This post is a bit too harsh in tone, and Josh’s comment is exactly right – true love can be conceived as a perpetual crush, and can be made lasting through such a conception.
I personally have said that it doesn’t matter why one falls in love, what matters is what we do with that.
Still, I think the reason why I was so harsh in the initial post isn’t merely because of the particular situation I was confronted with, a grown man having a crush on a girl way out of his league and not recognizing that he had other priorities in life. The reasons why I was harsh stem from one question:
If we place such an emphasis on the “magic” of that moment, being around those we have a crush on, what happens when that magic disappears?
In my own life, I’ve dealt with numerous women who liked me and fell out of love just as I was giving more (without pathetic pleading on my part, even). The “magic” seems to trump any sense of gratefulness, even though it should lead to more gratefulness. It seems to place a curious weight on physical presence, and can render conversation (I think the Greek for this is a variant of “logos,” actually; where does “dialogue” come from?) useless. I know we’ve all been in conversations with girls that liked us, and we could say “Yeah, aliens are coming up behind you, they’ve dismembered your family just now and wrecked your car,” and they’d be like “OMG that’s so deep.” I’m not saying “reason over passion,” I just don’t want a form of passion involved with a relationship that kills reason. I suspect there is a greater, deeper senusality out there, and that our generation thinks it knows it all because of our experience, but really doesn’t.
I hate to define love in terms of duty and obligation, but remember that spontaneity itself only exists because things happen regularly. And remember how much joy our parents get in giving to us, and in giving to us give to each other, and remember that our Christian God loves to be a parent, rather than consort with human females like Zeus.