gayHarmony?
by Motte Brown on 06/01/2007 at 4:00 PM
USAToday.com reports that a lesbian is suing eHarmony because they wouldn't change their policy to allow her to meet other women using their services. The lawsuit names company founder Dr. Neil Clark Warren as the defendant.
To me, the suit isn't what's troubling (though I don't know what's preventing homosexuals from coming up with their own online matching service). What's troubling is eHarmony's response:
"The research that eHarmony has developed, through years of research, to match couples has been based on traits and personality patterns of successful heterosexual marriages," a company statement said. "Nothing precludes us from providing same-sex matching in the future, it's just not a service we offer now based upon the research we have conducted."
Either Dr. Warren, a confessing Christian, is planning to facilitate relationships the Bible explicitly condemns or he is attempting to mislead us into thinking that he will. Mmm... Do you help enable what God calls an abomination or break the ninth commandment? That's a tough one.
1. Mike Theemling said the following at 4:11 PM on Jun 1:
1
eHarmony is in a real bind because they have intentionally severed any ties with any Christian organization.
eHarmony used to be affiliated with Focus on the Family, but in his own words Dr. Warren said that was "the kiss of death" with trying to reach the more mainstream public .
It will be interesting to see now if eHarmony will crack under the pressue. I suspect they won't but I agree it is a bit sad that they won't use the defense of defining marriage as one man + one woman but rather use the guise of "insufficient research".
What's sadder is the statement "Nothing precludes us from providing same-sex matching in the future". Given that Dr. Warren is a professing Christian I pray he will not give in to the pressure.
2. cmzollman said the following at 5:09 PM on Jun 1:
2
I think unfortunately, like any other corporation, the lawyers are expressing the P.C. way so as to not be boycotted by a small but increasingly aggressive social group. I do think that if Dr. Neil Clark Warren was truly trying to represent Christianity through this medium that he would be straight forward and honest. Then again, even some churches do not understand the severity of the sin of homosexuality. So I guess it is not too much to expect from a main stream corporation, trying to help people find mates, without overtly purporting the founders own Christian beliefs; so as to capture the entire market instead of just a segment.
3. Canadian Boy said the following at 6:20 PM on Jun 1:
3
The Bible condemns same-sex RELATIONSHIPS? This is news to me.
4. Tomi said the following at 7:27 PM on Jun 1:
4
Whichever way way this case goes, it will definitely be a landmark with lots of implications for things that come up in the future.
5. Carrie said the following at 7:41 PM on Jun 1:
5
As a Christian in marketing I see this as some darn, good PR. Neil may be a Christian, but e-harmony is not marketed to Christians specifically and for that reason he knows he needs to toe the line.
He states "it's just not a service we offer now based upon the research we have conducted." Now, the only question left is why doesn't he research same-sex unions? That's the question that could put him in some hot water and force him to publically pick sides.
6. chris said the following at 8:52 PM on Jun 1:
6
Or perhaps eHarmony is just trying to answer the charge in a fairly "neutral" way to avoid getting dragged into a debate they don't want to get dragged into. Or perhaps they're answering in such a way to support a defense that it's simply something they don't do. Example: A clothing store that only supplies men's clothing is not discriminating against women.....
Overall, I think you're reading too much into the statement.
Of course, Lev. 18:22 refers to men, so, technically, they *could* offer matching of lesbians only without violating that particular part of the Bible.
7. BrooX said the following at 10:30 PM on Jun 1:
7
Motte, sounds like you're twisting words or making significant assumptions, both of which could be classified as sinful judgement. A general education requirement for most college grads is a class in critical thinking. The statement from eHarmony is NOT saying that they are planning-to NOR that they will in the future provide same-sex matching options. If you're going to harp on the words "Nothing precludes", well maybe I could give you that - but really, I think that'd be nit-picking. Even if the company charter and bylaws stated that the group exists to assist heterosexual match-making in accordance with Biblical mandates, they can almost _always_ be changed with certain provisions of the general will of the company board of directors.
I think eHarmony presented a decently wise statement of fact and in such a tone as to minimize invitations to be attacked by political and religious agendas.
Keep it up Dr. Warren - and watch your back.
