Homosexual Harmony Or Violation Of Scripture?

CHICAGO TRIBUNE -- Apr 14 -- As part of the settlement reached in Nov, eHarmony agreed to offer CompatiblePartners.net, market it in gay media and reel in the first 10,000 singles by registering them for free. But some Christians who rank religion fairly high say the company’s actions violate Scripture that label homosexuality a sin. They also feel betrayed. “You have now officially joined the list of Companies Promoting Immorality (CPI)--a growing list, indeed,” wrote Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth, a conservative Christian advocacy group, in a letter to Neil Clark Warren, who has retired but is still on eHarmony’s board. FULL ARTICLE @ CHICAGO TRIBUNE

Mark Brooks: Match, Plentyoffish, Yahoo Personals, and numerous other dating entities are also in the same violation then, I guess. Equal rights vs Scripture. I vote for equal rights, and freedom, every time. Sorry scripture. Your moral compass is off on this one, so says modern society. I believe in sexual freedom, and openness. Your comments please.

See all posts on eHarmony
See all posts on CompatiblePartners

Comments

[Sam Moorcroft, ChristianCafe.com]

Mark, just because something is "in" or "modern" doesn't make it moral. As I have said in previous posts, for all of recorded history, across all cultures, religions (including atheism), races, etc. marriage has been between a man and a woman. Homosexuality has been condemned unequivocally.

So, the entire history of the human race has been against your so-called "equal rights". I think it the height of arrogance for our Western culture to dismiss all of history and claim it has the moral high ground. It does not. Quite the opposite, in fact.

I recognise that we live in a democracy and people are free to do what they choose with their own lives. Where I object is being told that my Scriptures are out of touch, and that I had better be more than tolerant, in fact, I should be *accepting* of lifestyles that are an aberration to me!

Sites like eHarmony are told they have to serve a market they know nothing about, and many within their organization, as well as their core membership, actively oppose serving. Where are the human rights in that?

Or, does it only work one way? Apparently, it does. So much for your so-called "freedom".

The moral compass of the Scriptures will be here long after decadent Western civilization has faded away with all its arrogance and "modernity".

Does "sexual freedom" include the right to marry my sister? We are both adults and consenting. Does your modern morality permit that? How can you not?

[Glenn Millar]

Sam, I like you so I say this with all due respect. You are entitled to your beliefs. You are entitled to have a wonderful site for people who share your beliefs. Plus I agree with you that eHarmony should not be forced by the courts to accept Gays. (I argue that point from a business practicality standpoint, not a moralistic one as you do.)

However, you are not entitled to enforce your beliefs on others when they violate basic human rights. All of the arguments you use against Gay marriage were the exact same arguments used to stop Blacks and Whites from marrying in the 60's. Bible thumpers quoted passages that said mixed race marriage was an abomination and forbidden by God. Do you still believe that to be true?

The bible is full of things that I hope you no longer accept. For instance treating women as second class citizens: (Let your women keep silence in the churches; for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.- Corinthians 14:34-36)

Or those the same scriptures that tell parents to stone their children to death should they be rebellious. (Deuteronomy 21:18-21)

Or the scriptures that allow you to sell your children into slavery. (Exodus 21:7)

The bottom line is if you are going to take the bible literally, then you must accept everything exactly as it is written. Or the other choice is to follow the most profound teachings of Christ who said, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Good advice for all of us.

But if you are going to take the bible literally I am worried about how successful Christian Cafe gets. I sure hope it isn't making you rich. Because I believe the teachings of Matthew 19:24. (And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.)

[Sam Moorcroft, ChristianCafe.com]

Glenn,

You are seriously going to lecture me on the Bible? And explain how ChristianCafe.com won't be as successful as it could be because of my Biblical worldview?

You clearly no nothing about my market (or the Bible - you have fallen into the trap of so many who take things out of context).

Let me ask you the same question I asked Mark: can I marry my sister? If no, upon what basis do you forbid me (and don't use current laws as your argument)?

[Sam Moorcroft, ChristianCafe.com]

sorry, "know nothing"

[Christy]

Sam, what is your point? Mark just said he doesn't agree with homosexuality being labeled as a sin. Do you? If so why? Because your Bible said that? Where is your opinion?

Do you think one day I am going to wake up and say I want to be a gay? It is not a decision or choice you can make.

Thanks Glenn for the lecture btw.

[Sam Moorcroft, ChristianCafe.com]

Christy,

My point was that I don't agree with Mark. And, I laid out my arguments already. There is no point in me re-iterating them on the same page.

Do you think I am going to wake up some day and say I want to marry my sister? My point there (sorry that I have to actually explain this) was that the argument for sexual freedom (including gay marriage) taken only a little further opens up pandora's box. Because, let's face it, anything any group (2, 3, 4, whatever) of consenting adults want to do with each other cannot be condemned according to Mark's reasoning. And, I assume, yours or Glenn's.

