First  Prev  197  198  199  200  201  202  203  204  205  206  207  208  209  Next  Last
Who is a virgin and proud of it?
37272 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 12/7/12 , edited 12/7/12

Jdaimond wrote:



why did you throw friends and family in with that? Im talking about a different type of love and that argument was irrelivant to my post.


I threw in friends and family because I think it is relevant. My point was that Marriage is not the ultimate expression of love. I love my friends and family, and I don't think marriage is the appropriate response to that love. I also understand that you think the love for your friends is a different "type" than the love for say, a spouse. But I would disagree with that. What is different about the love for your friends than the love for your significant other? I'd argue that the only fundamental difference is sexual attraction. I think that if you think loving someone of the opposite sex is different than loving someone of the same sex, then you're confusing love and sex, and are a good bit similar to many of the people that you criticize in your post... you think that, at some level, sexual attraction plays a part in love, and I would guess that sexual attraction has nothing to do with love. Would you argue that it does? Have you ever had a friend that you felt would support you, that understood you, and felt connected with? That feeling is of the same relevance as the feelings you get from a spouse, but I'm not ready to marry that friend. Do you see my point?

Another way to prove you love to a person is the will power to stay abstinate till marriage.


I more or less agree with all the parts that I didn't comment on, so I'll skip to this. I'll just pose this question. Can you marry someone you don't love? I feel like I've seen or at least heard of this phenomenon, so I don't think it's a stretch to say that some people do get married without actually loving each other. In fact, I think you've even hinted at something similar. People getting married without love might be a good reason for the high divorce rate. I suspect also, that people that don't have sex can get married. Lack of sex is not proof of love. It would sound ridiculous for someone to say "I love you because I've never had sex with you." I'm only trying to say that sex has nothing to do with love. Not having sex says exactly as much about love as having sex does -- nothing.


Also i dont believe love is always '' logistical compatibility ''. Ever heard '' God is love''? Ever heard ''God works in mysterious way''? I put those 2 together to form my own quote. ''LOVE WORKS IN MYSTERIOUS WAYS''.


I never said that love is "logistical compatibility." I said that marriage is. There is a difference between love and marriage -- that's sort of the point of my post. I agree that love works in mysterious ways. In fact, I think the idea that love is different between different people is a big reason for that mystery. Telling someone that you don't mind sitting silent in their presence might be a huge expression of love for one person, and another person might be offended by the idea that you would rather sit silently than talk to them. I feel like the ultimate expression of love depends on your love for a person, and thus changes depending on who you love. I'll repeat what I said in my last post: I don't think marriage is necessarily an expression of love, I think it's a product of love, attraction, and logistical compatibility. Love alone does not result in marriage, and I also think that, like you said, logistical compatibility is entirely separate from love -- but I think it has a lot to do with marriage. If you disagree, all I can do is give my reasons: Marriage is not a promise to love someone. Most ceremonies include some variation of "Love, honor, cherish, keep in sickness and in health, and be true as long as you both shall live?" A good portion of that promise is logistical. Why don't they just say "do you promise to love as long as you both shall live?" They don't, because love is not the same thing as marriage. Love and honor, for instance are different. Therefore, I think more goes into marriage than love, because marriage is not just a promise to love someone.
4961 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / Earth
Offline
Posted 12/7/12

theYchromosome wrote:


Jdaimond wrote:

I am a virgin and hell yeah im pround of it. My opinions on the subject.
people from age 13 to 23 are to immature for relationships in my opinion. You see kids going around saying ''well be in love forever'', but truthfully most of the time this is not true. Teens are to stuck up on forever and believe it every time its said.
MY OPINION IS IF YOU DONT GO INTO A RELATIONSHIP THINKING ''I COULD SEE MYSELF MARRYING THIS PERSON'' AND YOU DONT MARRY THAT PERSON WITHIN A YEAR OF DATING THEM THAN ITS NOT CONSIDERED A RELAITION SHIP TO ME.
People my age and sometimes older just want to experience love. If you say ''I love you'' but feel that marriage is hasty than its not love.
I know it sounds judgemental but I grew up in a very different lifestyle than others so people cant see it my way but trust me, i see it thier way and its ridiculous to me.

