Your misinterpretations are irrelevant.
Have you?
"Love" is caring for someone.
To care for someone is to feel affection for them. To "love" someone is to feel affection for them. You can argue differences in degrees, but in the end, they're the same thing.
Straw man. The only person that gets to decide whether they "love" someone is that person. There are no rules or conditions that dictate that decision other than how they feel.
Again, evidence that your reading comprehension sucks.
I know what your point is and I'm saying that it's wrong.
And yet you've been making the same argument about something arguably more important, sex. Here's a reality check: There's no such thing as unconditional love, at least in the context of an intimate partner. Furthermore, there's no such thing as an unconditional relationship. Relationships are effectively emotional agreements. By being in a relationship, you agree to meet the needs of your partner, to the best of your ability. If for any reason, you can't meet those needs, your partner is well within their rights to end the relationship or have those needs met elsewhere. "Love", regardless of how you define it, is utterly irrelevant.
This is conjecture.
Why would I google something that sounds like some teenage meme garbage? Also, "This is a quote."