The Instigator
chowdhuryn7
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
eyonairy
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

It is possible to romantically love more than one person at the same 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: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 397 times Debate No: 70009
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

chowdhuryn7

Pro

1. Love is defined as an intense feeling of deep affection.
2. A romantic relationship is built on love, devotion and attachment.
3. A person in a romantic relationship can be in love with their current partner and their former partner at the same time.
4. Marriage is a legal contract built on a spiritual bond.
5. Polygamy is the custom of having more than one wife or husband at the same time and it is accepted by many religions and cultures, including Islam.
6. In Islamic polygamy, a man is allowed to have multiple wives but must love and treat all of them equally.
7. Infidelity is defined as being unfaithful to one's romantic partner or spouse.
8. A married man can commit an act of infidelity but still be in love with his wife, and also fall in love with his mistress.
9. Dating occurs before a romantic relationship.
10. One person can have two dating partners and romantically love both of them.
11. It is possible for a girl to be in love with her childhood best friend and her boyfriend at the same time.
12. Therefore, it is possible to romantically love more than one person at the same time.

Non-Controversial Premises:

Premises: 1,2,5,6, and 7 are all non-controversial. Premises 1,2,5 and 7 are all definitions. Premise 6 is based on the Islamic religion and followed by Muslims and is only referring to Muslims.

Controversial Premises:

3. This premise is only a scenario and not necessarily the case in all romantic relationships.
4. Marriage is not always built on a spiritual bond, because in some cultures, marriages are arranged and the couple might not even know one another enough to have a spiritual bond.
8. This premise is also a scenario and not the case in all marriages or all affairs. It is also possible for the female to cheat on her spouse.
9. This premise is not true in all occasions. In some instances, two people might already know each other well enough to skip dating and directly get in a romantic relationship.
10. This is also a scenario and not the case in many dating partners. Especially because, sometimes the partners don"t know each other well enough to fall in love.
11. This is also a scenario and might be similar to premise 3.
eyonairy

Con

Con
1. I agree with your definition of love.
3. I do not agree with this statement, because if you start a new relationship it means you have moved on and no longer love this person.
4. I agree with your statement.
5. I do not agree with this statement, just because it is accepted in certain religious means that it is okay.
6. The Islamic is not the only religion or culture that believes in polygamy. The way they treat there wives is not always equally.
8. I do not agree with this statement, because once a married man cheats on his wife it is because he has lost love and interest in her.
9. I agree with this statement.
10. I do not agree with this statement, because one person cannot split themselves to entertain two people at once.
11. I agree with this statement.
12. Therefore, I do not agree that one can be romantically in love with two people at the same time.

Non-Controversial Premises:
Premises 1,4,9,11 are non-controversial. Premises 1 and 4 are simple definitions describing the characteristics of what love can bring out on a certain person. Premise 9 is non-controversial because I order for a person to even seem attracted to another they would need to experience dating and be familiar with the persons personality. It is then that the person can decided if that is the type of person you will be willing to commit yourself to in a relationship. Premise 11is non-controversial because when a person is younger they are taught to befriend everyone and love them equally. This is where the phrase "Treat others as you would like to be treated" came from.

Controversial Premises:
3. A better way to explain yourself would be to say: you still have feelings of love for your ex-partner but you are no longer in love with your ex-partner because if you still love your ex-partner wouldn't your still be with them. Love is through thick or thin.
5. There is plenty of women in these marriages who are not in favor of being in a polygamist marriage. This could be because most of these marriages are arranged. Also, they usually teach their daughters to become independent usually by receiving an education in order to not have to be stuck living that lifestyle.
6. Different African cultures also believe in polygamy. Neither of these religions treat there wives equally. For example, if wife A bears a son but wives B and C do not then wife A will always be the favorite in hopes that she would be able to bear another son. These men favor their sons over their daughters because their sons are the ones who can carry the family and after marriage.
8. In the Roman Catholic Church, they base their moral perspective on the "10 Commandments". The seventh commandment clearly states "Thou shall not commit adultery". Depending on the religion is how the outsider who is looking into these types of relationship would end up giving a negative commentary towards them.
10. If you actually love more one person then you do not clearly understand what love is. Pretending to love more than one person at the same time is just a desire of wanting multiple lovers at the same time and trying to fill a fantasy of always being wanted. These people are usually the ones who have been traumatized as a younger person as to feeling abandoned. Also, having a threesome does not mean you are sharing your time with two people at once.
12. People often tend to confused sexually in love with romantically in love. Yes, sex is romantic but it is not enough to base a strong long-lasting relationship out of.