Also saying i want to express my love for you by having sex is retarded. Just ask that person if they could express their love for you by getting married. The love just flies right out of the window.

SEX IS NOT THE ULTIMATE EXPRESSION OF LOVE, MARRAIGE IS.


I think you've got the wrong idea about both sex and marriage. Sex isn't an expression of love at all, it's an expression of sexual attraction. As for marriage, if that were the ultimate expression of love, then I would need to marry my friends and family too, and I definitely don't see that happening. Consider that you can love people without being sexually attracted to them, and also consider that marriage probably entails much more than simply loving someone. Finally, consider that if you think others your age are confused about what love is, that you might also be in the same boat. What makes you better at understanding love than your peers? I will tie up my post by saying that I'm pretty sure I don't have a complete understanding of love, but I would guess that the ultimate expression of love towards a person changes from person to person, and is almost never sex or marriage. (And I don't mean to insult marriage either, I'm just saying that love probably entails different things for different people. Marriage is less an expression of love, and more a byproduct of love, attraction, and logistical compatibility -- I think, haha.)


Marriage is one kind of expression of love, if it is done as it was intended (people marry for different reasons).
6610 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
17 / M / North Dakota
Offline
Posted 12/7/12

MountainMew wrote:


Jdaimond wrote:


MountainMew wrote:


Jdaimond wrote:

I am a virgin and hell yeah im pround of it. My opinions on the subject.
people from age 13 to 23 are to immature for relationships in my opinion. You see kids going around saying ''well be in love forever'', but truthfully most of the time this is not true. Teens are to stuck up on forever and believe it every time its said.
MY OPINION IS IF YOU DONT GO INTO A RELATIONSHIP THINKING ''I COULD SEE MYSELF MARRYING THIS PERSON'' AND YOU DONT MARRY THAT PERSON WITHIN A YEAR OF DATING THEM THAN ITS NOT CONSIDERED A RELAITION SHIP TO ME.
People my age and sometimes older just want to experience love. If you say ''I love you'' but feel that marriage is hasty than its not love.
I know it sounds judgemental but I grew up in a very different lifestyle than others so people cant see it my way but trust me, i see it thier way and its ridiculous to me.

Also saying i want to express my love for you by having sex is retarded. Just ask that person if they could express their love for you by getting married. The love just flies right out of the window.

SEX IS NOT THE ULTIMATE EXPRESSION OF LOVE, MARRAIGE IS.


Who are you to tell someone what is or is not love? For that matter, who are you to tell someone what does or does not make a relationship.
On a completely personal level, I find marriage silly. It simply isn't my cup of tea, I'd never consider marrying anyone I happen to get into a relationship with.
If someone feels sex is the ultimate expression of their love, then so be it. Love and relationships are complex, not many people have the exact same way of expressing their feelings. No one has any right to tell someone their ways of expressing love is wrong so long as the action is consensual, if you ask me.


I am someone who has experieced hurting someones feelings. The things i said was immature and i hated myself for it. I told myself i would never hastly or irresponsibly do something again. I went back to the girl, got on my knees and said sorry in front of a lot of people to the point that it kind of embarressed her. At first it was so that i could feel better about myself but the more i thought about it the more happier i was that maybe she felt relieved to hear me say it. It was so far from love and as you said ''love is complex'' you just cant fake it. Faking it will only lead into trouble.
Also, i never pointed anybody out in particular so theres no reason to get offended. One of the facts we both got wrong and im just now realizing it is that there if you truly love someone you can never stop expressing you love for them. Sex or marriage, there truly is no way to express you love for them because love is to strong to express it with sex or marriage.
couple questions for you to answer.
Do you believe that more than half of relationships are love.
Why do you not want to get married.



I realize you hadn't pointed anyone out, but you did make a rather daring statement of what the "ultimate expression of love" is, and that caught my attention. I'm in no way offended, just sparking discussion really.
To answer your questions, I believe there is love to more than half of relationships. Because I am in no way aware of every relationship out there, it's impossible for me to say if they all are love. And, of course, love being the complex thing it is, there could be love in a relationship where I can not see it. Anyway, generally speaking, I think there is a form of confusing emotions in every relationship, and possibly love in half.
You're second question is a tad personal, to give a broad answer and make as much sense as I can, I believe there is more faithfulness in a relationship for me than marriage. There's some simple religious reasons as well. I also just don't like the whole concept of marriage. If I love someone, I don't need marriage to prove it. Of course, there's more to it than that, but that's the best answer I have to give.