So, polygamy, polyandry, incest, peadophilia (e.g. 45 year old man and a 14 year old boy who consents) all have to be accepted, logically, in the name of "sexual freedom".

Mark is the one who believes in that concept. I don't.

Let me ask you the same question I have asked Mark and Glenn (are people afraid to answer this?): can I marry my sister?

[Christy]

Mark sure didn't think of incest and peadophilia when he mentioned "sexual freedom" and no, you can't marry your sister. Mark was talking about homosexuality. It is a different thing isn't it? You can't change the fact that somebody is a gay.

[Sam Moorcroft, ChristianCafe.com]

Christy, why isn't incest okay for consenting adults? Please provide us with a logical argument.

My point is that if two men or two women can be with each other sexually (whether born that way or not), then *any* two (or three or whatever) adults can be with each other sexually. Who are you to tell a couple in a loving, consenting relationship that what they are doing is wrong, just because they are siblings? Simply put, you can't.

So, no, the argument that Mark is putting forward *does* concern this type of arrangement, as he is the one advocating "sexual freedom". He merely used homosexuality as his example (whether he realises that or not). He can't be for "sexual freedom" if he is contraining it, by definition.

[Glenn Millar]

Sam, my argument was a very simple one. I never said don't follow the morals you learn in the bible. What I said is you can't take everything in the bible literally. If you do, you are going to find yourself in a quandry and I gave you some examples.

And I also wasn't commenting on your market. It is very successful and you should keep doing it. I'm not sure what was misinterpreted there.

In answer to your question about incest, the reason it is different from homosexuality is because there is a practical argument there as well as your moral one. The practical argument is that cross-breeding promotes survival of inferior recessive traits. This is why the AKC doesn't allow interbreeding sibling dogs. It's also the reason it is legal to marry your second cousin, but not your first cousin, because that supposedly is far enough away in the interbreeding chain.

There is no such practical argument against homosexuality. Yes, you could make the argument that it leads to non-breeding. ie two homosexuals can't produce a baby. However, if you make that argument, then it would follow that any woman over 50 shouldn't have sex because she's not going to have a baby either, and I hope we both think that's absurd.

Also, I'll tell you one personal thing about me. I am straight, but in the 12 years I have been in the Bay Area I have made many Gay friends. In fact, I even lived (plutonically) with a Lesbian couple for a year. What I have learned is that homosexuality is clearly not a choice. And homosexuality does no harm to anyone. There are many Gays in long-term loving relationships. Last year, a female couple in San Francisco celebrated being together 50 years. How many heterosexual couples get to say that?

So how about you and I get together and go after something really worth fighting like sites like Ashley Madison who promote the breakup of marriages and families, something we both agree is pretty bad for society.

[Jonathan Crutchley]

Dear Sam,

If you want to marry your sister, that's your business and none of mine, and none of the government's, in my opinion. I don't recommend it, as inbreeding has proved harmful to future generations. I respect your right to operate the ChristianCafe.com and I wish your all the success in your business. You won't find competition from us at Manhunt.net. I also sympathize with eHarmony.com -- it was a shame that, for business reasons, they felt it necessary to cave in to extreme political purists. The internet dating field is a huge market, and there's enough for all of us to share.

[Sam Moorcroft, ChristianCafe.com]

Glenn,

Thanks for the clarification. And, there is no doubt, based on previous posts from each of us (often on the same topic) that we agree on a lot. However, you can't get off that easily, hehe:) You started off by critiquing my argument. All I am doing is responding.

Concerning the Bible, I take the literal parts literally and the figurative parts figuratively. With respect (he says somewhat condescendingly;-), you don't know your Bible. It clearly and unequivocally condemns the practice of homosexuality. Notice I said practice.

There are plenty of practical arguments against homosexuality. I'll provide you with one physical argument, concerning men. Not to be too graphic, but the rectum is not designed to accommodate a penis. It is meant solely for excreting waste. Of course, I wouldn't use that argument against lesbians. Vaginas were meant for penises (when having sex).

Your argument against incest doesn't wash, either (no pun intended). It has been used historically to prohibit inter-racial marriage (which the Bible is not against - at all - in spite of your earlier comment).

To quote you, "All of the arguments you use against Gay marriage were the exact same arguments used to stop Blacks and Whites from marrying in the 60's."

The same can be used to prohibit sibling marriages. What about a couple who don't want children? Or, can't have them? And, if they choose to have them, what business is that of yours? Lot of couples have disabled babies (and know in advance).

As I asked Christy, who are you to tell a couple in a loving, consenting relationship that what they are doing is wrong, just because they are siblings?

Sure, it may repulse you, but so does gay sex for a lot of people. But just because you don't *like* something isn't an argument against it.

