Dont I Get A Choice?

[98cwitr]

No, it was something that I came to realize I was.

then by what means did you come to this realization? In other words, have you answered to yourself why and how you came to your own beliefs?

 

[Steezie]

They aren't perfectly analogous but insofar as making a distinction between desiring a particular state and actually being in that state are concerned the analogy is point on.

I just dont want people thinking that polyamoroy is just sex sex sex because it isnt.

What "forced" you to examine your militant monogamy? The simple passing of time, as your remarks above seem to indicate? And doesn't examining your monogamy require thought? If so, then you did actually think about changing your mind about polyamorous behaviour.

I began to realize that I had very deep feelings for multiple people and at first I dismissed them as a simple crush but they never really went away and when I thought about it I came to realize that yes I do have room in my heart to love more than one person. I tried to figure out what exactly this actually was and I started reading and I came across the definition for polyamorous. That fit rather well so I now identify as polyamorous.

Well, from my monogamous point of view polyamorism seems very promiscuous. I suppose, though, that, for those who have embraced the idea of multiple sexual partners, the number of partners has to increase significantly before it is regarded as promiscuous. This is rather like the glutton who doesn't think eating a half dozen pies all at once and all by himself is gluttony. He is so used to overeating that it takes a full dozen pies to make him feel like he's being a pig.

I think you have the wrong definition of promiscuous. Promiscuity is casual sex with multiple partners, not a relationship with multiple people possibly involving a sexual aspect. That may sound like I'm nitpicking but its a very important difference to keep in mind.

Um, this is stating the obvious, I should think. You might as well have said, "The only difference between one and many is the number involved."

Obvious though that may be, some people still need it pointed out. Also, I meant more in terms of function. Most polyamorous relationships function pretty much the same way most monogamous relationships do except with more people involved.

 

[Celticflower]

Would you say that polyamorism is polygamy without the marriages?

(not trying to be rude, just trying to understand a term I haven't encountered before)

 

[aiki]

I just dont want people thinking that polyamoroy is just sex sex sex because it isnt.

Well, what distinguishes polyamory from simple close friendship? It seems to me, as I've already pointed out, that the difference between the two is sex. If all that polyamory involves is merely deep and platonic affection for others, then it is no different than common intimate friendship. It is only when that deep affection includes sexual relations that it becomes polyamory.

I began to realize that I had very deep feelings for multiple people and at first I dismissed them as a simple crush but they never really went away and when I thought about it I came to realize that yes I do have room in my heart to love more than one person.

Why does that love have to involve a romantic dimension? Would you love these people as intensely if there was no sexual aspect to your feelings? If not, is what you're feeling really love? If yes, then why include a romantic/sexual layer to your love at all?

I think you have the wrong definition of promiscuous. Promiscuity is casual sex with multiple partners, not a relationship with multiple people possibly involving a sexual aspect. That may sound like I'm nitpicking but its a very important difference to keep in mind.

No, I understand what the definition of promiscuous is. In my last post I was suggesting that you may not be, as a pro-polyamory person, in the best position to see clearly whether or not polyamory is promiscuous. So, when does polyamory become promiscuous? When you are having intimate relations with ten, or twenty, or fifty people? Where's the ceiling here?

Promiscuous people have relationships with those with whom they have casual sex. Those relationships can sometimes be very short-lived and superficial but they do qualify as relations. All a polyamorous person can claim above an unabashedly promiscuous one is that their relations are longer in duration and perhaps less directly revolving around sex. To a monogamous individual like myself, this appears to be hair-splitting. Its like a drug addict saying he's not really an addict because he's in a long-standing buying relationship with only a select few dealers; the real addicts are those who get their drugs from just any old drug dealer. The reality, though, is that both kinds of drug abusers are addicts. Likewise, there is no fundamental difference between the polyamorous person and the promiscuous one - unless, of course, the polyamorous person isn't having sex, in which case, as I've pointed out above, they aren't actually polyamorous.

