Which do you prefer, to be with someone you love or to love the one you're with?

1. 62

   messy marshellaposted 11 years ago

   Which do you prefer, to be with someone you love or to love the one you're with?

   replyreport
2. 73

   LadyLolaposted 11 years ago

   I prefer to be with the one I love. But then, I've been married (common law) for 22 years. I met him when I was 18 and fell head over heels, and I still feel that way after that long. We aren't always agreeing, we do argue and sometimes I feel like I hate him...don't they say that there's a fine line between love and hate? Anyway, I could never stay with someone just for the fact of being with them. I love that song by the way, "If you can't be with the one you love, love the one you're with"...I'm showing my age aren't I?

   replyreport
   1. 62

      messy marshellaposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks for your response LadyLola!
      More often than not, people don't end up with their greatest love (true for me). Anyway, I totally agree with you about the love and hate thing. As for the song, it is familiar! I'll recognize it once I hear it!

      replyreport
3. 85

   tsmogposted 11 years ago

   What a great and interesting question to ask, messy marshella. This question deserves a hub answering it. I wish I had the time.
   
   A quick view one may say there is a need to define. Seems, there is not anything to prevent one from the belief the answer is actually one in the same, yet not both, while being both. In the view I am suggesting that would ring true up to a point along that line of definitions until the change up occurs.
   
   The question is 'Which do you prefer?' Next, are conditions separated by a conjunction - 'or.' To answer this question 'or' has to be defined. Until that is defined, then the conditions are mutually exclusive. If that is so, then they have as much propensity to be one in the same as they do as separate actions while neither comes along to play.
   
   Answering this question as it is presented offers some pretty revealing truth(s) if the choice is made. And, it is a good thing it is rational and not empirical in nature or is it? I am thankful I have moose as a spiritual guide. Otherwise I would not have ventured an answer - smile.
   
   Tim

   replyreport
   1. 62

      messy marshellaposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Wow. Thanks Tim for that very comprehensive reply.

      replyreport
   2. 85

      tsmogposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      You are welcome. I hope it helped.

      replyreport
4. 80

   dashingscorpioposted 11 years ago

   Why would anyone (choose) not to be with the person they are "in love" with?
   The whole notion of (love the one you're with) is in reference to (using) a person  as a "substitute" because you (can't) be with the one you love! It's basically (settling) for what you can get.
   Having said that if your need to be with "someone" is stronger than your desire to have a honest loving monogamous relationship then that is a sign that you aren't ready to commit. Even after marriage sometimes people must be apart for work, military, or school. Unless you have agreed to have an open relationship/marriage most couples want to believe their mates will "foresake" all others!

   replyreport
   1. 62

      messy marshellaposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks for your response dashingscorpio! Yeah, everyone wants to be with the one they love, isn't it? But sometimes, choosing that option comes with many sacrifices involving other loved ones, so you get caught in a confusing situation.

      replyreport
   2. 80

      dashingscorpioposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      messy marshella, Life is a "personal journey". Each of us is responsible for our own happiness. As an adult you get to choose who you want to date or marry.

      replyreport