Letter: Just a thought ... about love vs. being in love

To the Editor:

People have said that they love someone but are not “in love.” What is the difference? Does just loving a person who is a child, friend, family member, pastor, your doctor or even a pet simply mean it’s a type of attachment to an endearing feeling that only supersedes like? Love is defined in many ways but can be measured in degrees that can’t be compared with being in love. Would you agree?

Being “in love” is being in total captivity with a depth of love that captures one’s heart, devotion, emotions, plus an ongoing attraction and need to be constantly with whomever or whatever the person is in love with.

The feelings of attachment and one’s heart tied tightly to deep emotions of being totally immersed in love and being bound to the inability to be released from being in love is less binding than loving.

One person may only love the other while the other is totally in love. Certainly, that is what seems to be an unbalanced togetherness that may stay the same for a lengthy period of time, or eventually dissolve, leaving behind a broken heart. People who have been jilted by a lover or partner have a difficult time regaining their feeling of wholeness.

Is it true that it’s better to have loved and lost than to never have loved? Would that be a yes or no?

Linda Alexandra

Wauconda