Most polyamorous relationships function pretty much the same way most monogamous relationships do except with more people involved.

If you truly believe this, you are very confused. God's plan for people is that one man and one woman "cleave" to one another for life. The dynamics between a man and a woman who have committed themselves to this plan are unique to such a relationship. Suggesting that there is no difference between a monogamous, married relationship and polyamorous relationships is just an attempt to make polyamory appear less like the perversion of God's plan than it is.

Peace.

 

[Steezie]

Well, what distinguishes polyamory from simple close friendship? It seems to me, as I've already pointed out, that the difference between the two is sex. If all that polyamory involves is merely deep and platonic affection for others, then it is no different than common intimate friendship. It is only when that deep affection includes sexual relations that it becomes polyamory.

Love is the distinguishing feature. Someone who is polyamorous has the capacity to truly love more than one person in an intimate and romantic fashion. The same way you might feel about a wife or girlfriend, I also can feel for multiple people.

Why does that love have to involve a romantic dimension? Would you love these people as intensely if there was no sexual aspect to your feelings? If not, is what you're feeling really love? If yes, then why include a romantic/sexual layer to your love at all?

Because love IS romantic for me, at least the love that I would share with someone I am in a relationship with. What you are describing is love for a sister or brother. Deep though such feelings may be, they are not the same as the feelings I would have for a lover.

No, I understand what the definition of promiscuous is. In my last post I was suggesting that you may not be, as a pro-polyamory person, in the best position to see clearly whether or not polyamory is promiscuous. So, when does polyamory become promiscuous? When you are having intimate relations with ten, or twenty, or fifty people? Where's the ceiling here?

It doesnt matter if I'm polyamorous, monogamous, or a turnip; many polyamorous relationships are not promiscuous in nature. I know the definition of promiscuity, I know what a polyamorous relationship is and I know that some poly relationships have a core couple or trio with rotating sexual partners, some have a V of three people, some involve four, some have a three people but not necessarily sex. Polyamory doesnt follow a set formula thus you cant say polyamory is promiscuous.

Promiscuous people have relationships with those with whom they have casual sex. Those relationships can sometimes be very short-lived and superficial but they do qualify as relations. All a polyamorous person can claim above an unabashedly promiscuous one is that their relations are longer in duration and perhaps less directly revolving around sex.

Which means that a promiscuous relationship and a polyamorous relationship are not the same thing.

To a monogamous individual like myself, this appears to be hair-splitting.

There's a big difference between 100mg of a medication and 1000mg of a medication. That extra zero is a small thing that makes a big difference, the same is true here.

Likewise, there is no fundamental difference between the polyamorous person and the promiscuous one - unless, of course, the polyamorous person isn't having sex, in which case, as I've pointed out above, they aren't actually polyamorous.

You seem fundamentally unable to grasp the fact that a polyamorous relationship is about MORE than sex. Sex can (and often is) a part of it, the same as a monogamous relationship. What sets a polyamorous relationship apart from a promiscuous one is love. With promiscuous relationships, there is often no deep feelings attached, that is the opposite of a polyamorous relationship.

If you truly believe this, you are very confused.

Why? Because I disagree with you?

God's plan for people is that one man and one woman "cleave" to one another for life. The dynamics between a man and a woman who have committed themselves to this plan are unique to such a relationship. Suggesting that there is no difference between a monogamous, married relationship and polyamorous relationships is just an attempt to make polyamory appear less like the perversion of God's plan than it is.

And that's fine, I have no issue with your beliefs. All I'm asking is to not be treated differently because we disagree.

 

[Sketcher]

I think you actually do have a choice.

 

[Steezie]

I think you actually do have a choice.

I tried very very hard to "un-choose". It didnt work so well.

 

[aiki]

Love is the distinguishing feature. Someone who is polyamorous has the capacity to truly love more than one person in an intimate and romantic fashion. The same way you might feel about a wife or girlfriend, I also can feel for multiple people.