Questions:
2. What exactly is love? What exactly is devotion? Is devotion to your mother and devotion to your significant other the same things? Couldn't anyone get attached to their significant other if they are good-looking and/or financially stable?
7. What exactly defines infidelity? Is it a kiss, a secret dinner date, having sex with the person, watching porno, thinking of someone else while your having sex with a completely different person. Wouldn't you agree that committing infidelity you are no longer in love with the personality your first partner has therefore you no longer love them?
Report this Argument
Debate Round No. 1
chowdhuryn7

Pro

2. The definition of love was defined in premise number 1, which you have agreed on. Devotion is a sort of commitment, whether it is commitment to a person or an idea. Devotion to your mother and devotion to your significant other are similar but different. Devotion to your significant other would be based on romantic love and devotion to your mother would be based on parent-child love. A person can get attracted to someone if that someone has good qualities, such as financial stability or looks. However, being attracted to someone and being attached to someone is not the same thing, Being attracted to someone means that their qualities draw you to them. However, being attached to someone means that you want to spend every minute with that person and you don't want to be away from each other.
3. Love is only through "thick and thin" in romantic love novels, not in real life. Sometimes even if you are in love with the person, you have to leave him/her for his/her benefit, or maybe for your own benefit. Maybe your partner cheated on you so you decided to leave your partner. You can still be in love with that partner, and at the same time meet someone else and fall in love again. It is possible to simultaneously be in love with your ex partner and your new partner.
5. This premise was not showing that polygamy is okay, the purpose of this premise is to show that it is possible. Polygamy is accepted by the men and women in the cultures where they follow it. This is a system of belief for them, it's a part of their society. The people in these cultures, including the women see this as a normal system. Polygamy is a consensual system, permission from the partner is necessary to start a new marriage. If there is no consent, it is not considered polygamy, it is considered cheating.
6. I have stated in premise 5 that there are many religions that believe in polygamy. Maybe in Islamic polygamy, some men don't treat their wives equally. However, according to the religion, they are supposed to treat their wives equally. It is a part of the religion that all wives must be treated equally, as in loved equally, by the husband. If the husband likes one of the wives more because she can bear children, it does not necessarily mean that the husband is in love with that wife. It means that he is using her just for the purpose of getting an heir.
7. Infidelity would be defined as being unfaithful to one's romantic partner. Being unfaithful can mean having sex with another person, a kiss, or a date. Watching porno is not considered cheating. No, I would not agree with that. You can still be in love with your first partner and then notice another person and be attracted to the third person. First, you and that third person might just be having fun, as in just sex, but then you start falling in love with the third person too. It does not mean that you love your first partner any less. It is possible for you to be in love with both of them simultaneously.
8. Not everyone is Roman Catholic and just because it is forbidden does not mean that it is not possible. Adultery might be immoral and it might be wrong, but it does not mean that it doesn't occur. Adultery happens all the time and it doesn't necessarily mean that that the person is unhappy and that is why they're cheating. It could just mean that the person wants more, or something different on the side. Maybe the person is a nymphomaniac, which can be defined as a person who is addicted to sex. As I stated on the previous explanation, the relation can start with just sex and turn into so much more.
10. Dating two people at the same time is not the same thing as a threesome. One person would not be entertaining two people at the same time, that person would just fall in love with both of them at the same time. Premise 10 only states that the person has two dating partners and loves both of them at the same time.
11. If you agree with this statement then you agree that one person can love two people romantically at the same time. Recall that I stated in premise 11 that the girl is in love with both her best friend and her boyfriend. In love meaning that she romantically loves both of them. It has nothing to do with childhood love or treating others equally. It has to do with romantic love, so if you agree with this statement then you agree that one person can romantically love two people at the same time.
eyonairy

