The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Is it possible for a person to romantically love more than one persona at a time?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/13/2015 Category: People
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 350 times Debate No: 69980
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)




It is possible that one can romantically love more than one person at once.
Round 1
1.Both parties agree that the debate will be written in English.
2.Both parties agree that the definition of Romantic love is when a person loves another with a physical and emotional attraction that is intimate and more than just the way someone loves a parent or sibling
3.A person can be romantically in love with more than one person at a time.
4.Monogamy is not proven to always be the case. There are people that are in open relationships who are in love with more than one person.
5.An example of a person loving two people at the same time is a widow, or someone who has lost a spouse. They may will always love that person because it was not their choice for them to be taken away, but may fall in love again. If they do move on and find another spouse who they love romantically, they will always love the other person, which makes them love two people at once.
6.Another example is when a person is single. When they are single they may be dating more than one person at once. They may fall in love with both people because they love each person in a different way. They could love one in more of a physical way, and one more in an intellectual way, but as long as it is an intimate relationship, they can love both.
7.Therefore, a person could have been widowed, dumped, or abandoned but just because they are not with that person, does not mean that they do not still love that person romantically, even if they have moved on.
8.Therefore, when single, a person can fall in love with two people at once
9.Therefore, a person can fall in love with two people for different reasons and love one more than the other but still be in love with both.

Non controversial-
Numbers 1 and 2 are non-controversial because both parties agree that the debate will be in the same language and upon the definition of romantic love.
3. This is just re stating the con argument
4. This point is arguing that monogamy is fiction and cannot be proven to be true.
5. From our definition of romantic love, a person is romantically in love with someone if it is more than the love they have for their parents or siblings so if a person was once married, they will always love that person romantically, even after they die and will always have that love for them, even if they meet another spouse in the future
6. Just because one person romantically loves two people, it does not mean that they have to love them both the same way. They are able to love them both romantically, because every person is different in the world and they may love each for different reasons, but it may still be a romantic love.


1.Some men/ women might seek pleasure with making love to other individuals, while in fact disabling feelings toward that person (meaning they would only love their spouse)
3.A person cannot be romantically in love with more than person at time
4.Open relationships in most instances do not always result in love. In many circumstances open relationships can just be intimate.
5. When a person loses a spouse, how is that romantically being in love? When our definition defines romantic love as "when a person loves another with a physical and emotional attraction that is intimate"" that becomes invalid when their loved on is physically not there
6.Being in love with two people is not an excuse, because ultimately if that person had to chose, one of the parties would have to face a heartbreak
7.Therefore, In that defense, there is a difference of being IN love with one person and HAVING love for someone
8.Therefore, Being in love with someone goes back to the definition stated in the 1rst premise, whereas having love for someone is defined as: having fluctuating feelings for that person, wanting them instead of needing them
9. Thus, Love is action, correct? Meaning that there is just not enough time in the day to romantically love multiples
10.Thus, When a person is single, they are in a sense looking for what they like in a person, to potentially find love
11.Therefore, Regardless of the qualities that one might love about one more that another and vice versa, when it came down to choosing a spouse, polygamy is illegal. Meaning monogamy would have to be practiced


Premise #1
Is my own statement going open relationships (commonly used as a defense of being involved with multiple parties)
Premise #3
The argument of open relationships does not always involve loving another party. In most instances a couple may seek sexual pleasure by being pleased with another person. In that sense, there are two people who are romantically in love with one another, yet find pleasure with other parties, with no feelings attached.
Premise #4
In the definition of romantic love, physical and intimate are attraction that you cannot get with a loved one who is deceased. It is possible to have emotional ties with a lost spouse, but that would interrupt our definition. If you a widow/widower find love again, they would gain the physical and intimate aspect of the definition.
Premise #5,6, 12
If loving two people were possible, there will be a time where one of the parties will eventually feel uncomfortable, meaning the person would be forced to choose which one they rather be with. The one they chose, would be the one they genuinely love
Premise #7,8
Being romantically in love and having love for some are two different feelings that might be misinterpreted within the argument. The argument of loving the an additional person maybe for multiple reason. Maybe the person thinks they love them because of better intercourse, better personality, yet loving someone"s qualities differ from the action of romantically being in love.
Debate Round No. 1


1. This may be true, but humans are not perfect and they lie. They may want to believe, and say that they only love one person, when in reality they may love someone else. Cheating does occur.
4. This may be true, but an open relationship can lead to a person falling in love with two people. If they are in a relationship, but exploring other options, they may end up falling in love with someone else while they may just be exploring around with people other than their partner, which would cause them to be in love with two people because they still love their original partner.
5. This is a very good point, but the definition does not say that they have to physically love them at the moment. They may have been physically in love with them a long time ago and that love lasts.
6. This statement makes a valid point, but even though a person must choose, it does not make them only love that one person. They may always think about the "one that got away."
7. Again though, even if they have to choose, this does not mean that their heart has chosen only one person. They may still love the other, even though they are not able to be with them.
8. This is a valid point. People do not always know what their heart is telling them, so why is the opposite not true? They may love two people but their heart may not be telling them whom they love more. This does not mean that they are not in love with both people.
13. Therefore, because a person does not physically love a person at that moment does not mean they are romantically in love with them.
14. Therefore, humans may lie, and being in love is different from having love for someone.


1.Lying happens, like you said "humans lie". However, love is something that can"t be hidden from someone"s true feelings. The person you choose is essentially your "number 1". In hopes that he/she would eventually just lose that romantic love for the opposite party.

