Connecting Singles^® Forums 100% Free Online Dating

Marriage is a partnership which may or may not include Love.

Love is Truth
Love is God

Marriage is a very personal thing. On one hand, you've got people who just want to get married to someone just for some lame reason like improving their own credit rating or sneaking through some tax loophole (and they only care about marrying anything that walks).

Then OTOH you've got the middle aged men and women who are terrified of commitment because they have the mentalities of teenagers.

The role of male spearm is in direct conflict with the moral values of religion. Millions of spearm in your ejaculation has been designed to kill other male sperm. This design is a huge piece of evidence in support of evolution. This shows that at our very begging women had multiple partners. The male with the strogest sperm would have the greater chance of producing offspring. Therfore his family line will survive. We didn't start having problems with that issue until men decided to create laws to govern relationships between man and woman. Some of those laws are the opposite of the laws of nature. That is why there is so much infidelity. The laws of man say you must have only one partner, the laws of nature is telling you to reproduce with many to increase the chance your family line will continue. Some people can have just one partner. Others struggle with that concept inside themselves. Now, if you believe God made all things, then you have to admit God created a force so powerful that man cannot control. The power of reproduction. Did "God" make a mistake then? Or is evolution true? Or did "God" use the process of evolution to create life?
If the latter is true, then our struggle with multible partners is another design flaw by the creator.

ok, here's what the OP "asks" ............ oh ... never mind

Sounds a bit complicated to me.

To simplify what is said and to adjust it to my simple self:

* was never "desperately seeking the one";
didn't (and don't) want to be alone - yes.
But it's
if-it-happens-I'll-keep-it-and-cherish-it attitude as oppose to desperately-seeking-the-one attitude.

* some people it might view it as being unhealthy - to have(or to consider) but one single choice. I respect it. For myself, I never analyzed if it's healthy for me or it is not. When I am with a man of my choice, I don't have a slightest interest in others. Would assume that going against my nature and trying to pursue somebody else when I am in a relationship, wouldn't feel good to me, hence UNHEALTHY for me.

The prison of one's choice

Interesting points of contradiction. The powers that be have 'steered' things in their designed direction based on 'gods' books. Without them and their design criteria, there is no definitive proof that monogamy is inherent in man.

Does consciousness and its concepts of love and soulmates lend a hand in also not procreating so much that abberant features multiply?

There are different types of love which I will not explain
as it is very easy to find on the web. An act of love in
a marriage or long term relationship is a beautiful thing.
You are one with this very special person, you trust, you
communicate without saying a word, you don't smother but
your partner knows you are near, you know you will not
always agree on all things but that is OK, your love just
continues to grow in the trust, respect, adore, etc. (JMO)

Great theory, but nobody talks about what happens if the strongest male has bad DNA which causes all his kids to be born crippled or crazy. I guess in that case, would they let wimpy Mr. #2 have a go at it?

I realize we all have a right to our opionion, but I totally
disagree with you on this. Let's for this time, not even
bring God in to the picture. If your way of thinking were
correct, just try to imagine how many deaths would occur
each year, just from STD'S. What a frightening thought and
then to bring children into such a society is to say the

least very sad.

I think we are trying to make sense out of insanity.
(no disrespect intended)

I think you reflect the considerations of many Laura. Where does this consideration come from though? The origins of our human behaviors are plottable. It is how we become who we are, by 'observation' (any form of learning) of repetitive behavior from others.

I guess the question is, would we be healthier as a species had we chosen other 'behaviors'

My sense of this comes from what you say as well

This is essentially, "being in the now", indulging the moment of posssession for lack of a better word. Its undeniable that we all do this, though for some the moment is longer or shorter than others. (relationships just don't last in general, nor are they all encompassing)

Are we keeping the "marriage forever" notion, to avoid the heartache of loneliness, that part that involves searching, that part that involves being alone. Do we set ourselves up for disappointment in the surmissed granduer of marriage forever.

Would we be more healthy (one has to think about this without the preconcived notions of moral code)if we just took each moment as it comes, without emprisoning ourselves in monogamy... and still maintianing the use of respect for others as well

OK ... good points, but what is love an act of?



not what are acts of love.

eugenics morons from the late 1600's, royalty all keeping it in the family. Maybe this is what happened to love

non taken ... making sense in the end becomes sanity?

Love is the absense of:

delusion
illusion
confusion
deception
fear
ego
attack

We're here to learn from one another so that ultimately
we can know and remember what Love (God) is.

We learn that from the others around us, from short term
relationships, long term relationships, lasting marriages,
non-lasting marriages. In essence all living things.

You made an excellent point.
There must be better ways to fine tune human perceptions about this issue.
They'll do anything to fool and enslave us, while a hand full of them, enjoy a great, free life.
Slavery is the engine of evolution at its early stage and it won't go away easily.
It does good to the very intelligent and educated. They really can get a few free rides, during a life time.

Again, not, what is love; but what is love an act of?

And this is part of my question Dusty. Since life has so many contacts, relationships etc. do we, by indulging monogamy/marriage, preclude more healthy growth in ourselves. Does what we have learned from others, (moral codes) right or wrong in a behaviorial sense, leave us lacking in areas that might be more advantagious to growth than what monogamy gives us?

Love is an act of tender forgiveness, a tender look which
which becomes a habit. Very simple way of putting it
stated by Peter Ustinov.

Of course I am not desperate to find love or marriage. However
I am a lady who truly needs that companion in my life. If it
never happens again I will be fine and continue on with my
life's journey. It is a very special thing for me to have
that rapport with someone and know the feeling is mutual.

Must this last forever? (which is the notion of marriage). Setting aside moral codes, why would we preclude having that moment with someone that lasted for say just 20 minutes of our lives, based soley on the preconcieved notion that a 20 minute rapport is somehow 'not right' for us.