Unconditional Love-How would you describe it?

by rip van winkle 239 Replies latest members private

• 

  caliber

  Have you ever tried to rehabilitate an abused dog?

  I know of one dog that was so abused that for example one time the former owner tied him to the fence with a piece of

  barbed wire so that he wouldn't scare the cattle in the roundup. He said the dog was "useless and stupid."

  The new owner showed love and trained this dog to be one of the smartness dogs I are ever seen.

  He could ride on the snow machine He won bets with people for things like "I bet you 10 dollars my dog will

  go across the yard and toot the horn on the tractor." He would pull grain down to the auger with his hind legs.

  Countless tricks too numerous to name

  I seen this dog's reactions with both owners... I would never have believed this dog to be this smart

  but he responded to love and attention shown
• 

  TD

  but he responded to love and attention shown

  Yes. The reason I ask is because it's a long, time consuming process that requires a phenomenal amount of patience. Sometimes it can't be done by a man no matter how skilled he is if it was a man who abused the dog originally. The animal never forgets and never gets over the mental association between men and abuse. It's sad whan an animal sh!ts itself at the sight of you just because you look and smell similar to the previous owner.
• 

  rip van winkle

  My thanks to 00Dad for(his post that was the catalyst to my OP) http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/beliefs/230691/1/Relationship-Issues-Boundaries-Freedom-of-Choice-and-Codependency

  Just to reiterate for those who joined the discussion a little later- or didn't read the discussion in it's entirety. When I posed the question-

  "Unconditional Love....?" I was not looking at this from a JW/Xian idea in mind.

  It was the first time I had ever expressed that thought because I had never thought about it. Ever. It truly flowed from my heart.~ to the written word~

  I personally experienced it. It is mine.

  ----------------------

  For some who have already participated and for those who might at a later time, their perception of the question may solely be from what they experienced in the JW organization and not from any other source. Understandably, it is the only view they can see. I will not criticize critical thinking. Nor do I wish to beat a dead horse.

  Although I do recognize that a person is shaped by nature, nurture and life's experiences, I do not deny my life as a JW (IIWII) anymore than I can deny that being verbally, emotionally, physically and sexually abused as a child or adult didn't shape my perceptions of life and people in general.

  Now, I will respond to you individually:

  gymbob- I am sorry that your parents think that ignoring and dismissing you from their lives, in order to "please" God, is loving. It is not,

  -------------------------------------------------

  dreamgolfer- " Hard to find, but once you do, you should never be able to lose it." I like the acronym you made out of the word UNCONDTIONAL!!!!

  ------------------------------------------

  TD- on 00Dad's post: You said:"'Unconditional Love' to me, means that you love the person with absolutely no strings attached and regardless of what you get in return.

  I would hope that God, if he exists loves his human creation unconditionally and parents should love their children unconditionally. But that is not love between two peers. That is the love of a guardian or steward. I would agree that the JW parent organization fails miserably in this regard."

  (And you asked several questions regarding Unconditional love in the case of a physically abusive spouse, infidelity, witholding sexual relations from a spouse. etc. or in the case where a friend no longer wants to be your friend.)

  "Of course you could say that you still loved an abusive spouse in the sense that one would love their enemies, but the love that exists between a husband and wife is much more than that.

  I was careful to distinguish relationships between two peers from other types of relationships. The unconditional love of a parent or guardian can go in only one direction if need be. Most of us who have raised children have experienced periods during their adolescence when they didn't seem to love us much at all. We loved them anyway."

  TD I responded:

  "To me it doesn;t mean to be a doormat. It doesn't mean being abused from an abuser. It doesn't mean to be enabler. It doesn't mean to be co-dependent. What I was saying is that I do believe it exists and that I have received it and I have also given it without expecting something in return. But, I will say, as I said on my post, that it's an ideal. It is hard to put into practice as we are imperfect, but there are principles that can be applied in one's life."

  And again I said:
  "you can still love the person and not agree with the behaviour. And when I said-not being abused- from your scenario- is just that. The love is not conditional. We cannot change other people's behaviours, that's the acceptance part. Accepting doesn't mean that we condone it or agree with it. Still Thinking loved her alcholic partner, but that relationship was destroying her. A person who love's unconditionally has to include themself in the equation. They have to love themself enough to not allow another person's destructive actions to infect, control or destroy them."

  -------------

  KSol- I think what I stated in the above, previously to TD and what you can find in the pages of this thread will be sufficient to answer your scenario of having a gun held to my head or regarding Stockholm Syndrome.