Con

2. Now that you have clarified the definition of love in premise 2 being the same as the definition in premise 1 it probably should have not have been reinstated. As for the definition of love I can now say I agree with you, now knowing you are not trying to find two different meanings and sticking to just one. As for devotion I still cannot agree in the terms you are explaining it. Devotion is to have love, loyalty, or enthusiasm for a person, activity, or cause. In no way is it possible to have one and not the other. Therefore, a person can have equal devotion for their mother and their partner especially if your partner because the person you want to spend the rest of your life with it is only right to give them equal feeling of devotion.
3. In reality love is through thick and thin sometimes even if a person is cheated on that does not mean that person is in love with the person they had the affair with it just means they were looking for a different type of attractiveness. For example, Mary and John are married for thirty years and have four kids together and John has a moment of weakness and has an affair with Amy. Mary and and John discuss the why and quickly find a solution by John admitting it was just that he was attracted Amy for a different quality his wife did not have but that does not mean he loves Amy even if she did make him feel better temporarily. Which is my point you can only truly love your wife not your wife and a random lady.
5. I am not arguing whether or not polygamy is okay or possible to occur. What I am arguing is that polygamy is not a suitable premise for advocating whether someone can romantically be in love with two different people. A man within this culture is understood to be more of a dictator figure within their marriage they do not get emotionally attached to all their wives. These men know they have these wives to only bear the children that would carry on their household name or carry on their family business. It could be possible that he could be in love with the first wife but then again they view marriage as a cultural necessity not as a voluntary gesture.
6. The last sentenced you stated " .. the husband is in love with that wife. It means that he is using her just for the purpose of getting an heir". This statement justified the argument I have for premise 5. Polygamy is mainly based off of arranged marriage and there is stories that couples over time learn to love each other but there is no way the man could love all his wives and his wives love him for being a polygamist. As a woman we crave attention from the one specific person.
7. Infidelity is not a reason to justify how someone can love two people at the same time. Once a man cheats it is because he has lost respect for woman of how the can be affected emotionally and physically. This does not mean he all of a sudden love two women it just means he's at the point of not caring anymore and is going to do anything he has to do just to get pleasured.
8. I am not trying to impose the Catholic religion onto anyone I am just stating how it is against loving two people at the same time, just how you have stated the religion of Polygamy to be for multiple lovers. As for your example of someone being a nymphomaniac a person with that kind of personality would not ever imagine of getting married for they are not oblivious they know the rules that follow being married to someone whether religiously or lawfully. They tend to always be single and jump from one female to the other better known today as "players".
10. In the early stages of dating there is no way one can love that person and continue to only date them. They would want to be in a monogamous relationship with that person. The thought of their significant other still being available to other men or women would simply drive that person mad. That is where the ugly green monster called jealously is rooted from.
11. I agreed with this premise in the first round because you stated a distinction between friendship and relationship. If you are saying that you are trying to make the distinction of love between friendship and relationship then I will continue to agree with this premise but if you are trying to clarify with you saying it is the same type of love then I would have to disagree and will soon follow my argument as to why. So which one will it be?
Debate Round No. 2
chowdhuryn7