Claiming some special capacity to love more than one person romantically is nothing more than almost every person on the planet can claim. The only thing that separates the polyamorous person from the teenager who gets her heart broken a dozen times, or the man whose been divorced repeatedly is that the polyamorous person doesn't have the inclination to romantically engage people one at a time.

Because love IS romantic for me, at least the love that I would share with someone I am in a relationship with. What you are describing is love for a sister or brother. Deep though such feelings may be, they are not the same as the feelings I would have for a lover.

Romantic feelings are what they are because they are ultimately sexually-oriented. Essentially, what you want to describe as romantic "love" is really nothing more than lust. Real love between a husband and wife revolves around their self-sacrificing commitment to one another. Real love is not pre-occupied with sexual gratification, but with serving the other. This kind of love, however, while most intimately and powerfully expressed in marriage is not entirely unique to the relationship between husband and wife.

Which means that a promiscuous relationship and a polyamorous relationship are not the same thing.

They are only different insofar as a fat cat is different from a thin one.

There's a big difference between 100mg of a medication and 1000mg of a medication. That extra zero is a small thing that makes a big difference, the same is true here.

The difference is not in the nature of the medication, however. Whether its 100 mgs. of aspirin or 1000 mgs., its still aspirin. Likewise, whether its four regular sexual partners or fifty random ones, the nature of such sexual conduct is still promiscuous.

You seem fundamentally unable to grasp the fact that a polyamorous relationship is about MORE than sex.

No, I understand that there is more to it than just sex but I also recognize that what makes a polyamorous relationship truly polyamorous is that one is having sexual relations with multiple partners. Layering on other relational aspects to such a circumstance is, in my opinion, just a means of justifying promiscuity.

Sex can (and often is) a part of it, the same as a monogamous relationship. What sets a polyamorous relationship apart from a promiscuous one is love. With promiscuous relationships, there is often no deep feelings attached, that is the opposite of a polyamorous relationship.

I think the only thing that distinguishes a polyamorous relationship from a simple friendship is sexual interaction. You take away the sex from a polyamorous love-triangle and what do you have? Just a trio of good friends.

The same could be said for a monogamous, married relationship, though, couldn't it? Take away the sex from a marriage relationship and all you have are two very good friends. But hold on. Unlike a polyamorous scenario, a monogamous married state is based upon exclusivity, a narrowness of relational interest; it is a confining thing to be married. Being married means one has resolved to direct one's strongest, deepest, most intimate feelings, thoughts and energy toward just one other person. It means one has promised to endure in such a relationship no matter what. This commitment and its exclusivity are what makes marriage unique. Even without sex no other relationship is like it. Can the polyamorous person say the same? Obviously not.

And that's fine, I have no issue with your beliefs. All I'm asking is to not be treated differently because we disagree.

"Not to be treated differently"? If you're doing something I think is morally wrong, am I supposed to turn a blind eye? If so, how far should I take such a response to things I think are immoral? Doesn't such "blindness" itself become immoral? I can think of instances where it would.

Peace.

 

[98cwitr]

I tried very very hard to "un-choose". It didnt work so well.

What does that mean exactly? Are you promoting for a KFC commercial?

 

[Steezie]

Claiming some special capacity to love more than one person romantically is nothing more than almost every person on the planet can claim. The only thing that separates the polyamorous person from the teenager who gets her heart broken a dozen times, or the man whose been divorced repeatedly is that the polyamorous person doesn't have the inclination to romantically engage people one at a time.

Romantic feelings are what they are because they are ultimately sexually-oriented.

What makes you say that?

Essentially, what you want to describe as romantic "love" is really nothing more than lust. Real love between a husband and wife revolves around their self-sacrificing commitment to one another. Real love is not pre-occupied with sexual gratification, but with serving the other. This kind of love, however, while most intimately and powerfully expressed in marriage is not entirely unique to the relationship between husband and wife.

Im sorry, but who died and made you arbiter of human emotions?

No, I understand that there is more to it than just sex but I also recognize that what makes a polyamorous relationship truly polyamorous is that one is having sexual relations with multiple partners.