  Mostly your commentary is geared towards JW's and their perception of love. I don't disagree with your assessment on their behaviour. As far as the idea of unconditional love being a romantic fantasy- ask "still thinking" if she agrees to your assessment.

  You ended your 1st post (#1641) with a positive view of the subject

  KSol said: " Don't get me wrong: it's healthy to have the DESIRE to experience unconditional love, or to seek relationships with those who are likely to give and receive love with few strings attached, but it's setting expectations WAY TOO HIGH; people are likely to be disappointed if it's not achieved. It's one of those life situations where you may NOT want to test the limits of other's love (as an answer to a question that you really don't want to know).

  The good news is that MOST people would claim to want to give/get love unconditionally, and the DESIRE to know unconditional love is a worthy goal to have (esp if it pertains to love of one's children, family, etc), as long as people realize not to be too disappointed if they don't attain it...."

  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  I will respond to the rest a little later as I would like to end this post on KSol's warm and fuzzy happy thoughts.
• 

  TD

  rvw,

  I don't think your responses come to grips with the nature of the objection, but thank you for repeating them.
• 

  00DAD

  Although I haven't commented on this thread in a couple of days I have been following it.

  One of the things that I have noticed between the "Two Opposing Camps" (for lack of a better term) in this discussion is how the term "unconditional" or its opposite "conditional" are understood in the context.

  One side, those that believe UL does NOT exits, seems to be understanding it as having an all encompassing meaning including changes in life situations and changes in the relationship between the two parties. For example, Ziddy told us about how her dog had to be put down. And another poster (TD?) cited an example of "the loved one" putting a gun to our head.

  In the other camp, those that believe in UL, they understand that the adjective "unconditional" only refers to the one that loves and does NOT mean to include inevitable changes over time. It means that the lover loves NOW without any conditions or restrictions on that love. It also does NOT mean that such love is given out indiscriminately like party favors. It is only for special relationships.

  I don't know if that clarifies things, but it's how I see this "debate" unfolding and how I understand the term.

  BTW, I do have to say, that I really appreciate that as far as I've observed everyone contributing to this thread has been really respectful in their disagreements. As we all know, it's not always like that here!

  Keep up the good work.

  00DAD
• 

  King Solomon

  In the other camp, those that believe in UL, they understand that the adjective "unconditional" only refers to the one that loves and does NOT mean to include inevitable changes over time. It means that the lover loves NOW without any conditions or restrictions on that love. It also does NOT mean that such love is given out indiscriminately like party favors. It is only for special relationships.

  Words mean what they mean: they don't mean what we may WANT them to mean.

  "Unconditional" is unambiguous, and means just what you'd think it should mean: NO conditions.

  But by referring to the "inevitable changes that may occur that we all know exist" you ASSUME that everyone is aware of this as a condition, although you instantly added a CONDITION thus making it CONDITIONAL love, i.e. love is offered as long as time stands still (an impossibility).

  Cell phone users have learned that "unlimited" data plans don't really mean "unlimited" as anyone might think (unlimited use, as in "All You Can Eat" buffets), but is actually meant by data providers to suggest "unlimited ACCESS" to their data networks, i.e. 24/7.

  Reality is, those "unlimited" data plans DO have usage caps, and consumers who use more than the cut-off (usually 5GB per month) will be cut off the plan or "throttled".

  But again, words mean what they mean: changing basic definitions of terms like "unlimited" is disengenous, and intellectually dishonest (as GB regularly does, relying on semantic arguments).
• 

  TD

  It means that the lover loves NOW without any conditions or restrictions on that love. It also does NOT mean that such love is given out indiscriminately like party favors. It is only for special relationships.

  Thank you. That is most helpful in understanding your position.

  Realistically, nobody can prove a negative. A person could claim that they have winged, pink unicorns flying around their head which are invisible to everyone else and nobody could ever prove otherwise because the nature of the claim precludes any further proof beyond the unadorned assertion

  Similarly, If a person came home and found that their spouse had gone stark raving mad and drowed their two infants in the bathtub, they could claim that they still love that spouse unconditionally and nobody could prove otherwise. (Although subsequent actions might tell a different story.)

  So I haven't participated on these threads to tell anyone who they should love or how they should love them. Love is subjective.

  I'd add that the broader question of whether altruism actually exists in any form at all is a huge philosophical debate that was raging before any of us were born. It's very, very difficult to name any act where the giver does not derive at least some benefit themselves, even if it's only the belief that God is smiling with approval upon their kindness or that they are simply being consistent and true to their principles.
• 

  bats in the belfry

  Description: Unconditional Love - Anything but the Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witnesses.
• 

  00DAD

  King Solomon: Words mean what they mean: they don't mean what we may WANT them to mean.

