Mrs. HD is looking at the facts, forming an absolutely correct conclusion, and then twisting that conclusion into something completely misleading.
Fact: sex does not require love. Fact: love does not require sex. Conclusion: There's no relationship between the two.
The facts are indisputable. Sex without love is all too common. Love without sex obviously exists – just read the posts right here on this forum. Given those facts, it’s quite correct to conclude that there is no requirement for a relationship between the two. Saying that the two are unrelated is an attempt to disguise her trying to get you to make the leap from “no requirement for a relationship” to “there can never be a relationship”. This is pressing an agenda (big shock there) instead looking for truth. Truth would require more than just objectively provable facts.
Fact: sex does not require love. Widely held opinion: sex is much better with love. Fact: love does not require sex. Widely held opinion: sex enhances marital/romantic love. Conclusion: While there is no requirement for a confluence of the two, both love and sex are enhanced when they occur together.
Gasoline does not require a car. Likewise, a car does not require gasoline. But unless you put the two together, you’re not going to go anywhere.