I would hope that any judge would thow the case out on the basis that it has nothing to do with discrimination based on sexual orientation; the services eHarmony offers are based on bonafide requirements of being physically male or female.
8. Samuel PG said the following at 10:57 PM on Jun 1:
8
Forgive me for my ignorance, but I did not know that customers can press charges against companies for refusing service. It might be a different situation if the company were discriminating among employees but can't any business discriminate in who it serves? Discrimination could be bad for business, but illegal? (By the way, I do not use "discriminate" with the usual negative connotation. The word itself is neutral, and has only recently come to be used as an equivalent to racism, sexism or homophobia).
9. Bia said the following at 3:40 AM on Jun 2:
9
I think the Dr proffessing to be a Christian does not mean that his actions are bible based, or right at all. These days everyone is a "Chritian", but the bible says that every tree is recognised by its fruit.
10. Nate Lotze said the following at 8:43 AM on Jun 2:
10
Dead wrong, BrooX. If you're going to cite "critical thinking," do it yourself. "Nothing precludes" is not nit-picking, it's saying that there's nothing preventing them from offering said service later on, and I'm pretty sure you know that.
So nothing precludes? Not even the Bible? And the word "now" bolsters the time aspect--right now we don't, but we're keeping out cards close, and if we choose to in the future, nothing's stopping us. That's what they're saying, per the text of the statement.
You're right that they never said they were going to offer their services to homosexuals. And they probably won't. But they didn't come down on either side of the fence. And you said it yourself--they did it to minimize invitations to be attacked by political and religious agendas.
So we're to assume Warren's agenda is what, making money? Sure looks like that to me.
11. Paul said the following at 10:02 AM on Jun 2:
11
With Nate's post, it looks like we're back to a discussion on deception, similar to one that took place on a post about Planned Parenthood a short while ago, except this time the sides appear to be reversed.
So I'll ask a similar question to one that was asked there:
Is it acceptable to conceal our true motivations for the benifit of what we believe to be the greater good?
In this case the greater good would be eHarmony maintaining their mainstream credibility and continuing to support the formation of successful heterosexual marriages, by choosing not to make a political point of their decision not to get involved with homosexual relationships.
12. Mike Theemling said the following at 10:47 AM on Jun 2:
12
Addressing some questions/comments:
Canadian Boy,
The Bible is clear that same sex sexual acts are wrong (Lev 18:22, Lev 20:13, Rom 1:26-27, 1 Cor 6:9-10).
The problem is that you'd have a hard time convincing people that a romantic relationship has the full intention of being platonic. People do not go to dating websites in the hopes of just finding "friends" (although that may occur too if a romance doesn't pan out).
To be clear, having a homosexual orientation or affinity is not sinful, but acting upon it is. This includes "lusting in your heart". Jesus said that it's not just the act itself which is important, but what goes on inside (Matt 5:27-28).
This is why that providing same-sex matching essentially facilitates sinful behaviors and/or thoughts.
chris,
With the passages cited above, it is reasonable to conclude that it is the sin of homosexual acts applies to both men and women.
Samuel PG,
According the the USA Today article the basis of discrimination is that the California law specifically includes sexual orientation. The problem is defining the context.
If eHarmony were clearly a "Christian" site it would have an easier time defending itself stating that its matching system are in line with its belief system.
But since eHarmony has cut all ties with being a Christian site to attract the mainstream it has to resort to other reasons.
Even if it were a Christian site, it still might not be off scott-free depending on the interpretation of the law.
I do see your point though. For example, if the verbage in the California law says "gender" in the list of things not to discrmate against (along with race, religion, sexual orientation etc) then along the same logic many businesses would be "discriminating" to men or women. What about a women-only fitness center? What about a gentlemen's club?
It'd be interesting to see how this case pans out. I do not think it will go very far, but stranger things have occured.
13. jo mamma said the following at 11:42 AM on Jun 2:
13
broox.. reread what motte said, he was asking a critical question to us...
hello guys! He said it's based on research. Gay marriage is not legal so there is no research! He answered right there. Once gay marriage will be legal in all 50 states (never will happen) then he said he would consider researching.
