one must observe that this comment springboards off of an obvious "they/their", which we all know is again referring to the Watchtower corporation.
And Heaven's comment on page 1 - same sort of reference:
"You do need to be careful though as some people are just plain dangerous and need to be given a wide berth. Jehovah's Witnesses are not encouraged to have unconditional love. ..." Heaven, page 1
And I could keep on, but I'm not going to. I've posted enough to illustrate my point.
As Leaving 101 {Hi, there!!} and WasAnElderOnce both said, - er, well, they both indicated that "unconditional love" doesn't actually exist in reality. [Sorry 'bout putting words in your mouths, guys!! ]
In my opinion, "unconditional" love - in the rarified, eternally persisting sense - doesn't exist in reality, because reality is always CHANGING the CONDITIONS within which the "love" exists.
Therefore, the affection must change and morph with the changes in reality.
So, in my opinion, that state of pure, everlasting "unconditional" love, cannot exist in the real world.
Besides, we are also running into the clumsiness of the english language, with its limited vocabulary when it comes to the concept of "love".
Although I detested much of the para-scriptural blather coming from the Watchtower writing department, I must say that I was intrigued when they came up with the FOUR greek words to describe our ONE lone english term... "Agape', storge', eros, philia" is less clumsy than ??principled?? love, brotherly/sisterly love, family love, friendship, sexual love, romantic love, yadda yadda yadda yadda...
Zid
Instead of using unconditional love I would say I wish my parents had the kind of love for me that didn't come with unreasonable conditions such as my family and I not being welcome in their home as long as I'm married to my husband who has done nothing to them and happens to be a pretty good hubby..