You know what, that was a pretty damn good answer but if you think about it. How much relationships has your friends been in? Probably about 2 each if im right and im not saying their not in love with who they are with now. What im saying is that the past relationships they were in is to be considered done which means that if there that young and they have already been in one relationship amagine someone in their 20s. So statistics say that well above half of people are not in love. I truly believe in destiny. I dont believe that someone will fall in love with someone if the person matches their criteria. I like your reply though and dont mean to sound creepy but i like you personality as well. I actually regret the ''ultimate expression'' but i still stand by my opinions.
17774 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
17
Offline
Posted 12/7/12 , edited 12/7/12

Jdaimond wrote:
You know what, that was a pretty damn good answer but if you think about it. How much relationships has your friends been in? Probably about 2 each if im right and im not saying their not in love with who they are with now. What im saying is that the past relationships they were in is to be considered done which means that if there that young and they have already been in one relationship amagine someone in their 20s. So statistics say that well above half of people are not in love. I truly believe in destiny. I dont believe that someone will fall in love with someone if the person matches their criteria. I like your reply though and dont mean to sound creepy but i like you personality as well. I actually regret the ''ultimate expression'' but i still stand by my opinions.


Those aren't statistics. At all. Don't even try and claim that "statistics say" when you have no idea what you're talking about.
First of all, among all of my friends, only one of them has been in a relationship, so your attempted statistics are immediately flawed and invaluable. Secondly, are you trying to imply breaking off a relationship means there was no love? That's so absurd. It is very much possible to be in a relationship, be in love, that love eventually fade and end off that relationship. Just because it ends does not mean it was never there.
I'm glad you like my reply, or whatever bits of my personality end up in them. It's good to have discussions where replies are considered well received, I feel. A shame I haven't altered your opinion in anyway, though.
6610 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
17 / M / North Dakota
Offline
Posted 12/7/12


I threw in friends and family because I think it is relevant. My point was that Marriage is not the ultimate expression of love. I love my friends and family, and I don't think marriage is the appropriate response to that love. I also understand that you think the love for your friends is a different "type" than the love for say, a spouse. But I would disagree with that. What is different about the love for your friends than the love for your significant other? I'd argue that the only fundamental difference is sexual attraction. I think that if you think loving someone of the opposite sex is different than loving someone of the same sex, then you're confusing love and sex, and are a good bit similar to many of the people that you criticize in your post... you think that, at some level, sexual attraction plays a part in love, and I would guess that sexual attraction has nothing to do with love. Would you argue that it does? Have you ever had a friend that you felt would support you, that understood you, and felt connected with? That feeling is of the same relevance as the feelings you get from a spouse, but I'm not ready to marry that friend. Do you see my point?

Another way to prove you love to a person is the will power to stay abstinate till marriage.



Dude, thats what i meant. I meant their was a diference between sexual love and love the whole time.

in Everything else you are pretty much thinking the same thing as me.
6610 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
17 / M / North Dakota
Offline
Posted 12/7/12 , edited 12/7/12



Secondly, are you trying to imply breaking off a relationship means there was no love? That's so absurd. It is very much possible to be in a relationship, be in love, that love eventually fade and end off that relationship.


That is excactly what im implying. Thats not what i call love, thats called a spark. You why its called a spark? Because its there and than its gone. Love does not dwindle and saying there was love but now its gone is excactly what I call immature relationships. Love doesnt fade. Its indestructible but love does have an imposter. The imposter is called a spark. A spark is the very reason that my statistics are true and i didnt make them up. Go take a survey to see how many relationships people over 20 has been in. I aint some hater that sees a couple going down the street and thinks thats a spark but i do think relationships that are loosing there fun is called a spark because it is impossible for true love to ''fade'' as you said it.
37272 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 12/7/12 , edited 12/7/12

Jdaimond wrote:




Dude, thats what i meant. I meant their was a diference between sexual love and love the whole time.

in Everything else you are pretty much thinking the same thing as me.