It's like the hot girl that tells the nerd, "i'll date you in 1,000 years" She's being nice without being completely rude
14. Rob said the following at 1:10 PM on Jun 2:
14
i must say- i am saddened by eharmony's response. it appears that they beat around the bush in standing up for what is RIGHT and TRUE- which is found in scripture. i hope that they will not fall under the pressure of the world! i don't care if eh reaches out to both non and Christian people. if mr. warren claims to be a Christian, he is commanded to stand on the Word of God; especially in this situation. i don't care what the world says- mr. warren must obey God and His Holy Word.
15. BDB said the following at 2:09 PM on Jun 2:
15
Carrie wrote:
>>Now, the only question left is why doesn't he research same-sex unions? That's the question that could put him in some hot water and force him to publically pick sides. <<
To which he could say, "Our research indicates that there is already a lot of competition so it's not a market we believe we can make money in. Other companies are much better than we are. We'll stick to what we do well."
16. Sara B said the following at 2:14 PM on Jun 2:
16
Christians are not the only people in the world.
Thank GOD!
17. BDB said the following at 3:53 PM on Jun 2:
17
Mike Theemling wrote:
>>What about a women-only fitness center?<<
I read an interesting article about just that issue. Legally, places like "Curves" can't prevent men from joining.
What they CAN do is not buy any free weights, buy exercise equipment that is sized smaller for women, paint the place pink, use fragrances, etc. etc. They can make the environment such that women are comfortable and men are uncomfortable.
But you see the same kind of market segmentation. At least here, where Bally's advertises clearly for maximizing hedonistic appeal; Family Fitness Center would take a completely different approach.
Interestingly, with a PhD in Psychology from the University of Chicago, Warren can be his own expert witness if this actually goes to court. My guess is that he can hold his own against other PhD's. Further, because it's a business, his research is a "trade secret" that would be damaged by being subject to discovery in court.
This could be interesting.
18. Carrie said the following at 5:10 PM on Jun 2:
18
I can't help but chime in again. I really don't understand why so many people feel that the "right" thing for Dr. Warren to do is to publically say "We aren't going to set-up same sex unions because the Bible says 'No!'" That is hardly demonstrating love for the other person. I know many conservatives would like to believe that they are being loving, but it is hardly interpreted outside of our circles as such.
I would hope Dr. Warren never sets up his company to allow same sex unions. I hope he does stand up for biblical standards of behavior. However, Jesus is the measure for how things are done, not James Dobson.
19. Ellie said the following at 5:27 PM on Jun 2:
19
If I were eHarmony I would argue that not offering a specific product or service is not discrimination. For example, if I went to a men's clothing store it would be silly for me to accuse them of discrimination for not having a junior teens department. If I went to a law firm that specialized in defending people in criminal matters it would be silly to accuse them of discrimination if they would not handle my divorce for me. Furthermore, no one would even expect every clothing store to carry clothes for every gender and age group, or every law firm to provide services for every type of legal issue. In the same way eHarmony offers the specific service of matching people who want to get married, they are not discriminating against homosexuals, they are just not offering another particular service that can be found elsewhere anyway.
20. fridge said the following at 11:40 PM on Jun 2:
20
Hi BDB, Mike Theemling,
Some equal opportunity/sex discrimination acts only prohibit discrimination in certain circumstances. For example although the Australian acts prohibit sex discrimination in employment generally, there are exceptions that allow you to specify you want a male to play the role of Hamlet or a female to work as a bra fitter. In addition, you can apply for a specific exemption to the Act, I understand this is how women's-only gyms get around it.
As a side note, there was a recent decision to allow a pub in Melbourne to refuse entry to heterosexuals and lesbians. The owner had to seek a special exemption for that:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/NATIONAL/Pub-owner-defends-gays-only-entry/2007/05/28/1180205127908.html
21. Chris Krycho said the following at 11:43 PM on Jun 2:
21
Carrie -
How is that being unloving again? How is affirming that the truth of the Bible is worth standing on not loving? The words we choose to communicate that truth can be loving or not; but it is impossible to say anything but that truth in true agape love for people. Just because it's not perceived as loving doesn't mean it isn't. If we do not say that sin is wrong, then we (1) make God a liar and (2) leave the blood of their sin on our hands. Love is not letting someone walk off a cliff because we don't want to offend them: it's telling them, no matter how much it may offend or anger them, that they are walking off that cliff.