Pro

2. The definition of love was defined in premise number 1, which you have agreed on. Devotion is a sort of commitment, whether it is commitment to a person or an idea. Devotion to your mother and devotion to your significant other are similar but different. Devotion to your significant other would be based on romantic love and devotion to your mother would be based on parent-child love. A person can get attracted to someone if that someone has good qualities, such as financial stability or looks. However, being attracted to someone and being attached to someone is not the same thing, Being attracted to someone means that their qualities draw you to them. However, being attached to someone means that you want to spend every minute with that person and you don't want to be away from each other.
3. Love is only through "thick and thin" in romantic love novels, not in real life. Sometimes even if you are in love with the person, you have to leave him/her for his/her benefit, or maybe for your own benefit. Maybe your partner cheated on you so you decided to leave your partner. You can still be in love with that partner, and at the same time meet someone else and fall in love again. It is possible to simultaneously be in love with your ex partner and your new partner.
5. This premise was not showing that polygamy is okay, the purpose of this premise is to show that it is possible. Polygamy is accepted by the men and women in the cultures where they follow it. This is a system of belief for them, it's a part of their society. The people in these cultures, including the women see this as a normal system. Polygamy is a consensual system, permission from the partner is necessary to start a new marriage. If there is no consent, it is not considered polygamy, it is considered cheating.
6. I have stated in premise 5 that there are many religions that believe in polygamy. Maybe in Islamic polygamy, some men don't treat their wives equally. However, according to the religion, they are supposed to treat their wives equally. It is a part of the religion that all wives must be treated equally, as in loved equally, by the husband. If the husband likes one of the wives more because she can bear children, it does not necessarily mean that the husband is in love with that wife. It means that he is using her just for the purpose of getting an heir.
7. Infidelity would be defined as being unfaithful to one's romantic partner. Being unfaithful can mean having sex with another person, a kiss, or a date. Watching porno is not considered cheating. No, I would not agree with that. You can still be in love with your first partner and then notice another person and be attracted to the third person. First, you and that third person might just be having fun, as in just sex, but then you start falling in love with the third person too. It does not mean that you love your first partner any less. It is possible for you to be in love with both of them simultaneously.
8. Not everyone is Roman Catholic and just because it is forbidden does not mean that it is not possible. Adultery might be immoral and it might be wrong, but it does not mean that it doesn't occur. Adultery happens all the time and it doesn't necessarily mean that that the person is unhappy and that is why they're cheating. It could just mean that the person wants more, or something different on the side. Maybe the person is a nymphomaniac, which can be defined as a person who is addicted to sex. As I stated on the previous explanation, the relation can start with just sex and turn into so much more.
10. Dating two people at the same time is not the same thing as a threesome. One person would not be entertaining two people at the same time, that person would just fall in love with both of them at the same time. Premise 10 only states that the person has two dating partners and loves both of them at the same time.
11. If you agree with this statement then you agree that one person can love two people romantically at the same time. Recall that I stated in premise 11 that the girl is in love with both her best friend and her boyfriend. In love meaning that she romantically loves both of them. It has nothing to do with childhood love or treating others equally. It has to do with romantic love, so if you agree with this statement then you agree that one person can romantically love two people at the same time.
eyonairy