How about polygamy? Is that okay? Here in Canada, there is a case before the courts in BC, where a polygamous sect is being prosecuted. There is a feeling that current marriage laws as being between two people (gay marriage is legal here) is unconstitutional. While I don't agree with polygamy (and neither does the Bible, incidentally, in spite of numerous incidents of it happening throughout), I understand the reasoning of the polygamists.

This is the Pandora's Box that has been opened by anyting other than opposite-sex relationships.

I am sure your roommates are nice people. Lots of people are nice, and that has nothing to do with their sexual practices. And, longevity of relationships doesn't confer legitimacy on them. We are all God's children and Jesus' sacrifice on the cross was for all of us, including sinners like me.

I am of the opinion that your reasoning is being strongly by your emotions. That makes sense. It doesn't make your beliefs correct, though.

[Sam Moorcroft, ChristianCafe.com]

Jonathan, thank-you for being logical! You and I actually see eye-to-eye on a number of issues (sexuality and homosexuality aside).

All I ask for in an argument is well-thought out reasoning and intellectual honesty.

As I said before, we live in a democracy, so lots of things happen that I don't agree with (nor you).

Now, I am hoping that my (long) response to Glenn isn't lost in cyberspace...I posted at the exact same time you posted your comment, and it failed to show. Drat.

[Bill Smith]

Um, just because something is condoned or condemned by human history doesn't make it right.

In 1863 the history of the United States and much of our prosperity was based on slavery. Did that make slavery right?

When will Christian start to live the love they preach?

[Sam Moorcroft, ChristianCafe.com]

Bill, one of my staff asked me today, "is this still a dating blog?" He makes a good point:)

(Your comment appears under my initial one, which is confusing - I think - as there are many more below it, all along the same vein.)

Let me say this, then we should really take this somewhere else: you make a good point about Christians and love. If we judged Jesus by the actions of a lot of Christians, it wouldn't say much about Him, would it?

However, you don't judge the Founder by the actions of the followers. You judge Him by His teachings.

But, some of His followers sure could use a kick in the pants. We are all imperfect.

[Glenn Millar]

Sam I have one more question for you, then I'll stop. Is it true that the bible forbids a man to marry his widow's sister?

Glenn

[Mark Brooks]

You must have had a very Christian up bringing. Thats some pretty in depth
knowledge you're presenting.

Mark Brooks
Principal, Courtland Brooks

Find Me http://pingmark.com
Know Me http://seasonalparadise.com
Use My Team http://courtlandbrooks.com

[Barb Elgin, MSW, LCSW]

Wow - what a 'passionate' discussion happening here! I think this is just one of those issues where all of us need to 'agree to disagree'. Is there not room for mutual respect? Of course, condemning someone is not very respectful, at least in my way of believing.

No one else made the observation that I will now - that not everyone is a Christian here, anyway. Christianity is ONE religion, not the only one here on earth. And, there are people of Christian faith who DO believe god and Jesus accept gay people as they are.

As well, there are varying interpretations of the Bible, which apparently has been translated from a totally different language, re-written and re-interpreted over the centuries. Then, I've heard it has been run through various 'mills' of time periods, autocracies, etc. So - I would be very careful taking the bible literally, given these reasons.

I am of the opinion, as a lesbian, why in the world would I sign up for a dating site created by a company that doesn't like me for who I am? That's just silly. If EHarmony doesn't accept tax dollars, perhaps they shouldn't have to serve who they don't want to serve, however, I guess the court relied on the race issue on this one - that, no matter what kind of business you are - profit or non-profit - you mustn't discriminate.

We certainly can't 'prove' one's sexual orientation is chosen or wrong. We can't prove it's ok either, however, there is research of all sorts out there that suggests that gayness, gay parents, etc., are all normative. The animal kingdom is full of examples of gay species, including species like the penguin, for example, where I hear there are male/male coupled penguins who mate for life.

As a compassionate person I would say, how can you judge without ABSOLUTE certainty? However, as I was reminded by Frank DeCaro last week while he was interviewing me on his SiriusOutQ radio show - it does take time for people to 'get over it'.

In the meantime, can't we all just 'agree to disagree'?

[Sam Moorcroft, ChristianCafe.com]

Barb, as Jack Nicholson said in "Mars Attacks" as President Dale (as only Jack could say it, with that crazed look in his eyes):

"Why can't we work out our differences? Why can't we work things out? Little people, why can't we all just get along?" :-)

As for my clever friend, Glenn, who asked, "Is it true that the bible forbids a man to marry his widow's sister?"

Let me respond with a question to you, Mr. Smarty-pants: "If a plane crashes on the border between the US and Canada, where do they bury the survivors?"

Ok, I am off for my morning bike ride. Gotta clear my head and get ready to seize the day!

Sam