That's not a "conservative" thing: it's a truth thing and a God thing. Look again at the way Christ interacted with sinners: He extended mercy, but always with a call out of their sin. He did not let them remain there and excuse it. (Take John 8, for example: while He rebuked those who had defied the law by not bringing the man as well, He also told the woman "Go and sin no more." That's important!) We need to minister love; but we can be no more loving than we are when speaking the TRUTH.
22. Cathy in NOLA said the following at 12:12 AM on Jun 3:
22
Jesus is a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense. OF COURSE non-Christians get ticked when we tell them the truth. Sodomy is sin, period.
Heterosexuality is part of the creation order. To go against it is sin:
Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, who exchanged the truth of God for the lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due."
Romans 1:24-27 (NKJV)
People who do not know their sin have no need of a savior. To neglect to tell them of their condition is hateful. If e-Harmony is consciously going in the direction implied by their statement, Dr. Warren has a duty to step down from the organization and publicly repudiate the unbiblical aspects of it. People need to see principles in action. Of course, it could be argued that he put pragmatism before principle when he left FotF in the first place, not trusting the Lord with the success of his endeavors.
23. Kelly said the following at 8:12 AM on Jun 3:
23
I wasn't aware that EHarmony had 'severed Christian ties' but it certainly explains a feature article I saw there recently that horrified me - all about 'moving in together' with no mention of marriage.
24. Monica W said the following at 12:35 PM on Jun 3:
24
My aunt lived as a lesbian for over 20 years before becoming a Christian. She has been delivered of this for 15 years. That is the perspective I'm writing from.
I believe the Bible is clear that people need both truth and grace to grow. Having said that, I also believe that our culture is top-heavy on the grace/love side, saying that anything is ok if it feels right and that something is bad if it feels wrong or causes pain. In years past, homosexuality was viewed as a problem, and families, churches, and counselors attempted to help people overcome it. Now people are being told that it's something they're born with and that they don't have a choice in the matter at all. People seem to be shamed into silence, unwilling to offend anyone. The Bible is clear that sin always has consequences, that the wages of sin is death. That is true of all of us without Christ's Salvation. If no one speaks up to tell these people that homosexuality is sinful in God's sight and that they do have a choice, how many people will suffer spiritually and emotionally over time? I do not mean to say that we should be mean and rejecting to these people. I am saying that the truth must be spoken in love, but spoken directly so it can be heard and understood.
25. BrooX said the following at 3:15 PM on Jun 3:
25
Maybe the words I wrote were a little harsh. I did try to give the benefit of the doubt by saying it "sounds like". What I was trying to get at is that sinful (as opposed to righteous) judgement has to do with _assuming_ that we know one's abilities, calling, and/or motives when in fact, we don't.
Just because a fellow believer in Christ doesn't jump up on a soapbox to make a particular affirmation, it doesn't mean they are in the wrong. In Acts, Stephen makes a big speech and delivers a conclusion that gets him into trouble. The author does not mention other believers jumping up to the front to affirm what Stephen said. Did Stephen know what he was getting himself into with his statements? Probably. Were the other believers wrong for not jumping up? Not if they had a different calling.
Christ touches married people and single people... Some long-term, successful marriages have come out of the most unlikely of beginnings... Maybe Dr. Warren and the eHarmony team are doing the best they can with the wisdom God has given them, to help people make long-term successful marriages... in which case, the political/religious homosexual marriage debate might be viewed as a distraction of resources from their primary calling. We're in speculative territory, but it seems quite possible. Billy Graham decided to avoid political issues. Jesus did to.
26. Carrie said the following at 3:21 PM on Jun 3:
26
Chris,
I'm glad you typed "extending mercy". So many people just talk and that is what I was cautioning against. If Dr. Warren were to just stop at words " . . . the Bible says 'No!'", then it will be all for naught. Too many conservatives today are about saying the right thing, but stop there.