Con

2. We can agree on the definition of love for this premise as well. When I stated that someone shows devotion to someone through loyalty I mean it by saying you will respect them entirely by not disappointing them in any type of back stabbing. A form of not showing your devotion to this person by being dis-loyal would be romantically loving someone at the same time and that it's why it is simply not possible to do so. For example even in parents you always love your mother more then your father and vice versa when there's a divorce coming around we always have a preference of who we would want to choose. Going back to the statement of you saying "in a romantic relationship sexual attraction is included in the love" that is not entirely true because you can be in a romantic relationship and the sexual attraction is not always included but you still stay in this relationship because you genuine love them and can do without that part of the relationship.
3. I agree with your statement in this premise. If these two people are just dating they technically do not have to stick it out through "thick or thin" one of them can simply walk out and start with a new slate quickly.
5. Polygamy is a great example to argue if a person can be romantically in love with two people at once because it proves how it is not possible. Polygamist marriages can not be consensual morally speaking which is what this argument is based on. Majority of these marriages are arranged using dowries bribing the man to take these women. I'm sure no one is asking these women if they prefer to be in these marriages or epic they even want to be given off to be married a bear children. Majority of these women can not choose or say yes or no therefore morally speaking it is not consensual.
6. Polygamy for these women is a form of entrapment just bearing children and being responsible for them and if they do not bear an heir to the family name they are shoved to the side it is not a stereotype yet a true understanding of extreme masculinity. You have stated love is not when one of the many wives give birth to a boy and I'm saying to them this is how they prove their love to each other since they are always competing with each other. Therefore, they do not know what love really is. This justifies the Polygamy is not based off of real love and the man can not romantically love more than one person at the same time.
7. My statement does refer to all men because there is no way intentionally or unintentionally if you cheat you still love your wife no way! You have deliberately chosen to act in this manner. Ofcourse some use the excuses I was drinking too much etc, but if you know you're a person who drinks to get drunk you cannot go out to drink, bring your wife when you go out, or throw a party at your house and get drunk there. If you truly love your wife bad respect her you will do the necessary to make sure you do not betray her in that form. It goes back to premise 2 talking about loyalty.
8. A nymphomaniacs for a year or ten years will not considered marriage because it will give them literally anxiety. They will feel tied down and will act out in raged if their sexual pleasures are not fulfilled. They are not necessarily bad people but they each understand their own kind of people and know what they can accept or not. For example they know they are not allowed to have sex everywhere desired therefore they have designated orgy meeting places to be able to have sex. They are not willing to be romantically in love with two different people at the same time.
10. Collaborating on what you stated on "some people are possessive of their dating partners, but they might be hypocrite" is actually a good example of how it is impossible to be romantically in love with two people at the same time because they to them having a relationship is irrelevant. They only want a people in their life to feel superior to.
11. As long as we are clear on the difference of loving a friend and being in love with a friend I can agree to your previous statement because it justified how someone can not be romantically in love with two people at once. It is simply not possible be eyes us as humans we can only give full romantic feelings to one person.
Debate Round No. 3
chowdhuryn7

Pro

1. Love is defined as an intense feeling of deep affection.
2. A romantic relationship is built on love, devotion and attachment.
3. Devotion can be defined as a sort of commitment, whether it is commitment to a person or an idea. Devotion cannot be defined as betrayal. It cannot be tied with loyalty. Loyalty does not have anything do with being devoted to your romantic partner.
4. Dating occurs prior to a romantic relationship occurring.
5. Sexual attraction towards partners is usually included in a romantic relationship. Couples are sexually attracted to one another and partake in sexual intercourse and many other sexual activities. It is a part of the relationship process.
6. People in a romantic relationship don"t necessarily stick it out through thick and thin. So one partner can be in a new relationship, and fall in love with their current partner, but still be in love with their former partner.
7. Based on the religion, polygamist marriages must be consensual. Stories of dowries and child bearings are not the case in every family. However, I can agree with your thought about it not being moral, but this is a system of belief for them. So for them, it is moral. It is a part of their culture and it is a voluntary process that no one is being forced into. The bride and groom give their permission. The wife gives her permission before the husband can remarry.
8. Polygamy can be based off of real love. A husband is supposed to treat all of his wives equally. It is possible for the husband to love his wives equally also.
9. Infidelity is defined as being unfaithful to one's romantic partner or spouse. This does not include watching porn. However, this does include kissing going out on romantic dates and partaking in sexual intercourse or coitus.
10. If men don"t plan on cheating, then it is not their fault. Sometimes a female can approach them. Sometimes, men are the victims. They can be lured into it. It can also happen coincidentally. Then, they can end up falling for the mistress and still be in love with their wife.
11. Nymphomania is an addiction that can be acquired over time. A nymphomaniac can get married, and then acquire this addiction. This addiction does not have to happen prior to the marriage.
12. I can agree with your statement about people becoming possessive in premise 10.
13. The purpose of this premise was to prove that a girl can romantically love her best friend, and her boyfriend, at the same time. She is in love with both of them, at the same time.
14. Therefore, it is possible for an individual to romantically love more than one person at the same time.

