Originally posted by Magnus:
Well, Love given, but not reciprocated is still love. That's why i
wrote 'we still love them anyway'. 
Being selfless does not imply not to have/expect anything in
return.
For example, if I made sacrifices out of love so that the recieving
party can have a better life. Seeing that person valued that
oppurtunity will be the best return for me like no other.
So Love does not necessarily have to be two-way, you reckon?
"Seeing that person valued that oppurtunity will be the best return
for me like no other." That'd be ideal. Suppose you didn't get to
see "that person value that opportunity", would you stop giving
love selflessly? Would you put an end to your gift of "True
Love"?
If being selfless does not imply not to expect anything in return,
then being selfless can
imply to expect something in return, right? Wouldn't you say that
to be truly "self-less" in every sense of the word, expecting
recognition of the "self" or rather, the concept of the "self" is
inconsequential?
It is of course a bonus when one receives a reward, tangible or
otherwise, for one's efforts, but when one deems the reward (eg.
return of love, recognition, appreciation) as the objective of
one's labour of love, when one gives love only for the reward,
could that kind of love be self-less?
This is probably all empty talk anyway *shrug*... Some may argue
that love is for doers, not for thinkers.