For a modern-day controversy and a true testing of Christian love and mercy go do some research on "SoulForce". This is a GLBTQ group that goes around to Christian college campuses (for the most part) and demands that they change their policies regarding homosexuals. Some of the schools handled this group well whereas others, I think, could have been more charitable and loving. It would definitely take a good amount of homework to figure out what actually happened at each stop (rather than getting SoulForce's version), but I think you'd be surprised. This year they stopped at my alma mater and I was quite impressed with the way the situation was handled. I would argue they did the best they could being on this side of heaven. They did their best to show that their actions matched their verbal witness. The local media that covered the event did an excellent job and this group was portrayed in an extremely fair light as was my alma mater.
Don't stop at telling homosexuals that they are wrong. Enter into a friendship with them and pray that the Holy Spirit would show them the error in their ways. Conservatives "Christians" too often just shout at these people -- that's not love.
27. Canadian Boy said the following at 5:32 PM on Jun 3:
27
This site makes me proud to be a Canadian. I did an essay on online dating services, and every Canadian dating site I visited had "I am a (male/female) seeking a (male/female)".
Now, on the topic of calling out sin- I think the wrong approach is being taken here. How can you expect to go up to a homosexual and say "You're a sinner, what you do is an abomination and only Jesus can forgive you so ask Him to" and then expect them to do so? Why should they? To non-Christians, sin means nothing!
Cathy said "People who do not know their sin have no need of a savior." Yeah, well, people who do not know their saviour have no need for sin. Telling them that homosexuality is a sin will turn them away from you. Telling them about Jesus, and His love for us, will probably yield some better results.
Finally, the issue of Jesus extending mercy and then rebuking sin. Reading the Gospels and Acts, I noticed that it was ONLY Jesus who did this. The apostals preached, healed, faced persecution, but I didn't see them calling sin. I DO, however, remember the "speck in a brother's eye/plank in your own" pretty well. It seems to me that we are to share the love of Christ, not the condemnation of Him. Condemning sin is God's job, not ours. If homosexuality is a sin, the Holy Spirit will move the believer to change. We won't, and it is not loving for us to try to.
28. Alton said the following at 1:02 AM on Jun 4:
28
This is an interesting case, considering the current legal-political atmosphere with regard to homosexuality. In recent years, it seems the category "sexual orientation" has been assumed into the "equal protection" clause of the Constitution. The argument, simply put, is that every "right" of male-female couples must be "extended" to same-sex couples as well - and failure to do so amounts to arbitrary discrimination.
Despite the apparent innocence of the argument, it is based on unspoken, radical philosophical presuppositions about the nature of man, sexuality, love and marriage. In a word, equality is interpreted to mean that man and woman are, in every way, interchangeable. As a result, androgyny is becoming more and more politically enshrined in American law.
With that in mind, although the statement from e-harmony is certainly wishy-washy, it occurs to me that they might just be covering themselves from a legal perspective. In other words, saying "we believe homosexual behavior is an abomination" probably wouldn't hold up in court today. Rather, their statement tries to explain that they're not "arbitrarily" discriminating against same-sex couples. To crudely paraphrase: "We like same-sex couples, really ... it's just that our product targets only 'heterosexuals' because our research currently relates to patterns in 'heterosexual marriages.'"
Observable scientific data (in fields such as psychology and linguistics; not to mention biology and common sense) demonstrates the simple fact that men and women relate to one another differently. Moreover, same-sex couples relate to each other differently than male-female couples.
These observations are probably politically incorrect. However, citing scientific studies and giving examples of their research would probably give e-harmony much more of a case before a secular court than would pointing to a Bible and citing passages about homosexuality.
Depending on the ideology of the judge, both with regard to homosexuality and "stare decisis" (following judicial precedent), e-harmony might have to really fight this one out.
29. Jason W said the following at 6:24 AM on Jun 4:
29
Canadian Boy,
You simply can't tell people about the love of Jesus and expect them to change. The problem in our society today is that we aren't aware of our sin, it's been drummed into use that it is 'acceptable'. If people are not aware of how they've broken God's law and hence been separated from him, then they won't want to accept Jesus why should they? Way of the Master says it is like wearing a parachute that you don't know what for . . . it just is heavy and cumbersome and they'll get rid of it. But at least if you expose their sin, show them their need for a saviour, it is at their own peril that they reject his grace . . . the decision lies solely with them. Jesus is love, and what more loving act can one perform but to stop people from going down a path of sin? Salvation can only come from knowledge of sin and a need for a saviour.