You DO understand that the vast majority of these relationships confine that sexual activity within the relationship?

I think the only thing that distinguishes a polyamorous relationship from a simple friendship is sexual interaction.

Why are you so unwilling to see beyond the sex? Its a relationship based on love.

The same could be said for a monogamous, married relationship, though, couldn't it? Take away the sex from a marriage relationship and all you have are two very good friends. But hold on. Unlike a polyamorous scenario, a monogamous married state is based upon exclusivity, a narrowness of relational interest; it is a confining thing to be married.

The vast majority of polyamorous relationships are just as "confining" (unfortunate choice of words) as monogamous ones.

Being married means one has resolved to direct one's strongest, deepest, most intimate feelings, thoughts and energy toward just one other person. It means one has promised to endure in such a relationship no matter what. This commitment and its exclusivity are what makes marriage unique. Even without sex no other relationship is like it. Can the polyamorous person say the same? Obviously not.

Again, who died and made you arbiter?

"Not to be treated differently"? If you're doing something I think is morally wrong, am I supposed to turn a blind eye? If so, how far should I take such a response to things I think are immoral? Doesn't such "blindness" itself become immoral? I can think of instances where it would.

I think not encouraging love is immoral, what do you suggest I do?

What does that mean exactly? Are you promoting for a KFC commercial?

I tried very hard to make myself not polyamorous.

 

[98cwitr]

I tried very hard to make myself not polyamorous.

why?

 

[Steezie]

why?

Because previously I had been very monogamous and the prospect of being polyamorous was not something I wanted or was comfortable with.

 

[98cwitr]

so what changed?

 

[Steezie]

so what changed?

I realized that I was indeed able to feel actual romantic love towards more than one person.

 

[ephraimanesti]

I realized that I was indeed able to feel actual romantic love towards more than one person.

MY FRIEND,

This is no great accomplishment--i notice the same "ability" in both of my dogs.

The trick, as a human being, is to overcome our "evolving animal nature" which atheists love to extoll the virtues of, and allow ourselves to be transformed into the Image and Likeness of our Creator--feeling Agape (Godly Love) for ALL people just as God does, but experiencing "romantic love" for the ONE person God has chosen for us as our soul-mate (if you will.)

You may fool yourself with your extolling of the joys of a promiscuous life, but it is all just the same old fornication which God has condemned from the beginning of time because it stands against TRUE Love and makes Agape impossible.

In the REAL world, God and not Hugh Hefner sets the guidelines for what is normal and what is perverse!

A BOND-SLAVE/FRIEND/BROTHER OF OUR LORD/GOD/SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST,
ephraim

 

[Steezie]

MY FRIEND,

This is no great accomplishment--i notice the same "ability" in both of my dogs.

I'd thank you to be a little less insulting. I have refrained from being rude I think you can as well.

The trick, as a human being, is to overcome our "evolving animal nature" which atheists love to extoll the virtues of, and allow ourselves to be transformed into the Image and Likeness of our Creator--feeling Agape (Godly Love) for ALL people just as God does, but experiencing "romantic love" for the ONE person God has chosen for us as our soul-mate (if you will.)

Then what differentiates "true love" you feel for your "soul mate" from love you may feel for others?

You may fool yourself with your extolling of the joys of a promiscuous life, but it is all just the same old fornication which God has condemned from the beginning of time because it stands against TRUE Love and makes Agape impossible.

As I have explained before, most polyamorous relationships are not promiscuous in nature.

 

[ephraimanesti]

I'd thank you to be a little less insulting. I have refrained from being rude I think you can as well.

MY FRIEND,

i'm not sure why stating the obvious is considered "rude" but that is a side issue which comes with the territory, i guess.

Then what differentiates "true love" you feel for your "soul mate" from love you may feel for others?

