PDA

View Full Version : Do you believe in love at first sight?



Inola
12-09-2012, 15:12
Sorry, the sun is shining and putting me in a romantic mood :)

:kiss_mini:

FatAndy
12-09-2012, 15:23
:agree:

TolkoRaz
12-09-2012, 15:38
Sorry, the sun is shining and putting me in a romantic mood :)

:kiss_mini:

I have just arranged for an Alert to be broadcast over every one of Moscow's Radio & TV channels! ;)

cadiguzel
12-09-2012, 15:47
No.

mds45
12-09-2012, 15:51
Yes and I believe in love at first read too ..

Inola
12-09-2012, 16:22
Yes and I believe in love at first read too ..

happens to me too (to fall in love with books) :p

peppermintpaddy
12-09-2012, 17:19
Of course,it happens all the time,..........even to an old cynic like me....

Inola
12-09-2012, 17:24
Has it ever turned out to be the one (assuming that you believe in existence of "the one")?

peppermintpaddy
12-09-2012, 17:33
Has it ever turned out to be the one (assuming that you believe in existence of "the one")?

I'm not sure I believe in the one,i think there are probably several "ones" for everybody......

rusmeister
12-09-2012, 18:38
I like what JRR Tolkien had to say:


Nearly all marriages, even happy ones, are mistakes: in the sense that almost certainly (in a more perfect world, or even with a little more care in this very imperfect one) both partners might be found more suitable mates. But the real soul-mate is the one you are actually married to.
J. R. R. Tolkien, Letter to Michael Tolkien, March 1941
British scholar & fantasy novelist (1892 - 1973)  

GalinaP
12-09-2012, 21:14
I'd rather believe in 'they lived happily ever after', if were possible, first sight is dangerous with my shortsighted intuition.:rant:

Inola
12-09-2012, 21:41
I like what JRR Tolkien had to say 

"Love is moral even without legal marriage, but marriage is immoral without love." (Ellen Key)

Potty
12-09-2012, 21:46
"marriage is immoral without love." (Ellen Key)

well, you can always love your partner as a friend or as a nice person. Or as a brother/sister. I know few couples who are not in love with each other. They seem fine. Well, definitely not immoral at least.

Inola
12-09-2012, 21:49
well, you can always love your partner as a friend or as a nice person. Or as a brother/sister. I know few couples who are not in love with each other. They seem fine. Well, definitely not immoral at least.

Love-friendship or "brotherly" love is still love... I think Ellen Key was talking about couples where spouses don't get along at all.

GalinaP
12-09-2012, 21:52
well, you can always love your partner as a friend or as a nice person. Or as a brother/sister. I know few couples who are not in love with each other. They seem fine. Well, definitely not immoral at least.

The only problem with this kind of love lies in the bed department.

Potty
12-09-2012, 21:57
I don't know what to believe regarding love at first sight. I just don't know. The good news is I believe in love) Some people don't)

GalinaP
12-09-2012, 21:59
Love makes the world go round.

rusmeister
12-09-2012, 23:43
"Love is moral even without legal marriage, but marriage is immoral without love." (Ellen Key)
Well, if "love" means "sex", then I disagree, but a failure/refusal to love (agape) especially your spouse, who you are supposed to love above all others, then there IS immorality, though it lies in that, not in marriage.

If spouses don't "get along" then they need to work on their marriage. They need to learn to love when they don't "feel like it", to do the acts of love, without grumbling or resentment, to willfully put themselves in a frame of mind where they determine to love their wife or husband no matter what she/he is like.

I recently saw an interview with an elderly couple that, when asked the secret of the longevity of their marriage, they said "We were born in an era when if something was broke, you fixed it. You didn't throw it away."

Inola
13-09-2012, 11:17
Well, if "love" means "sex", then I disagree, but a failure/refusal to love (agape) especially your spouse, who you are supposed to love above all others, then there IS immorality, though it lies in that, not in marriage.

If spouses don't "get along" then they need to work on their marriage. They need to learn to love when they don't "feel like it", to do the acts of love, without grumbling or resentment, to willfully put themselves in a frame of mind where they determine to love their wife or husband no matter what she/he is like.

I recently saw an interview with an elderly couple that, when asked the secret of the longevity of their marriage, they said "We were born in an era when if something was broke, you fixed it. You didn't throw it away."

I agree with the theory, but in practice it happens that one is trying to fix and the other doesn't - so the first keeps trying (e.g., for the sake of children) until he/she is run out of patience.. It takes two to make a marriage a happy one.

rusmeister
13-09-2012, 22:21
I agree with the theory, but in practice it happens that one is trying to fix and the other doesn't - so the first keeps trying (e.g., for the sake of children) until he/she is run out of patience.. It takes two to make a marriage a happy one.