2.In reference to premise 4 of my round of arguments, an open relationships, are defined a "a marriage or relationship in which both partners agree that each may sexual relations with others"

3.Assuming from premise 2, there are no emotional attachment.

4. Once again open relationships can also be just for intimate circumstances; mentioning again because we can't ignore the fact that this is indeed true in today's society. Seeking pleasure from other people comes from a physical attraction. Exploring other options in an open relationship would gear toward practice of polygamy (which is stated in Round 1, Premise 15)

5.Valid. Looking at a different stand point again, the person you DON"T choose would always think you love the other more. How it physically possible to love when you are deceased (if you"re not there"coming from a different point of view)?

6.True, but once again our definition it tampered with; that physical attraction from the person that got away, no longer exists.

7.This as well is very much true, however when a person loves romantically, it is thought that that romance is coming from both parties

8.Therefore, the dilemma we all face is settling with one person. With the one we truly love. The person you choose will be the one you physically, intimately, and emotionally connect with just a little more than anyone else.

9.Thus, proving once again loving two people at once is not possible.
Debate Round No. 2


1. If a person is in love with more than one person at a time, they do not have to love both people equally. As long as they are physically, emotionally, and intimately in love with them, they can be in love with two people.
2. Although a person might not always be with their first love, they may always love them, even when they are in a new relationship.
3. Another example is when a person has previously been in love with someone, romantically, and that person breaks up with him or her, or never wants to see him or her again. This may cause them to move on and love the next person, but not get closure and never love the next the way they loved the last. So this will cause them to love two people at once.
4.Going off of your premise #7 from round 1; what does having love for someone have to do with romantic love? I understand your definition but that"s like saying you have love for a friend, not that you are romantically in love with them?
5.Going off your conclusion #9 in round 1; Love is not action, it is a feeling. You act upon feelings; you don"t just act like you are in love when the feeling is not there.
6.Off of your premise 6 from the last round; Physical attraction may go away, even if you are in love with the same person for a long time, especially when you grow old with someone. But physical attraction does not disappear because you do not see someone all the time. It may actually be greater because you are always curious and lusting for them.
7.Therefore, romantic love is more than saying you have love for someone or even saying you are in love with them. It has to be physical, emotional, and intimate, as per our definition.
8.Therefore, love is more than an action and just physical attraction.


1. when a person falls in love with two people while they are dating both parties, there will be ultimatum when choosing which person they"d rather be with
2.Love is often something that is created and has to be maintained over time, in often cases that inequality of loving two different people may be a misinterpretation of the feeling of loving that person or the thought of loving that person
3.As you stated in Round 1, premise 6" "They may fall in love with both people because they love each person in a different way" which is clearly a similar situation. Whether a person has closure or not, they are still capable seeking a new found love that may in fact be better than what they perceived love to be in the first place.
4. The reasoning for this definition, was because of the misinterpretation of how one may feel about another. Often times, we don"t realize what love is until someone is willing to prove it to us. The "love" that we may feel for someone may not be real romantic love"and that is sometimes only figured out by meeting someone new.
5.It is am action; because often instances, you act upon feeling.
6.Physical attraction was something that was just agreed upon in our definition. When physical, emotional, and intimate relations aren"t there, the romanticism is disabled.
7.Therefore, romantic love is something that takes time and investment. Loving multiples is impossible when your time and energy should be devoted to what teens are saying now-a-day "main squeeze".
Debate Round No. 3


1.When a person was romantically in love with someone and that relationship either ended badly, quickly, or without closure, or it was the person"s first love, that love lingers which causes them to romantically love more than one person at once when they enter a new relationship.
2.As per the definition we agreed upon, stating that romantic love also involves a physical aspect, once being physical with a person does consider it love, even if they are not able to be physical any more. An intimate kiss could be regarded as physical.
3.If a person is in a closed relationship, there is more of a chance for them to want monogamy because they do not know what else is out there. But if a person is in an open relationship they are more likely to fall in love with two people because they are finding that they have different reasons for loving each person.
4.A person can love more than one person and not love each person the same. They may love one person for their mind and one person for their humor. Although this makes the reasons for love different, it does not make the love different.
5.When people are bisexual, they may fall in love with a person of each sex because they love each sexual organ about them and cannot pick which one they want to be with. This can cause them to love more than one person at a time.
6.Like when people lye, a person may not always know what their heart is telling them. They may have fallen in love with two people. But regardless if they chose or not, that does not mean their heart chose as well. They may have been forced into the situation, and their heart may still love two people.
7.Therefore, love can come in all types or shapes and sizes, and just because the two people are not able to express their love for each other at that time, does not mean that they had never done it, or never will. It is still love.
8.Therefore, people can love more than one person, just not the same amount. Love can come from anywhere and people love different things about people, but it all makes it love.


Is it possible to romantically love more than one person? Absolutely not. Though my opponent was able to give valid points, it was pretty apparent that no matter the circumstance, a man and a woman must confide in just one individual. As stated throughout the debate, the ultimatum would be how can one romantically love more than person when the time and energy you invest to love, is just too much to split up. If it ever came down to marrying a person, the would have to choose. They would choose the person who that love the most. According to our definition, it in fact would be the person who they emotionally, physically, and intimately connect with.
Therefore, if any of those are lacked, that would not only change our definition, but it would also prove why someone just can't love multiple people romantically.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.