I have readjusted my premises, so the numbers are off. I have added a premise on nymphomania. I have added new premises on the definition of devotion. I would like to note, that I cannot agree with my opponent"s definition of devotion because of the word "loyalty." I do not believe that loyalty must be included in devotion. Regarding polygamy, I would like to state that the religion does not approve of dowries, or "selling" your daughters. I would also like to state that even though I agree with my opponent"s view on polygamy being immoral, I still respect and understand the cultural points of polygamy. I also stand by my position of how people in a polygamist marriage can be in love, with more than one person, at the same time. I have agreed to premise 10, because I can see how a person becoming too possessive is the same concept as them thinking they are better than their partner. Also, that they want control over someone. I have only agreed to this, because we did not define love as a controlling relationship. However, this does not change my thesis. I would also like to point out that my opponent has agreed to premise 11 in round 1, so basically agreeing to one of the scenarios of being in love with more than one person at the same time. Thus, I have proved my point and I stand by my thesis that an individual can romantically love two people at the same time.
eyonairy

Con

I agree with your statement on love because this is a depfeiniton that justifies the feelings one gets while in love.
I agree with your statement for a relationship being built on love but not on devotion and attachment. A monogamous relationship is the only kind that can give attachment and devotion to a person.
I agree with this statement yet this statement is irrelevant towards how loving two people at the same time is irrelevant.
I agree with this statement because it serves as a right of passage in getting into a relationship.
I agree with the statement that sexual attraction is included in romantic relationships but this does not give reason as to how it is possible in romantically loving two people at the same time.
I agree with this statement that if that no one is bound to a specific person through their life.
I disagree with this statement because no one is asking the woman if they would want to adapt such a lifestyle of entrapment. They are confided to one person specifically which contradicts your statement on premise 6.
Polygamy can not be true love because it's more of an arrangement, business deal, obligation, etc. the husband will not treat all his wives equally for the reasons being stared in round 2 and 3.
I disagree with this being a reasonable argument as to how someone can romantically love two people at once this has nothing to do with a relationship in general. This is simply a definition of infidelity not a argument to justify infidelity with loving two people at once.
I disagree with this statement. Cheating does not justify sleeping with another woman and suddenly claiming you did it by mistake but if it is done more than once it is because you love your mistress as well. Loving two people at once is just an excuse to have sexual encounters with whoever you reach a desire for.
I disagree with this statement. A nymphomaniac would not ever put themselves in a situation where they would have to settle down with someone. They are incapable of being confined and are incapable of loving they only love having sex. This is addiction that occurs during the early years of being introduced to sexual activities not twenty years of being married to your high school sweetheart.
People getting attached to their lover is a why I is impossible to Los two people at once because humans crave attachment. This goes back to premise 2 justifying how attachment is only available to monogamous relationships not to people who pretend to love two other people at the same time.
I disagree with this statement. A girl especially a girl, would only have true feelings of love towards on man. A best friend since childhood does not constitute as a reason to love them too it is more of a platonic love rather than a romantic love.
Therefore, it is impossible to love two people romantically at the same time.

My opponent has tried to use the concept of Polygamy or long endearing friendships alongside relationship to justify romantically loving two people at once but has been unsuccessful in supplying other valid examples. Premise 2 reinstated the definition of love provided in premise 1 but true to use devotion and attachment as a following act of love but that is only in a monogamous relationship ship as I reinstated in premise 12. Premise 9 and 10 also were only definitions and example of the word infidelity. Infidelity does not occur to them steer into the way of a man having an excuses to claim he loves his mistress as well. He has simply ran out of sexual tendency towards his wife but still values the interest they share but obviously does not take into account respecting her or else he would have not cheated. Another option they could of had was going to see a sex therapist but that is besides the point. Thus, my opponent has not been able to prove with resources and actual evidence how it is possible to romantically love two people at the same time. Using only one example of a religious does not give enough support to the argument because even in that there is no evidence the man love all his wives equally .
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.