I do understand that. (ie, no argument)

But this is where I have to play the hole card - if the Christian faith is true (as I say it is); that is, actually the real truth about all of our lives, then there IS an answer even to that, and that is that the one who DOES fully accept it must take up the cross of making peace, and love, to someone to whom it is difficult, even extremely difficult, to do so. If for whatever reason sex is impossible, the spouse is constantly crabby, the Christian has to pray for patience and grace and strive to approach their spouse in love at all times, and always to quell their own feelings and desires. This can be incredibly difficult, and I do not try to minimize that. Buuuuut...

It is VERY difficult to hate someone who is always loving you; when you ruin their day, they still clean up for you, buy you flowers, smile and do not play emotional games, say thank you for things. Just pick on someone who is unfailingly kind to you and TRY to hate them sometime. I don't think you'll have much luck.

The Christian way. A hard way - but the way that makes miracles possible, including restored families, kids raised by their own birth parents and so on, as I've said before. Gotta keep your eyes on the two grandparents living together and greeting their grandkids together...

If I can't talk about that then certainly a catch-22 is created. But that is a real escape hatch - the one that doesn't look like one really IS the way out.

Inola
13-09-2012, 22:30
Loving means making the loved one happy, right? And if the loved one wants to divorce to become happy? He/she is not being nasty to her/his spouse, nothing like that, just asks for a divorce?

TolkoRaz
13-09-2012, 22:35
Have you asked a blind person about 'love at first sight'? :10310:

Now, there is an interesting concept! :book:

GalinaP
13-09-2012, 22:39
Have you asked a blind person about 'love at first sight'? :10310:

Now, there is an interesting concept! :book:

Love at first sound or love at first touch is thousand times more romantic than first sight.

Potty
13-09-2012, 22:40
He/she is not being nasty to her/his spouse, nothing like that,

such things happen in real life?

Inola
13-09-2012, 22:45
Have you asked a blind person about 'love at first sight'? :10310:

Now, there is an interesting concept! :book:

No, but I once said "Размечтался одноглазый!" ("Keep dreaming, one-eyed"*) to a guy who indeed had one artificial eye... There was a loaded pause (dropped jaws, mine included) and three seconds later all were "par terre" laughing like mad :D

(* It's a funny Russian phrase one can receive in reply for asking too much or similar.)

Inola
13-09-2012, 22:47
such things happen in real life?

Sorry, what exactly? man and woman not being nasty to each other? yes - this happens...

Potty
13-09-2012, 22:49
Sorry, what exactly? man and woman not being nasty to each other? yes - this happens...

no, divorce without at least one of 2 partners being nasty

Inola
13-09-2012, 22:51
no, divorce without at least one of 2 partners being nasty

yep, happened to me: not a cross word in more than 3 years.

TolkoRaz
13-09-2012, 23:11
Love at first sound or love at first touch is thousand times more romantic than first sight.

Blindly in love?

TolkoRaz
13-09-2012, 23:11
yep, happened to me: not a cross word in more than 3 years.

Was he incommunicado, or had you pickled his tongue? ;)

Inola
13-09-2012, 23:19
Was he incommunicado, or had you pickled his tongue? ;)

no cross words, no pickling, no biting (tongues) :D

hmm, this thread was about love at first sight, not marriage and divorce... What about you TR, love at first sight ever happened in your life?

TolkoRaz
14-09-2012, 00:00
no cross words, no pickling, no biting (tongues) :D

hmm, this thread was about love at first sight, not marriage and divorce... What about you TR, love at first sight ever happened in your life?

Many times, but he didn't notice! :p

Reminds of a great song, if you can stand him ........


James Blunt - You're Beautiful (Video) - YouTube

:)

scd167
14-09-2012, 08:12
Absolutely! In the summer here when the women are dressed to kill, I can fall in love at first sight at least two or three times on a decent evening walk... even more if I take a little longer walk.

:tgif:

rusmeister
14-09-2012, 09:31
Loving means making the loved one happy, right? And if the loved one wants to divorce to become happy? He/she is not being nasty to her/his spouse, nothing like that, just asks for a divorce?

It's difficult to say anything to someone who has been divorced. Anything may be taken as a personal affront. As a matter of fact, I came within a hair of divorce myself, and see everyone as victims of social attitudes that have gone wrong, that they hardly understand. We are all taught to place our own happiness first from childhood, in schools, in public life, the media, to seek our rights, and parents so taught unknowingly teach it at home. The result is that we really не ведаем что творим. We don't know what we are doing when we get divorced, because we don't know what we are doing when we get married in the first place; what marriage is really supposed to be for. If you've done it, you've done it. It may be irreparable, and in that case, you have to move on. But in order to not have it happen again, to discover that in a certain sense, all men are the same, and all women are the same, with different sets of problems and habits and behaviors that will sooner or later irritate and upset you, you need better preparation than a mere hope that you will be happy, and a worldview that can deal with whatever comes up.

Being "happy", in my experience, is a thing that comes and goes. Or rather, there is a broad state of contentment that is periodically disturbed by discontentment - whether it's from resting on our laurels and feeling like we ought to be doing something more with our lives, or from not being happy with a specific situation with a spouse that can't deal with their own discontent.

