Modern Romanticism

“Claiming to have done the right thing for someone else had to have been without choice involved. In love, we feel called to do what’s correct. Perhaps not correct or even rational for a hundred or more observers to our actions, though to us, it’s the most rational and logical to acts to do what we believe to be dutiful.”

– Modern Romanticism

It has to be noted, that with choice, there’s its definition of escape. To run from responsibility. To run from what one had stated that they were committed to. It involves the dishonest individual to seek a route that strays far from where they supposedly put themselves, of their own accord, as though to call a prison their home. Love should have been their prison, as this individual once claimed that they were willing to face the consequence of starting a relationship. Love should have built what was started, though in their current desire to flee from their commitment, they’ve revealed that they’ve lied. They’ve revealed that they’ve not contributed to building anything within that prison. Instead, their ongoing desire must to have been to escape from there, while using their partner as their mere puppet.

We do not choose to love, because we do not choose to do the right thing. Outside of the correct path, there’s a choice. But to the correct path, there’s just one choice; and having just one choice means there’s no choice. Because in having claimed to love and commit oneself to someone else, there’s two ways to set one’s mind: either in truth or in deceit.

A mother who loves her child will not debate with herself, upon numerous moments, to save her child who’s in danger. A spouse who knows their own partner has gone to the hospital from injury will not give themselves over to two or more choices to play with. No, for both scenarios, should they venture to their loved one to either save or be at their side, they’ve not committed these acts out of choice. To debate is to choose a side, while with love, there’s just the universal. “Choosing” to love is like believing one can reject the calls from instinct. To have such in mind, one has choice, though one also has deceit. For whom one loves, as an action would call for itself to be instant, taking to love’s call will not be with debate over what side to take. It will not be with confusion. If one’s heart has been set for truth, that heart has the utmost of clarity.

Of course, there are those times when we doubt our faith. However, even at those times, should faith be stronger than doubt, such doubt becomes overridden. It’s the same in simply lifting something. Comprehending that one’s ability to lift a heavy object could be challenging enough to override its mere possibility would have to mean that their doubt is simply the statement that says, “I cannot do this.” Whereas for faith’s sake, comprehending what love calls a person to do, a person does it even if they’ve deemed themselves incapable. They’ll do it, if that means to prove what’s possible about what’s impossible.