From: jsp@uts.amdahl.com (James Preston)
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.singles,soc.couples
Subject: Re: Sanctity of relationships
Date: 17 Apr 92 00:20:09 GMT
Reply-To: jsp@pls.amdahl.com
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

rawdon@cabrales.cs.wisc.edu (Michael Rawdon) writes:

}In <85ed02JIc9Vb00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> jsp@uts.amdahl.com (James Preston) writes:
}>However, if a guy who KNEW that she was involved with me made some moves
}>on her or flirted with her, that bothered me.  I repeat that I was NOT
}>bothered because I was worried that she might drop me.  No, I was bothered
}>because the other guy was clearly showing a lack of RESPECT for our
}>relationship.  

}Depends on who "the other guy" is.  If I couldn't care more about him than I
}would about a hole in the wall, why the heck should I give a damn whether or
}not he's "respecting" a relationship, if, as you say, I'm not worried that
}my SO might dump me?

I answered this already.  Where have I said that *I CARE* that he shows
no respect?  My feelings about it, however, don't alter the simple fact
that he is showing no respect.

}>		If you KNOW that someone is involved, who keep your bloody
}>hands off, that is merely respectful.  And that was the context of the
}>original question: knowing that someone was involved and yet pursuing
}>him/her anyway.  Under those circumstances, you are scum because you are
}>showing a lack of respect for an existing relationship.

}So it's basically a matter of territorial claims?  Each person "owns" the
}other?  Or, maybe the abstract entity "relationship" owns both (or all)
}parties in a relationship?

Why are so many people on this thread so hung up on this concept of
ownership?  Where did I say anything about ownership or territorial
claims?  YOU are the one who keeps bringing in that concept, not me.
The relationship deserves respect because it exists, because it was
brought into existance by the two people who made it, and because those
two people, and their choice, deserve respect.  Where does the concept
of ownership or territory enter into this?  Is it even possible for you
to view something in a way other than territorial?

}>Understand?  Those who keep going on about the free will of the person
}>being pursued are just missing the point.  It has nothing to do with
}>anyone's free will, it has to do with showing respect for an existing
}>relationship.  If you want to respect a person's free will, then you
}>damned well better respect the free choice that they have already made
}>to be in that relationship;

}This implies to me that the individual loses his free will when he enters a
}relationship.  That one free choice means that the individual is not allowed
}to make free choices about the relationship later on.

Jeez Louise, do you always go out of your way to subvert everything?  I
can't for the life of me see how you got that implication.  I have always
been talking about how THIRD PARTIES treat the relationship.  Respecting
a relationship means respecting the choices that were made by the people
in it.  How does that say ANYTHING AT ALL about any other free choices
that those people can make?

}The problem I have with your point, though, is that the concept of "respect"
}doesn't seem to have any concrete meaning.  What does "having respect for
}a relationship" gain one?

Given how you twist things, I don't wonder that you have trouble with
the concept of respect.  Do you have any concept of "self respect"?
Is the only way you can view things by what it might gain you?  Respecting
a relationship and not trying to harm it "gains" you the same that respecting
another person and not punching him in the face "gains" you.

--James Preston
Xref: sparky alt.romance:6667 alt.romance.chat:9077