30. Mike Theemling said the following at 11:06 AM on Jun 4:
30
Great insights Alton!
Along that vein, what I'm also very curious to see is the eventual clash between State constitutions which have been amended to define marriage as "one man + one woman".
Here's the rub. Those who are against a FEDERAL Constitutional amendment stating the same thing say it's unecessary since States already can do the same thing. But we have seen examples where there have been attempts to nullify the State constitutional clause (I believe a Federal Judge in Kansas or some other midwestern state attempted to do so a few years ago).
Depending on your views of Federalism, Federal Title 'X' laws, and perhaps moreover on Marbury vs. Madison there is a real possibility that the Federal government will muscle in and mandate that such State laws are illegal in the same ways they did so with abortion.
31. xeres said the following at 11:34 AM on Jun 4:
31
Monica W, thank you for sharing your insight on the matter.
32. v@v said the following at 11:34 AM on Jun 4:
32
Canadian Boy -- blessings to you. I must lovingly correct your statement. If you read the epistles, Paul blatantly calls out sin -- repeatedly (i.e., Corinthians and their own sexual sins, "do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, you are not your own, you were bought at a price;" Luke 17:3 "if your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him", the list goes on. I urge you, particularly, to read the epistles on this matter.
Further, the Bible says that "ALL scripture is God breathed and is useful to teaching, *rebuking*, correcting and training in righteousness" (2 Tim. 3:16). As a result, I must wholeheartedly disagree with the statement: "If homosexuality is a sin, the Holy Spirit will move the believer to change. We won't, and it is not loving for us to try to."
My brother, in love, that is wrong -- well, partially. You're right in the sense that we as people can't change anyone, but we can present the truth that CAN change. God has expressed his point on the matter -- his standard is secure, regardless of how I feel. The Holy Spirit has established his word already -- I must submit to allowing him to change me. It's not a "feely" walk here -- I might live with my boyfriend and use that same excuse, but I'm lying to myself. God has already said it's wrong. If I'm waiting to feel -- I'll feel my way right into condemnation. And no one but myself will have sent me there.
In regard to blatant sin -- If I don't "feel the Spirit telling me", it's most likely because I have hardened my heart and convinced myself of my own lie. So, I need God's word, the double-edged sword (Hebrews 4:12), to transform me by the renewing of my mind (Romans 12:2). Thus changing how I see things.
Saying the Holy Spirit will tell me if I'm wrong (regarding something he has explicitly stated in his word as right or wrong) is an excuse and a cop-out. It's not a matter of IF it is wrong, but when we allow the Spirit to convict us of it as sin in our lives. My brother, the Lord speaks through his WORD. We must ask the Lord to show us the Truth in light of HIS truth, not my lie. Inevitably, God's views will crash with mine if they are not aligned. And that's the point -- God only leaves room for Himself to abide. He stays, or my lifestyle of blatant sin goes -- one or the other. Please, continue to examine scriptures. God's word is true -- it is the standard. I pray you are led by truth -- because man, our feelings are so unreliable. Only God's word can change our lives.
33. v@v said the following at 12:30 PM on Jun 4:
33
Granted, this convo seems to be fluctuating between the controversy surrounding eHarmony, and sin itself. But, it comes to mind, we meet Christ at a place of death -- an altar (whether that was literal or not). We can't have the life that Christ offers, until we willfully die to ourselves.
Reminds me of a song in Spanish (and I don't know who wrote it):
"Tu me amas como soy
Yo perfecta nunca fui
Pero yo te conoci
Recibiendo tu Perdon
Tu poder me transformo
Y ahora no soy como ayer
Yo quiero ser te fiel
Pues, tu me amas como soy"
Translation:
You love me as I am
For I was never perfect
But when I first met you, it was recieving your forgiveness
Your power transformed me
I am not the same as before
I want to be faithful to you
because you love(d) me as I am.
