Strong concept, the inverse progression from universal to individual, and the IP is solid. A few thoughts...
Titles can be instrumental in 'shaping' a reader's approach; 'A Love Poem' might be regarded as an explicit guide to the theme, whereas a similarly relevant, but indeterminate title would allow the reader to explore interpretations without specific preconceptions.
The transition between the lines of that first couplet sounds (to my unqualified ear) somewhat contrived, and I'm not convinced that 'so' is an ideal start to a line anyway. I realize it emphasises the consequential nature of the relationship between those lines (cause and effect), but I'd be inclined to use 'yet', which is less prescriptive (draw the reader in/make him or her do some work :)
Second couplet: nothing technically wrong with this, though it is the most conventional of the piece, almost mundane -- which is, I guess, apposite in matching imagery with ambience.
Third couplet: perhaps avoid the and/and conjunction duet (and/but?). 'An hundred' could be regarded as an anachronistic convention, unless used in a context intended to evoke a 'classical' era of poetry, so I guess it's down to personal preference.
Fourth couplet is good -- simulates enjambment to break the routine without disrupting the rhythm.
Final couplet: my impression of 'flows intact' is one of redundancy, in that 'flows' implies continuity and integrity, so 'intact' is superfluous to the expression. It also contradicts 'flow' in terms of sonics (hard consonants), and nuance ('intact' suggests stasis?).
I hope that doesn't overstep the 'blunt' criterion Ben :>) Just my take on it -- others will inevitably see an entirely different poem :> The vital element is the underlying idea, which is not in dispute here...