What is Love?

"The Beatles sang, 'All you need is love', then they broke up." -Larry Norman

Most of us acknowledge the importance of love, in general terms.  Love is a central theme in our societies,  movies, books and songs.  But when we talk about love as being central, what do we mean?  When the Torah says "Love your neighbor as yourself" does that mean the same thing as Donna Summer singing "Love to Love You Baby"?

In a sense, they could be.  Perhaps love just boils down to one's needs or desire.  We need our neighbor, so we will act in a positive way toward our neighbor.  To love your neighbor as yourself is to put oneself in the center of the world and everyone else is receiving of the love that we have for ourselves. We desire sexual satisfaction and we express that sexual need/desire to others, and they may share such need and so we express it.  It is a psychological principle that expressing love to others usually is reciprocated.

But is love only about desire and what we want?  Is that even the primary basis of love?  Is romantic love simply selfishness?  Is there no benefit for the other involved?  In fact, could love only be about the benefit to others?  Is "love" in its pure form, focused completely on the Other, not on the self?  Although to "love your neighbor as yourself" begins with the self, isn't it actually teaching us to move beyond ourselves, to leave the self behind?  

And is there a different category of supernatural love?  Or is the love of God and for God simply aspects of human love?  Is God's love for people simply desire, for God's own attainment?  Or is it other focused, not having anything to do with the self, other than knowing what the self requires?

But do the desires and needs of God actually relate at all to human needs or desires?  And what about between humans?  Can the needs of a human male be the same as the needs of a human female?  And if we loved trees or loved dogs, would we give them the same kind of love we would give a spouse or a cup of coffee? Are there a variety of loves, or only one?

If love is really what makes the world go around, then why is it so confusing to even figure out what it is?  How does one express love politically?  Or is that even possible?

Religious Tolerance

Most people think that religious tolerance is a good thing.  We should live and let live and if a group wants to believe in something, even if it is weird, they should be allowed to do so.

But what if one's belief is that all other beliefs are wrong and that they would be severely judged if they continued to believe in the wrong thing?  Some might go to extreme measures (and many have) to convince others that they need to believe the same as oneself.  Does "live and let live" extend to beliefs that cannot accept a "live and let live" standard?  Frankly, any religion that holds itself exclusively (such as most monotheistic religionists) cannot accept tolerance as an overall standard, because their beliefs are too serious, too much a matter of life and death for it to be taken lightly enough to easily tolerate other beliefs.  Can all religions really be tolerant without compromising their faith?

And should all religions be tolerated?  Some worshipers of Kali acted on the belief that anyone not worshiping Kali should be killed.  How different is that from the 30 Years' War in Europe, when hundreds of thousands of people killed each other over which version of Christianity they accepted?  Or the Crusades, who killed people in the name of a belief?  Should such religion be tolerated?  

What about doing something less than direct killing? What if a religious practice (or a belief in general) doesn't trust modern medicine based on a scientific model?  What if they believe in an alternative model of medicine?  What if they insist upon faith healing and prayer without medicine?  Is our medicine so foolproof that we must demand that they take it?  Must we demand that they give it to their children, even against their beliefs?  Can we legislate lack of trust?  Can we afford not to?

And what about cultural tolerance?  Many religionists want to teach their children instead of sending them to public school, so they can promote their world view without outside influence.  Doesn't that warp the children for their whole lives?  Isn't that a form of enforced belief, even cult behavior?  Or are they right that legistlating public education is also a form of enforced acculturation, enforced belief?  If we don't know who is right and who is wrong, does anyone have the right to believe as we believe?

Does one cultural group have the right, ever, to enforce their beliefs on others?