God loves you so much he'll take you as you are (someone said), but loves you too much to let you stay that way.
34. Cathy in NOLA said the following at 1:35 PM on Jun 4:
34
I was raised in the occult. I had my first pack of Tarot cards around age 12, had a Ouija board, etc. Living in NO,LA it's a rarity to have anyone condemn a spiritual belief. After all, there are a lot of beliefs mixed in around here (New Age, voodoo, etc). When I was 17 I met a guy who was the first person to ever tell me that what I was doing was wrong; that it went against the Bible. I got really angry with him and was bound and determined to defend my position. I thought he was an arrogant snot for daring to question what I believed. However, the Lord used his loving insistence that I was in sin and needed forgiveness. I couple of years later I became a Christian. The year after that I married him (now 11 1/2 years).*
It is our job to condemn sin. As they say, "Hate the sin, love the sinner." Yes, they will hate you. Jesus warned us of that. But don't worship a tiny god who cannot save, who cannot use our meager, pathetic efforts to bring about salvation. He can and he does. I still joke that I came to the Kingdom kicking and screaming but once I got in the door there wasn't anywhere else I wanted to be.
*Just as a side note, he now realizes that he was in sin for dating an unbeliever. No one was loving enough to make that clear to him when he was younger. We will not make the same mistake with our children.
35. cn said the following at 6:19 PM on Jun 4:
35
political correctness is an evil evil thing.
36. Canadian Boy said the following at 8:00 PM on Jun 4:
36
v@v and Jason:
For me, it's much more important for a homosexual to know that God loves them, has paid for their sins and has saved them by grace than for me to rip them to pieces and give 'em the old "turn or burn" lecture. You aren't going to do much good by telling a homosexual that they're sinning and have to stop- they'll see no reason in it, and telling them that they'll burn in Hell (as Jason suggested) will just turn them away from Christianity.
I fear that, with homosexuality, we get so concerned with the sin of gay sex that we get to the point of judgment and we start ignoring our own sins. We can't forget that we are all fallen, and homosexuality isn't the only, or worst, sin. (Warning, statement you aren't gonna agree with follows:) I would rather someone know Christ and be forgiven and continue to sin than to not know Christ at all.
But it could be done better than having them continue to sin. So, please, don't try to tell a non-Christian homosexual that what he or she does is sinful and that they need to repent. DO tell them about the God who loves them, died for their sins, wants to know them, and then personally form a real relationship with that person. It is then that you'll be able to help that person see their sins- the same way, I'm sure, they'll help you see yours.
Oh, and thanks for praying for me. I'll be praying for you as well.
37. David said the following at 9:09 PM on Jun 4:
37
Cathy-
What you said is so true! I think these "evangelism" points are the most ridiculous conversations. Is it all about "friendship evangelism"? "servant evangelism"? "soapbox evangelism"? hellfire and brimstone evangelism"? I think yes to them all. Is it all about the love? Or is it all about the judgment?
I think in so many ways we have to realize that people are at different stages within their lives, and therefore have different requirements.
For instance, my very good friend had an encounter with "angry hellfire and brimstone street preacher guy" who asked him point blank if he knew Christ, he responded with a no, and this guy told him he was going to hell. That one statement stuck with him for the rest of his life. Every time he got high, all he could think about was that he was going to hell. Until he finally said enough, and gave his life over to Christ.
Why does it seem to be so confusing to us? Sin for sure needs to be pointed out to some people, some people have zero understanding of "what" they need to be saved from. Other people already have a complete understanding of what they are guilty of, and they need to hear that there is someone who loves them in spite of this!
Bottom line in all of this, how about praying and asking for guidance from the Holy Spirit while talking with non-Christians and seeing where He wants to take the conversation?
38. Megan said the following at 10:14 PM on Jun 4:
38
Jesus forgave a woman caught in adultery:
John 8:10-11
Jesus straightened up and asked her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?"
"No one, sir," she said.
"Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin."
(NIV)
We're sinful people. Even when we're trying not to, we sin. Jesus knew that. Why the command to "leave your life of sin"? Couldn't he have just forgiven her and let it go at that?
I don't think you CAN be forgiven without repentence. And true repentence means loathing of the sin.