Love between a husband and wife, by its very nature, precludes its extension to "others." Above and beyond the physical aspects of a marriage relationship, lies the Agape Love of our Creator which such a relationship must contain to be valid before God. St. Paul describes it as being a mirror image of Christ's Love for His church, "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the Church and gave Himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to Himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church--for we are members of His Body. 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.' This is a profound mystery--but I am talking about Christ and the church. However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband."(Ephesians 5:25-33)

As you can see from the above definition, this type of relationship--two becoming one flesh and exhibiting the same sacrificial Love for each other as Christ exhibited for His church on the Cross--cannot possibly exist within the group fornication process you so eloquently describe but mislabel as "love." Love is Love and lust is lust, and never the twain shall meet!

As I have explained before, most polyamorous relationships are not promiscuous in nature.

Sort of like saying most murders don't kill people. In my humble opinion, without wanting to appear "rude" again, you appear to be seriously in need of an infusion of honesty, self-awareness, and a spiritual awakening. May you find them soon!

A BOND-SLAVE/FRIEND/BROTHER OF OUR LORD/GOD/SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST,
ephraim

 

[andreha]

I've been talking with a user over PM about various things and one thing she said that I dont quite get is that because I'm polyamorous, I'm lucky. She said that God had laid out a clear path for me and that I was to ignore things of the world (Because you cant be poly apparently) and focus on God.

Now, this is a little confusing because first and foremost I'm not a Christian so why God is meddling in my life I cant really figure out. But my biggest hang up is the fact that I dont seem to have a choice in this, at least according to this line of thinking.

So, why DONT I have an actual choice in the course of my own life?

Heya Steezie

We all get our own free will. The thing is, by ourselves, we don't have much power to change things. But, Christianity is an option available to all. And it's more than just living by a lot of rules. Once we get to see how much more God's choices for us works out than our own choices, it becomes clear how much better He is in directing us than we by ourselves. Christianity, at it's core, is a bi-derectional love relationship - that fulfills in a way no person can. And to be a Christian doesn't mean trying to be perfect either. None of us are perfect. If I had to tell you about all the things I've done in my life, you'd feel rather good about yourself.

But, the Lord loves us - He doesn't force people into a direction like a tyrant. He gives people their own choices. But, if you choose Him, He'll show you how His will has way better results than anything else.

 

[Steezie]

MY FRIEND,

i'm not sure why stating the obvious is considered "rude" but that is a side issue which comes with the territory, i guess.

Do you not see why someone's thoughts and feelings, especially about something they hold very personal and took them a good deal of personal struggle to figure out, might take offense at having it compared to a dog?

Love between a husband and wife, by its very nature, precludes its extension to "others." Above and beyond the physical aspects of a marriage relationship, lies the Agape Love of our Creator which such a relationship must contain to be valid before God. St. Paul describes it as being a mirror image of Christ's Love for His church, "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the Church and gave Himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to Himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church--for we are members of His Body. 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.' This is a profound mystery--but I am talking about Christ and the church. However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband."(Ephesians 5:25-33)

Exclusivity is still present in most polyamorous relationships, you still have yet to explain what exactly makes the love I could share between two others different than one person.

As you can see from the above definition, this type of relationship--two becoming one flesh and exhibiting the same sacrificial Love for each other as Christ exhibited for His church on the Cross--cannot possibly exist within the group fornication process you so eloquently describe but mislabel as "love." Love is Love and lust is lust, and never the twain shall meet!

Aside from the fact that love IS partially lust regardless of how many people are involved, why are you the one who gets to decided what "love" is and is not?

In my humble opinion, without wanting to appear "rude" again, you appear to be seriously in need of an infusion of honesty, self-awareness, and a spiritual awakening. May you find them soon!

And, with actually wanting to appear "rude", you need to get down off your high horse. You are instantly denigrating anything you dont understand because you dont agree with what you think it is. The fact that you are making zero effort to actually understand is, to be frank, really annoying.

 

[98cwitr]

I realized that I was indeed able to feel actual romantic love towards more than one person.

and does that satisfy you more than loving just one person romantically? How do the other parties involved feel about your affects toward the other ones?