Connecting Singles^® Forums100% Free Online Dating

That was the only way I could make the choice on giving or receiving love...

Do you think you have to be loved in order to know how to give it?

I'm with you on this one.


No charity love here. Been there, done that and didn't like it!!!!

... was only kidding about 12.. I have always thought 3 would be a nice number...just tryin to scare the B-Jeezus out of Marty!!! ... I would have to be fertile up to the age of 60 to achieve a goal of 12 ..

haha.. i was thinking you were joking, but hey..the more the merrier..LOL.. maybe

3, is a good number..however if I were to redo it I would of had one more...there is something to the saying of having an odd number...

Not to be flippant, but what good, what harmony, what peace of mind, body and soul is one without the other hand-in-hand; to give and to receive being the perfect balance...as either alone brings frustration, resentment, disharmony and a basket full of psychological problems to one party as for example to those that end up as "stalkers". Either alone does not bring us happiness nor balance.

either choice ultimately leads to emotional destruction.

to have such intense feelings for one and not shared between two, cannot/should not be defined as "Love".

Agree, love is not love unless it is returned. Even with our kids, if we love them unconditionally, they love us in return, even when they don't act like it.

"Loving" someone who doesn't love you may be obsession, or infatuation, but it's not real love.

Okay, let's make this a bit more interesting (since everyone's going to answer "they both go together").

What if you had to make an absolute either-or choice, and it applied to everyone? I'd choose to be loved - the alternative being far too frustrating.

But having someone "love" you that you don't love can be irritating. I'd rather be frustrated than irritated.

Well Lush and I are with you on that one... not everyone said both go together

Hey Anne....

Hey everybody....hope ur all having a good day...

I think this question was asked before, wasn't it Trudy??

And as I replied then....I thought, for many years, that to be loved was the ultimate thing, it wasn't till I really loved somebody I knew how wrong I was.
It feels great to be loved, yes, but to love.....takes you places, makes you dream, you are a totally different, better person in every aspect of your being....

I know...as I am so in love right now....

It has to be both for me...One without the other is a very lonely and sad place to be!!!!!!!!!!

yep your right being loved is marelvous, yet it seems more fulfilling to me to love others. As I cant control the depth of love others may have for me, nor can I make them love me in the way I may want them to. Not being certain if I would be loved truly and unconditionally, I would rather have the option to love to the fullest that I am capable of..at least that way I can still have the experience, excitement, and feelings of love, until I could find someone who can love me bck in the way I'm willing to give...and if that love never came around, I would still know and take joy in the fact that I have loved.

First, Beautiful, are those really your lips? Have you been channeling Angelina??

I'd like to ask a serious question, which I think may warrant its own thread (imo), namely: Exactly what value is obtained from loving someone? I'm not sure I see why loving someone makes you a better person per se (aside from the obvious provisos of the nature of that love and its context); I mean, what virtue obtains from loving someone? If you had a choice to merely like others or to love them, in what way would you be morally or spiritually bereft - or inferior to, say, beings that don't feel love?

These are very complicated questions which I'm guessing may not be appropriate for most of this list - they require far more than the usual bromidic analysis which treats the answers as self-evident - but I'm still interested in what people here would have to say...

Jeff

My thoughts exactly.....

The feeling is just way more fulfilling....

When you love....when you truly love, no expectations....love comes right back to you...and that feeling, doesn't matter how long it lasts, its what makes life worth living for...

Either way unless reciprocated would be difficult.. to love and not to be loved back would be awful... equally to be loved and not love would not be nice either..

I suppose it happens all of the time and someone ends up getting hurt.

Honesty would work in either situation. If pushed, I would prefer to be the one getting hurt instead of inflicting hurt on someone if I didn't love in return.

lol and now I am totally confused.... someone make me a foil hat so that I can obtain clarity of thought please!!!

Well, let me re-phrase my question (which is rather different from what Scottishlass intended):

If you had a choice between being able to love people and no one being able to love you and being unable to love people but people were able to love you, which would you choose?

yeh no kidding, bring on the foil..

its crazy with the few words used in the question and to just answer the question would seem easy enough. but if its looked into deep enough its a very hard question to answer, and have thought about it more then I should since I initally read it.
your correct only being able to have one and not the other...is just lonely, then again the question is to pick one...hmmm...so still going to go with beable to love..

And for you ambrose, a very good question...but you already know the answer.

Well I'm still a selfish biatch and would probably choose the latter, going through life loving and never having it returned...

Can you HAVE one without the other? Hmmmm. I tried "being loved". If it's not mutual, not a good thing. I think I choose both please.