  Unfortunately this is not exactly true. Unlike math equations, words, phrases, sentences and any linguistic construct does not always have a single, immutable and objective meaning.

  Words have meaning. But words don't always have just ONE meaning. The meaning can change on context or the situation. The meaning of words change over time. The meaning can change depending on the tone of voice. (Think sarcasm). The meaning can depend on how it is used in the sentence.

  Many words have multiple meanings. Which one is intended by the speaker/writer and which one was understood by the listener/reader might be different. Many words also have connotative value.

  If every word only meant one thing all the time we wouldn't even be having this discussion. It would be a settled matter.

  The point I was trying to make (apparently unsuccessfully) was that the way some of you on this thread are defining/interpreting the word "conditional" is NOT the same as the way that others are using it and/or intending it to be understood.

  If you can understand what I am trying to say but think there is a better way to say it then please suggest what that would be:

  There are people that I love and my love for them in NOT contingent upon them meeting any terms, conditions or restrictions which I place on our relationship. This does not mean that my love for them might not change in the future, it might. For example, if I die, then I can no longer love them. If they die, I also can no longer love them as they are not here to receive my love. (I can still love the memory of them, but that is all.)

  My "short-hand" way of describing this special kind of love that I have for this one person is that it is "unconditional love."

  Again, if you can think of a better, more accurate phrase to describe this, then I'm all ears, or eyes as the case may be!

  If I give someone a "gift" but insist they use it a certain way or I will take it back, then it's not really a gift, is it? If someone I have previously been fond of and have given gifts to in the past suddenly starts treating me badly I will probably not give them any more gifts. But I wouldn't try to take back what I gave them before. If I do, then it was never a gift.

  In so many relationships, what is called "love" or "affection" is often just one side of a behavior modification system of rewards and punishment. This is very effective in training dogs and apparently people too. The interesting thing about people is that we can often be trained with just an idea. For a JW example:

  • Be good and Jehovah will give you everlasting life in Paradise
  • Be bad and Jehovah will kill you at Armageddon and send the birds to feed on your corpse

  Notice that no actual reward of punishment was given, only the the promise of a reward or the threat a punishment

  " Thus strangely are our souls constructed, and by such slight ligaments are we bound to prosperity or ruin. " - Mary Shelley in Frankenstein

  00DAD

  BTW, TD my winged, pink unicorns are no longer flying around my head. They have departed for fairer realms. If you see them give them my greetings!
• 

  King Solomon

  00Dad said:

  Unfortunately this is not exactly true. Unlike math equations, words, phrases, sentences and any linguistic construct does not always have a single, immutable and objective meaning.

  You're attacking a straw-man position: no one said there are NOT multiple definitions of words. Obviously there usually ARE multiple definitions.

  The problem is not that you're using an obscure 3rd or 4th definition of the term "unconditonal", but attempting to redefine it to mean "conditional", thus making the distinction worthless.

  The word 'condition' has a very explicit commonly-accepted meaning in legal circles, being a term of art used in contract law.

  Condition:

  1. A prerequisite or stipulation in an instrument.
  2. A future and uncertain event, fact, or circumstance whose existence or occurrence is necessary for the existence or determining the extent of an obligation or liability.

  Similarly, "unconditional" has an explicit meaning:

  unconditional - not conditional; "unconditional surrender" unconditioned unqualified - not limited or restricted; "an unqualified denial" conditional - imposing or depending on or containing a condition; "conditional acceptance of the terms"; "lent conditional support"; "the conditional sale will not be complete until the full purchase price is paid" 2. unconditional - not modified or restricted by reservations; "a categorical denial"; "a flat refusal" categoric, categorical, flat unqualified - not limited or restricted; "an unqualified denial"
  3. unconditional - not contingent; not determined or influenced by someone or something else independent - free from external control and constraint; "an independent mind"; "a series of independent judgments"; "fiercely independent individualism"

  Here's wikipedia's defintion:

  Unconditional love is known as affection without any limitations. This term is sometimes associated with other terms such as true altruism, complete love, or "mother's love." Each area of expertise has a certain way of describing unconditional love, but most will agree that it is that type of love which has no bounds and is unchanging. It is a concept comparable to true love, a term which is more frequently used to describe love between lovers. By contrast, unconditional love is frequently used to describe love between family members, comrades in arms and between others in highly committed relationships. An example of this is a parent's love for their child; no matter a test score, a life changing decision, an argument, or a strong belief, the amount of love that remains between this bond is seen as unchanging and unconditional.

  So while we are entitled to our own opinions, none of us are entitled to make up our own facts and/or reality.