So, just to be clear, you no longer hold the opinion that marriage is the ultimate expression of love? Because everything I wrote was basically just my reasoning for disagreeing with that. I got the feeling that we were on the same page for the most part, I just have a big problem with saying that the "Ultimate Expression" is marriage.


PhyongHwa wrote:

Marriage is one kind of expression of love, if it is done as it was intended (people marry for different reasons).


I agree. I recognize that marriage can very well be an expression of love, and a pretty big one too. My only point was that I don't think it's the "ultimate expression." I feel as though there are things that speak much more of love than marriage -- that was the only point I really care about. I totally agree that it's an expression of love -- perhaps I should have stated that more clearly.
17774 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
17
Offline
Posted 12/7/12

Jdaimond wrote:




Secondly, are you trying to imply breaking off a relationship means there was no love? That's so absurd. It is very much possible to be in a relationship, be in love, that love eventually fade and end off that relationship.


That is excactly what im implying. Thats not what i call love, thats called a spark. You why its called a spark? Because its there and than its gone. Love does not dwindle and saying there was love but now its gone is excactly what I call immature relationships. Love doesnt fade. Its indestructible but love does have an imposter. The imposter is called a spark. A spark is the very reason that my statistics are true and i didnt make them up. Go take a survey to see how many relationships people over 20 has been in. I aint some hater that sees a couple going down the street and thinks thats a spark but i do think relationships that are loosing there fun is called a spark because it is impossible for true love to ''fade'' as you said it.


Because of what you said, I believe that there will be no agreement between us here. I genuinely believe it is possible for love to come and go, that it is not a "spark" but true love that didn't last. I also hate the way you use broad stroaks like "take any survey" or "statistics". Give me proof, or else you just sound like an idiot. You can simply say from your point of view, as opposed to pretending you have proof or "statistics".
Speaking of, it isn't "take any survey" it would be "look at the results of any survey".
Anyway, as I said, I know that if I was unable to change your point of view prior to this, than there is no way we will come to an agreement now. So, unless you have something you feel is necessary to add, I feel this back-and-forth between us can in itself fade.
6610 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
17 / M / North Dakota
Offline
Posted 12/7/12 , edited 12/7/12

theYchromosome wrote:


Jdaimond wrote:




Dude, thats what i meant. I meant their was a diference between sexual love and love the whole time.

in Everything else you are pretty much thinking the same thing as me.


So, just to be clear, you no longer hold the opinion that marriage is the ultimate expression of love? Because everything I wrote was basically just my reasoning for disagreeing with that. I got the feeling that we were on the same page for the most part, I just have a big problem with saying that the "Ultimate Expression" is marriage.


PhyongHwa wrote:

Marriage is one kind of expression of love, if it is done as it was intended (people marry for different reasons).


I agree. I recognize that marriage can very well be an expression of love, and a pretty big one too. My only point was that I don't think it's the "ultimate expression." I feel as though there are things that speak much more of love than marriage -- that was the only point I really care about. I totally agree that it's an expression of love -- Perhaps I should have stated that.


yes, that was kind of impulsive of me to say and i started regreting it a while ago.

One thing i feel a little different about though is the way you said lack of sex. I said that staying abstinate before marriage, not after. I doubt i could make out of the just got married limo. Id probably have to kiss over my sholder to keep from knocking my wife off the stage if you get what i mean. A girl flirts with my and im like ]]]]]]]] ) ahh damnit.
6610 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
17 / M / North Dakota
Offline
Posted 12/7/12

MountainMew wrote:


Jdaimond wrote:




Secondly, are you trying to imply breaking off a relationship means there was no love? That's so absurd. It is very much possible to be in a relationship, be in love, that love eventually fade and end off that relationship.


That is excactly what im implying. Thats not what i call love, thats called a spark. You why its called a spark? Because its there and than its gone. Love does not dwindle and saying there was love but now its gone is excactly what I call immature relationships. Love doesnt fade. Its indestructible but love does have an imposter. The imposter is called a spark. A spark is the very reason that my statistics are true and i didnt make them up. Go take a survey to see how many relationships people over 20 has been in. I aint some hater that sees a couple going down the street and thinks thats a spark but i do think relationships that are loosing there fun is called a spark because it is impossible for true love to ''fade'' as you said it.


