board77

Talk about off the wall...this just wandered into my brain from godknowshwhere...

Truth.

Love you can't have without lying isn't worth having at all.

It would be impossible to have love without truth.

Leoba wrote:

It would be impossible to have love without truth.

I wish that was true. *sigh*

The world is sadly full of examples of the opposite. It ought to be true.

By the way, Ms. Primadonna, your daughter's kittycat is lovely. I'm going to print it off and keep it! It's like my friend's grandson's version of Van Gogh's "Sunflowers". The kid's painting is better than the original!

Leoba and vison--

I have to agree with vison here. It should be true, but there are so many instances where it isn't it's not funny.

I know too well.

Okay, not sure I fully understand the question. Ax, can you please elaborate a bit?

Are we talking having to lie to someone in order to keep their love, such as giving them compliments which may be ego-flattering but not strictly true?

Are we talking faithfulness?

Or, more everyday stuff, like, what do you want to watch on TV tonight....and choosing a program YOU hate to keep the S.O. happy?

You decide what it means. That's part of the question.

I should then qualifying my statement. It would be impossible for me to love without believing in truth, because trust is built on that. Once that truth is shattered, or even just fractured, it makes it very hard for me to continue.

Sounds like a "truth" to me.

I happen to agree with you, but there have been times in my life when the delusion was so nice...

I took the question to mean important truth, such as faithfulness or honesty about essential matters. Saying "Sure, sweetie, I'd be happy to stay home tonight instead of going to that movie" may be, strictly, a lie, but it's genuinely motivated by love.

vison wrote:

By the way, Ms. Primadonna, your daughter's kittycat is lovely. I'm going to print it off and keep it! It's like my friend's grandson's version of Van Gogh's "Sunflowers". The kid's painting is better than the original!

Thanks, Vison! I think she's got a real gift. And in an odd coincidence, for Christmas she gave me a painting--her take on Van Gogh's "Starry Night"! I'll have to get a photo up as an avatar sometime.

An interesting take on the question, Prim. Is a relationship improved, do you think, when partners are willing to do this?

I believe any relationship worth having has to be founded on truth and honesty with each other, or it's not going to last. Some of the things that hurt me the most in my marriage were things I had assumed to be true from my husband's actions before marriage, only to find he changed once we'd been married for awhile.

Some of the little stuff I'm willing to give on, like watching a movie or TV program I don't really care for, to keep the other person happy. BUT they'd better be willing to do the same for me now and then! :D

There is only so much of oneself you should be willing to sacrifice for a relationship. True love builds the other person up, allows them to grow and fulfil their potential. If you have to stifle yourself to keep the relationship happy and running smoothly, it's not a healthy relationship.

I just started to say that I can't imagine love without truth, because my almost 22 year old relationship with my much beloved husband is based on complete and total honesty.

But then I remembered my youngest daughter, who lies quite often. And, somehow, I still manage to love her.

I don't think it's an either/or thing. I think that if you have love, then truth just enhances the bond because it increases the level of trust. My man and I are VERY much bonded at this point in our lives, to the point where this morning he sensed that I was troubled before I was even really aware that I was bothered by something. And he's not really a very sensitive guy, really. If personality types mean anything to you, he's an ISTP.

He asked me what was wrong. I said, "Errrrrrrrr....." He said, "No, really, I'm getting a weird feeling from you." I said, "Well, there's this thread on Board77 that I wanted to reply to, but you and I have this confidentiality agreement about sex.... so I couldn't. But it's a pretty good story. " And I reminded him about it. And he laughed. And I laughed. And I'm still not telling anyone about the weirdest place we ever had sex.... but it's a pretty good story!

Anyway! The point is, we are always truthful with each other, even in little stuff like that. I could have easily said nothing was wrong and changed the subject. But, no, since he asked I had to say, and we both felt better afterwards. I: because I was no longer *keeping* something from him, him: because he then knew what his weird feeling was about.

My youngest daughter--- I never know what she's thinking or if she's lying. Lots of times I have to go with the evidence, not her word. This creates resentment on my part, because it makes it so difficult to learn what the real situation is and to respond appropriately. If she would just TELL THE TRUTH, she'd get in a lot less trouble. But, no. She doesn't. And, somehow, I love her anyway. In a depressed sort of way when she's in trouble.

*sigh*

Axordil wrote:

An interesting take on the question, Prim. Is a relationship improved, do you think, when partners are willing to do this?

Sure--if both partners do it, if it is not necessary to the everyday functioning of the relationship, and if it's about truly minor matters. It's a little gift you can give each other that pleases the partner and involves a minor sacrifice--it's on the level of giving a needed footrub when you yourself are tired.

Also, it needs to be done without any intention of scoring "points" on the partner, or causing guilt.

So I guess it's a fairly advanced technique. :mrgreen: But after 30 years together, my husband and I are reasonably skilled.

Truth.

I've tried building something on lies before, and it just doesn't happen. It may be too idealistic, and too high a target to aim for, but to me trust and truth is everything. When that goes out of the window, my love goes with it.

Being deceived have hurt me more than truth ever has.

So I'm doing something that irritates the heck out of my love? He must TELL me about it! You want to spend the rest of your life being irritated by me? Not a good idea - oysters form pearls but humans don't - they form raw wounds. Better to talk about it honestly, and try and work out something ...

Overall I'm not conflict-driven, and though I allways need to puzzle things out and talk it out, I don't like conflict, and I'm flexible and willing to give in. There is only a few things I don't budge on, and in no particular order they are:

1. Faith.
2. Trust.
3. Honesty.
4. Communication.

All the other things - TV programmes, what to do tonight, what colour curtains, etc - can be talked about and decided upon. And all four of then don't even apply accross my life - they only apply to the man I'm partnered with. Which is what I understand this thread to be about anyway

As others said, for me there can be no love without trust. The love doesn't come first for me. The trust does. I need to have those four things first, before I can feel love. No compromise ( at least not at this stage of my life, and hopefully never! )

Axordil wrote:

You decide what it means. That's part of the question.

LOL, my question was the same as Sunsilver's

I think it doesn't mean anything.

Truth.

But truth sometimes means you don't tell it quite like it is.

As an example - your heart strays. Complete honesty would dictate that you confess. But the truth is that the underlying love is deeper and more important that a fluttering heart which will soon settle. So you don't confess - because that confession would cause pain to no purpose.

So there is still truth - that this love is more important that a temporary desire of the heart.

Normally I'd say truth because I hate lies, but then I considered how people say that when you're in love, you know it. I can buy that. However, I'm not sure there is absolute truth in this world. It only seems to depend on the perception of the speaker and the listener. In this case, give me tingly feelings of passion over cloudy vision any day.




*E*

Impenitent wrote:

As an example - your heart strays. Complete honesty would dictate that you confess. But the truth is that the underlying love is deeper and more important that a fluttering heart which will soon settle. So you don't confess - because that confession would cause pain to no purpose.

So there is still truth - that this love is more important that a temporary desire of the heart.

My husband and I were married by my father, a pastor with many years of experience. When we all sat down to discuss vows, my father said that the one thing we must not do is promise to love each other forever. He said that people can't make vows about their feelings--only about their actions.

In your example, viewed in this light, keeping quiet about the straying feelings is not a betrayal. What counts is what you do about it. Once you know that your underlying love is more important, then keeping silent about transient feelings you've done nothing about is acting to protect that love.

Prim, I agree. Actions are in your control whereas the heart is its own master.

How does that fit with 'thou shalt not covet' though? I'm not a literalist, so I don't ask that as a loaded question - but in curiosity of how a believer would view it?