-=> Quoting Maurice Kinal to Nancy Backus on 08-06-05  05:46 <=-

 MB> and it really does
 NB> hurt, when one cares about someone, and for whatever reason that 
 NB> person does things that are destructive.

 MK> That can happen too I suppose.  I wasn't really going that far with
 MK> the concept.  What happens further, after the plug pulling, is unknown
 MK> to me for the mostpart.  May hear rumours but that is all they are. 
 MK> Certainly nothing that one can do about that without making things
 MK> worse.  Is there? 

Often there isn't anything anyone else can do, before or after "plug
pulling", since it is really up to the person him/herself.  For better
or* for worse...  although, yes, often what we try to do to help only
does make things worse, since what really is needed isn't our input.

 NB> I've found it particularly the case
 NB> when that person is doing something destructive to him/herself.  I 
 NB> can't do anything to stop them, though I would have if I could, and 
 NB> it hurts precisely because I DO care.

 MK> Exactly.  My above 'additional grief' theory.  If you, or I, am
 MK> resposible somehow simply because of love then that makes a better case
 MK> for ditching it in the first place despite the lack of power over
 MK> denial of existance. 

I wasn't saying anything at all about whose responsibility it is.  I am
not responsible for my friend's actions in the least, but it still is
painful to watch her/him self-destruct.  My love for the person only
makes me care what happens, not make me responsible for what does or
doesn't happen...

 NB> Well, the work is to transform the bad into good, the unhealthy into
 NB> healthy...

 MK> I am not so sure.  My early experience with that is that 'work' is
 MK> often what makes things unhealthy in the first place.
 
We may be using different definitions of "work" here...  :)

 NB> In a marriage relationship, it's almost always worthwhile to
 NB> be working on things, from the outset, so that things don't get as 
 NB> bad as they could.

 MK> For sure but that is a two way street and cannot, nor should not, be
 MK> something either partner can do alone.  'This is the way I am, take it
 MK> or leave it.', comes to mind as an example of where I've seen
 MK> relationships fail and probably should, marriage or not.  Another

:)  While there is a bit of validity to needing to accept each other for
who and what they are, the "take it or leave it" attitude is usually a
good indicator for "this isn't going to work out, better cut your losses
now"...  and hopefully shows up before* one has too much invested into
the relationship.  But in any case, the one needing to effect any change
is the person who needs changing, not those around him/her.  One should
never go into a relationship thinking that one will be able to change
the other to some "more acceptable" person along the way.

 MK> famous line, 'You're not the person I married!'  Hm.  Who was that at
 MK> the wedding then and how will this affect a divorce?  Heh, heh.  I
 MK> better quit here before I say too much, if I already haven't.  :-)
 
  Ah, yes... and there are ways in which we never change, and
ways in which we aren't going to stay the same, no matter how hard we
do or don't try...  :)

 NB> before commitments are made.  Admittedly, that is easier said than 
 NB> done, unless one looks carefully at them instead of being simply
 NB> caught up in an infatuation.

 MK> Right.  Or even love.  Love does not conquer all.
 
Love doesn't conquer all, true...  but a truly unconditional love can
bear with just about anything.  Unconditional love being that which
loves the person without putting any conditions for that love... which
can accept the person without necessarily accepting all the behavior. 
There's a lot of different kinds of loving that get lumped together into
the one word we use, "love"....  

ttyl       neb

... Young at heart... slightly older in other places.

___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20

--- ViaMAIL!/WC v1.60d
 * Origin: Chowdanet (401-724-4410) telnet://chowdanet.com  (1:323/120)