I agree that you'd do better to tell people about God rather than tell them how evil and horrible they are. But I don't think you can just tell a person about God, get their sins forgiven, and have them go off and keep on living exactly as they did before. That isn't repentence or forgiveness and doesn't seem like it'd do a person a whole lot of good. In fact, it might even do a lot of harm because that person says, "Well, I've been forgiven now - what I'm doing is bad, but it doesn't really matter because God'll clear that all up."
39. Mike Jones said the following at 7:48 AM on Jun 5:
39
I have known about Dr. Warren's stance on homosexuality for some time now. He was on a NPR program called Fresh Air, and he stated that while they do not allow homosexuals on eHarmony, he consulted with a gay group to create their own matchmaker website. I think that is part of the reason why there was such a split between him and Focus on the Family. Its sad to, becuase a lot of Christians run to eHarmony because they think its values are more like theirs and different from Match.com and others...
40. Calvin said the following at 6:26 PM on Jun 5:
40
Might I suggest that both the law (judgement) and grace (love) are necessary for conversion of sinners. Allow me to elaborate.
If the law alone is presented, the sinner may (or may not) be convicted of their sinfulness, but no solution is presented whereby we might be saved. If grace alone is presented without law, then there is no knowledge of the need for repentence and therefore little if any impetus to rely on Christ's substitutionary atonement for our sins. Both presentations must be present and compelling.
With regard to the eHarmony statement, I really appreciated what Rob had to say about Mr. Warren being a Christian and providing a service to both Christians and non-Christians alike. There are not two standards for Mr. Warren's (or anyone's) conduct toward Christians and non-Christians. The standard presented in the Scriptures is loving promotion of that which is best for the people served. Clearly, homosexuality falls outside that standard and therefore should not be promoted (or facilitated) by eHarmony.
41. Jason W said the following at 7:25 PM on Jun 5:
41
Canadian Boy,
Yes, God does love homosexuals, but point in question is that they'll never come to God if they only know God has loved them and died for their sins, when they have no knowledge of their sins . . . which, is homosexuality. I'm not advocating a fire-and-brimstone approach, where we beat down homosexuals with a stick because they practice sodomy (or whatever), but without knowledge of God's law and how they have violated it, they aren't in a place to accept grace . . . which by it's definitions is something we don't deserve, because we have transgressed the law.
And this just doesn't apply to homosexuals at all. I know by the 10 commandments that I am a theiving, lying, blaspheming, adulterer . . and it's because I know these things that I can see that I've broken God's law, and require salvation. Should I not know how I've broken the law, then the need for salvation would seem stupid.
Jason W
42. Bing said the following at 12:57 PM on Jun 6:
42
I first joined eHarmony when Neil Clark Warren came to my church to do a workshop based on his "Date or Soulmate" book, which features the principles of matching on which eHarmony is based. He and I talked at length about the difficulties of finding Christian people to date and he told me "You are EXACTLY the type of person we want to help through eHarmony." Imagine my disgust when he "sold out" by broadening his target audience to include non-Christians because the website was doing well financially.
I wonder if it's only a matter of time until the target audience broadens again.
43. Anonymous said the following at 10:41 PM on Jun 8:
43
Did you all know that eHarmony owns Gayharmony.net? Just scroll down on this website to the bottom where it says Registrant: http://www.whois.net/whois_new.cgi?d=gayharmony&tld=net
44. Motte said the following at 7:29 AM on Jun 9:
44
Anonymous: Wow! That's great investigative journalism. It proves that their statement is more than just "creative" public relations. They've been planning it all along.
45. Ted Slater said the following at 8:27 AM on Jun 9:
45
... or it could mean that eHarmony bought it so that nobody else could. They may have just wanted to "take it off the market"....
46. Motte said the following at 8:33 AM on Jun 9:
46
Maybe so Ted. Time will tell.
47. Joe said the following at 2:55 AM on Sep 26:
47
Theres no reason not to get behind our brothers and sisters who happen to be gay or lesbian. Eharmony is shameful and like the one girl said were looking at possibly many years before all 50 states allow open gay marriage. Weve still got work to do to all be equal but were on the right path.