Doris and Carl Bunger were two middle-aged lovers in Iowa. They were married on September 26, 1951 in Waterloo, Iowa, when he was 41 and she was thirty. That is the first fact. Christianity developed the idea of love as a means to achieve good even further. Solomon says that Christianity elevated the idea of love to divine meaning. The Christian conception of love has always aimed “higher,” not only for virtue or happiness, but for perfection itself. With Christianity, love literally becomes “divine” – not only intoxicating, but absolute in itself. 20 The connection between friendship and politics, with the ideas of decency and justice discussed above, brings the love of friendship to the public eye. We cannot deny that friendship also exists as a private relationship between two people, but as Chiba argues, “friendship presents itself as one of the public activities closest to citizens, whose characteristics may be spontaneity, discussion, speech, common reflection, persuasion, cooperation, or the absence of hierarchy”.[79] If Onazi and Saffie are right about Bańkowski, Second, his use of love is linked to the classical idea that love is a means by which we connect with good and attain goodness. But it is also linked to Christian love, loving one`s neighbor as we love God creates a universal, indiscriminate and universal love among all men, and this love is very closely linked to the idea that the law must respond to human suffering and embody morality and justice to be law. [60] The interesting case of Bunger v. Bungerin 1958 offers insight into how the legal world attempts to deal with the abstract concept of love. Law limits himself to what Joe Friday of “Dragnet” reportedly said, “Just the facts, ma`am.” But the facts can be interpreted in different ways, and nothing distorts these views more than a divorce.
Love is the right to be silent/To extinguish the fire of pleading./To love is to treat any disagreement/As another negotiable instrument. Oche Onazi asserts that “the principle of well-being” is the most concrete and approximate description of love as used by Bańkowski – he refers to Bańkowski`s love as his “ethics of love”. He says that for Bańkowski, love is a means of grasping individual pain and suffering and the “preciousness of human individuality”.57 Outbursts of love are necessary for our legal and political institutions to respond effectively to human suffering and, in particular, to alleviate human suffering. Without love, there should have been no marriage at all. A marriage without love is not a marriage at all. But as simple as this explanation may seem, it cannot win the argument on the side of love. Well, for the sake of Valentine`s Day and millions of people in love, I want to contradict myself. Love in the language of the law: Love is the law you shouldn`t break / Or love will break your heart instead. / If you treat love like a bouncing check / You will pay the price with damages.
And so Brocka joked to the amazement and amusement of her Con-Com delegates: “Let`s not put love in it, because love is. Yuck!” In this way, the love of friendship was seen as the embodiment of civic and political potential. For example, Blatterer argued that we can only understand decency when we experience it, and the place where we experience it most is in friendship.76 Arendt saw friendship and the discourse of friends as connecting people as citizens and creating a sense of what is human. She said, “We humanize what`s going on in the world and in ourselves just by talking about it [with our friends], and by talking about it, we learn to be human. 77 Indeed, Chiba argued that Hannah Arendt`s Mundi love, a general “humanized love of humanity,” can be widely understood as rooted in Aristotle and Cicero`s maintenance of the public and political capacity for friendship.78 How courtly love, romantic love appreciates and idealizes love between man and woman. She too ennobles lovers and sees love as ritual and spiritual, as a means by which unity is created between lovers. He sees sex as both pleasurable and good. However, it would be a mistake to see romantic love only as a reformulation of courtly tradition. Romantic love reflects the many changes that took place after the Middle Ages and can be seen as the expression of a new type of humanism that embodies the ideas of freedom and equality and, above all, extends these ideas to society as a whole.
As Singer said: Middle English, Old English lufu; similar to Old High German luba love, Old English lÄof lieb, Latin lubÄre, libÄre zu gefallen But this view is more than just desirable. The relationship between law and love is actually closer to this model and further from the binary described above. Law and love are necessary for each other, they intersect and sometimes intertwine. To illustrate this argument, Bańkowski consistently cites two examples: the operation of an ATM illustrates why both are necessary, and the relationship between a host and their guest illustrates how both are needed. Bańkowski`s working definition of love is that it is a principle of action that seems to have no reason. He says: From this discussion we can roughly summarize the characteristics of classical love, as a way to find a part of ourselves, and as a way to attain beauty, wisdom and, above all, goodness. Love that comes from Christian thought can be described as love for a God that turns into love for others. It is an unconditional and all-encompassing ideal that is worth searching for itself. Christian love is a rational choice that is linked to a good life and the guarantee of a good life after death. It is not associated with intimacy between two people, nor with sexual love or sexual satisfaction. Romantic love, which began in the 12th century with courtly tradition and continued into romanticism, took the ideal of love established by Christianity, but translated it into a phenomenon that did not need to be mediated by God.
As a creature of the Enlightenment, romantic love legitimized man, his choices, needs, and desires (sexual and non-sexual). Romantic love is not necessarily associated with kindness and ethical behavior between individuals, but it is considered a good in a broader social and cultural sense because it fits into the ideas of a modern society based on the principles of humanism, equality of peoples, freedom of choice and autonomy of the individual. These qualities are reinforced in contemporary love. In today`s society, love has become life`s most important goal, firmly rooted in the ideas of freedom, autonomy and agency. The example of the host-guest relationship illustrates how a spontaneous act of love (invitation to stay) leads to rules/laws on how to behave towards a guest. Once the relationship is established, the gap between love and law is indistinguishable. He says: “Mysterious explosions of love carry with them the bonds of rules and rationality. The act of love [is] part of the lawful act.
And it`s the entanglement of the two that makes the plot appropriate – not one or the other. 11 A good analogy in this respect is the English common law of negligence in relation to rescue. There is no duty to save a person – you make this decision after an act of love – but once you do, there are rules about how to behave in the situation that the law imposes on you.12 Cordoner argued that this conception of love is very needy and is based on human imperfection. the absence of something in a person that only another can meet.18 It is also questionable whether the idea of fusion rooted in Aristophanes` myth is compatible with the ideas of autonomy, which are so valued in today`s society.19 Aristotle`s love of philosophized friendship conveys a sense of the other, his needs and well-being. and although it is, like Eros, exclusive and preferred, as discussed above, Aristotle attributes to it the ability to form a model for a just community. In other words, the values of friendship can translate into a general concern for others. Grayling argues that it is not an exaggeration to see the actions of human rights activists and social justice campaigns and those working in charities as out of friendship with humanity. And there`s no reason why animal rights activists can`t be considered animal lovers and environmental activists should not be considered friends of the environment. He says: “Love is an emotion attested by words and deeds. Sometimes actions are more important than words.
In order to establish its existence or absence, any finding of fact is required. Without such a statement, (Doris`) accusation that (Carl) did not “reciprocate” her love makes no sense.