Romantic love between men

  • Thread starter Thread starter LoyalViews
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

LoyalViews

Guest
If two males (boys, teens, men…) or two females (girls, teens, ladies) shared a romantic but NOT sexual love between them, would it be defined as same-sex attraction?
 
If they’re attracted sexually, then it is a same-sex attraction. Are you asking about the line past which they’re sinning? The attraction itself isn’t sinful, because it requires no consent of the will.
 
LoyalViews said:
If two males (boys, teens, men…) or two females (girls, teens, ladies) shared a romantic but NOT sexual love between them, would it be defined as same-sex attraction?
Click to expand...
According to people on this site the answer is no as according to some posters here same sex attraction is a disorder which could have absolutely no positive results and thus it has been selectively redefined as to exclude anything that is potentially good.

It depends on how you define “romantic love”
 
Let’s not be vague. Just look up the word romantic.

Peace,
Ed
 
Have you heard of the terms “romantic friendship” and “affectional orientation”? Some asexuals will speak of the latter rather than a sexual orientation (since they lack sexual attraction to others). So, in that case, a man could have a homoromantic attraction to another man without wanting to sleep with him.

I think of myself as a biromantic homosexual–romantically attracted (that is willing to kiss and cuddle, etc.) to both men and women, but only sexually attracted to women. In practice, I’m still a lesbian.
 
edwest2 said:
I disagree. “Romantic love” implies active physical contact of some kind. It is an active not a passive phrase.

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
Indeed, but how the physical expression has been viewed has varied.
 
edwest2 said:
I disagree. “Romantic love” implies active physical contact of some kind. It is an active not a passive phrase.

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
You’re right. I shouldn’t use the word romantic.

I mean a relationship when two people are strongly attracted to each other but not with sexual overtones. Unusually close, closer than best friends, but no sexual desire.

Would that be only a level of friendship?
 
LoyalViews said:
I mean a relationship when two people are strongly attracted to each other but not with sexual overtones. Unusually close, closer than best friends, but no sexual desire.

Would that be only a level of friendship?
Click to expand...
I have no idea what this means? Closer than “best friends”?

Certainly, it is possible to be attracted to someone without it being sexual or romantic. In fact, I have no idea why we would be firends with anyone who we didn’t find “attractive” in some manner (perhaps admirable is a better word).

It is not wrong per se for two people to share a close friendship, even if there is some attraction. However, for someone who suffers from same sex attraction, such a relationship might become a stumbling block for them. It might be considered a near occasion of sin. And if they view it in any way as “romantic”, it’s a very bad idea. Romance should be saved for those who can fulfil the objective of romance, which is marriage.
 
underacloud said:
I have no idea what this means? Closer than “best friends”?

Certainly, it is possible to be attracted to someone without it being sexual or romantic. In fact, I have no idea why we would be firends with anyone who we didn’t find “attractive” in some manner (perhaps admirable is a better word).

It is not wrong per se for two people to share a close friendship, even if there is some attraction. However, for someone who suffers from same sex attraction, such a relationship might become a stumbling block for them. It might be considered a near occasion of sin. And if they view it in any way as “romantic”, it’s a very bad idea. Romance should be saved for those who can fulfil the objective of romance, which is marriage.
Click to expand...
Ah I see.

I’ll let everyone know why I’m wondering, is because I plan to write a little document on homosexuality, and how one who struggles with it should remain chaste.
 
edwest2 said:
I disagree. “Romantic love” implies active physical contact of some kind. It is an active not a passive phrase.

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
No. It doesn’t.
“Romantic” has varying connotations according to culture.
 
Romance with no intention at all of marriage is nothing but a waste of time.

And a “celibate” homosexual romance seems like just an attempt at a loophole and is on its way to a slippery slope.
 
kbwall said:
Romance with no intention at all of marriage is nothing but a waste of time.

And a “celibate” homosexual romance seems like just an attempt at a loophole and is on its way to a slippery slope.
Click to expand...
Romance≠courtship
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top