But things like social order, like kids depending on mom and dad staying together to bring them up, the lifelong relations of in-laws - that they SHOULDN'T be broken and new ones formed every five to ten years, depend on us NOT acting, making the big choices, according to our feelings, not even happiness.

Without faith, I see no solution. I see either unhappy families just living unhappily together without hope, OR the non-solution of breaking up the families and screwing the kids, in-laws, and connected relationships (setting aside for a moment the obvious relation of husband and wife). It's becoming epidemic, though, to try to treat this break-up as normal. A couple of films come to mind, "The Santa Clause" and "2012", and there are no doubt others, where they attempt to normalize these heavily dysfunctional relationships, and make them seem resolvable. It's not about just a couple of films, they're just illustrations of a general trend to normalize the grossly abnormal.

But as a more direct answer to your question, "happiness" is a fleeting thing, and feelings are a disastrous basis to live by, especially in the decision to break up a family. That's why what my Faith prescribes really IS a solution. The feeling MIGHT really come back. Life has a way of surprising us in those matters. And if it doesn't, hope still remains, you are giving your life for your spouse in the sense of GIVING it, not throwing it away - of living day by day an act of love, made difficult by the unreasonable spouse, as something that can prove to be salvific for him (her) as well as you. If your eye is on eternity, then the temporal only has temporary power to cause pain and suffering. When you're in it, yes, you suffer. But there are worse things than suffering. Suffering is not, in itself, an evil, though we desire to eliminate it whenever we can.

And if he wants to leave you, well, he can.

10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the a wife depart from her husband:

11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.

12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.

13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.

14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.

15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.

16 For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?
1st epistle to the Corinthians, ch 7

That's all part of a holistic world view, where everything fits into everything else. This kind of behavior makes sense if the Christian view is true (because eternity must be taken into account, and this life is so temporary), and undeniably tends to work towards peace when done in context with the rest of Tradition (from refusing to take offense when offended to 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you").

A priest would generally give better answers. They are generally formally trained, and deal with various situations professionally. I'm just a layman. (I remember my first conversation with an Orthodox priest, Fr Andrei Tregubov in New Hampshire, and how I was struck then by how deep his thoughts about marriage were and how shallow my own were.)

I truly think that if you pursue happiness, and are willing to violate faithfulness for it, you won't get it. You can't build genuine happiness on the unhappiness of others. But if you pursue faithfulness, you may get happiness in the bargain.

Inola
14-09-2012, 10:17
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Rus, I agree with almost all... but you missed my point: any union will last only if both parties want to stay united, it's impossible to impose here...

Have you ever experienced "love at first sight"? :)

scd167
14-09-2012, 10:33
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Rus, I agree with almost all... but you missed my point: any union will last only if both parties want to stay united, it's impossible to impose here...

Have you ever experienced "love at first sight"? :)

To me, there is a bigger question. Is there any difference between "lust at first sight" and "love at first sight." I personally think not... however, lust can grow into love, if the woman plays her cards right!

That should illicit some good responses?

:SwoonLoveSmiley::SwoonLoveSmiley::SwoonLoveSmiley::SwoonLoveSmiley:

:irule:

Inola
14-09-2012, 10:42
To me, there is a bigger question. Is there any difference between "lust at first sight" and "love at first sight." I personally think not...

if you see no difference between 'love and "lust" - then there isn't any, regardless of the order number of the "sight" :)

I know there is.

Lost in moscow
14-09-2012, 13:36
I don't but I can't speak for the rest of me

rusmeister
14-09-2012, 16:14
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Rus, I agree with almost all... but you missed my point: any union will last only if both parties want to stay united, it's impossible to impose here...

Have you ever experienced "love at first sight"? :)
Thanks, Inola,
I agree, and I think what I posted, especially the Scripture, recognizes that. You can only control what you will do. But if you make divorce a non-option for yourself, from your side, then it is much less likely to happen. And if you are behaving as prescribed, then the spouse is less likely to be pushing for divorce as well.

As to "love at first sight", I understand at as "eros-attraction" at first sight, for the problem is in the multiple and excessive understandings of the word "love". "Love" at first sight is quite different from the love a patient spouse shows to a difficult one. Sure, I've experienced both kinds, although the latter is really more of what you determine to do than merely what you happen to feel. I had a case of teenage love of the first type (unrequited) that lasted until I married my wife. But as a feeling, it's bound to end, and a mature relationship has to shift to a more mature kind of love, based on doing more an on feeling, just like a car starts on battery power, which drains, and is replaced by the generator, which produces constant power. S "love at first sight" is useful for starting what ought to become marriage and family, the object, the purpose of the feeling, but cannot be the thing we depend on to hold the marriage together.

natlee
14-09-2012, 19:37
Butterflies - yes, love - come on, people! ;) My experience is bizarre anyway - I hated most my ex's at first sight :nut: some even at first touch :suspect: Grew to love them over time.. unfortunately! ;) Now I have once felt the butterflies at first sight, and that was via Skype! He had that smile, those eyes.. that look, mmm! I miss him! :)