Because of what you said, I believe that there will be no agreement between us here. I genuinely believe it is possible for love to come and go, that it is not a "spark" but true love that didn't last. I also hate the way you use broad stroaks like "take any survey" or "statistics". Give me proof, or else you just sound like an idiot. You can simply say from your point of view, as opposed to pretending you have proof or "statistics".
Speaking of, it isn't "take any survey" it would be "look at the results of any survey".
Anyway, as I said, I know that if I was unable to change your point of view prior to this, than there is no way we will come to an agreement now. So, unless you have something you feel is necessary to add, I feel this back-and-forth between us can in itself fade.


If the argument is going to fade than i suppose it isnt love. As witty as that is it sounds reallly creepy.
37272 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 12/7/12 , edited 12/7/12

Jdaimond wrote:

That is excactly what im implying. Thats not what i call love, thats called a spark. You why its called a spark? Because its there and than its gone. Love does not dwindle and saying there was love but now its gone is excactly what I call immature relationships. Love doesnt fade. Its indestructible but love does have an imposter. The imposter is called a spark. A spark is the very reason that my statistics are true and i didnt make them up. Go take a survey to see how many relationships people over 20 has been in. I aint some hater that sees a couple going down the street and thinks thats a spark but i do think relationships that are loosing there fun is called a spark because it is impossible for true love to ''fade'' as you said it.


I'll agree that the largest portion of relationships that end are what you call a "spark." They decided that they love a person without really knowing that person, and upon learning more about that person, decided they don't love them anymore. Cool, I'm with you. However, to say that love doesn't fade is equivalent to saying that the person you love doesn't fade. People can change over time, and if the things that you love about a person start to fade from their personality, love will fade as well. However, I also hold the opinion that you simultaneously love and hate nearly everyone in existence, and saying that you love someone is basically the same as saying that you have found the things you love and hate about a person, and have determined that you love them more. All in all, there is a reason to love everyone, you just need to find it. I don't really want to argue on this point, I just wanted to say that I think love can fade if the things you love in a person fade.
8802 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / Gotham City
Offline
Posted 12/7/12
Posted 12/7/12
I aint... but it doesn't mean I did it I wonder if it's even possible for guys to be virgin at 14+ years (be honest ).
13691 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Somewhere.... per...
Offline
Posted 12/7/12

p8ac8ut3wuce wrote:

I aint... but it doesn't mean I did it I wonder if it's even possible for guys to be virgin at 14+ years (be honest ).


I don't understand what you say... both the first part and the second part...
6610 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
17 / M / North Dakota
Offline
Posted 12/7/12

theYchromosome wrote:


Jdaimond wrote:

That is excactly what im implying. Thats not what i call love, thats called a spark. You why its called a spark? Because its there and than its gone. Love does not dwindle and saying there was love but now its gone is excactly what I call immature relationships. Love doesnt fade. Its indestructible but love does have an imposter. The imposter is called a spark. A spark is the very reason that my statistics are true and i didnt make them up. Go take a survey to see how many relationships people over 20 has been in. I aint some hater that sees a couple going down the street and thinks thats a spark but i do think relationships that are loosing there fun is called a spark because it is impossible for true love to ''fade'' as you said it.


I'll agree that the largest portion of relationships that end are what you call a "spark." They decided that they love a person without really knowing that person, and upon learning more about that person, decided they don't love them anymore. Cool, I'm with you. However, to say that love doesn't fade is equivalent to saying that the person you love doesn't fade. People can change over time, and if the things that you love about a person start to fade from their personality, love will fade as well. However, I also hold the opinion that you simultaneously love and hate nearly everyone in existence, and saying that you love someone is basically the same as saying that you have found the things you love and hate about a person, and have determined that you love them more. All in all, there is a reason to love everyone, you just need to find it. I don't really want to argue on this point, I just wanted to say that I think love can fade if the things you love in a person fade.


I agree. A person can change from the person you were in love with thats for sure but its a spark if you just simply get bored.
First  Prev  197  198  199  200  201  202  203  204  205  206  207  208  209  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.