Monday, June 04, 2007

Dating vs. Desires

The online dating service, eHarmony, is in a legal battle to protect its policy of heterosexual dating and not caving into radical homosexual agenda item number 2: Portray gays as victims, not aggressive challengers. This agenda item was devised in part by homosexual activists Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen and publicized in two publications: A 1987 article titled "The Overhauling of Straight America" and a 1989 book titled "After the Ball".

Read the full article by clicking HERE.
I guess all Christians, Jews, ect can only express their religious beliefs behind closed doors of their place of worship because less than 3% of the population, homosexuals, feel uncomfortable in a predominately heterosexual society. I guess some day I will be "coming out of the closet" into a homosexual ensued world.
As far as I am concerned every lifestyle, either heterosexual, homosexual, transgender, ect is to follow the same standards when it comes to the dating rules of eHarmony. I, as a heterosexual, can not date a potential partner of the same-sex, why should eHarmony therfore give special privlages to the homosexual community to do such a thing? The sexual desires of the homosexual community is not in the better interest of eHarmony and neither should it be as it is a dating service not a call service. Being a portal for healthy relationships is in the better interest of eHarmony and nothing more.
Suing online dating services that strictly serve the heterosexual community is the wave of the future for radical homosexuals. Sooner or later the state will have to punish anyone who "interferes" with the so-called "civil right" of same-sex marriages.
The punishment will be severe. Laws banning interference with "civil rights" will impose stiff fines and, after Goodridge, will authorize serious damage awards against anyone who on moral grounds refuses to recognize or honor the so-called "civil right" of same-sex marriages. If the people are denied a vote on marriage, then the persecution will begin in earnest.
Don't be fooled by the homosexual slogan: "We are the victims" because someday all of us are going to be victims to a lack of democracy at the State House.
Let the people, heterosexual or homosexual, decide the fate of marriage, not the black robes whose sole purpose is to apply democracy, not deny democracy.
Take Action
TAKE A MINUTE TO SUPPORT e-HARMONY.com: Write them via their Contact page or call their corporate offices in Pasadena, California, at 626-795-4814 (hit #9 when you get the machine). Their snail-mail address is e-Harmony.com, P.O. Box 60157, Pasadena, CA 91116. Also, call or write your U.S. Representative and Senators (202-224-3121; www.congress.org) and urge them to oppose H.R. 2015, the “Employment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA), the pro-homosexual/pro-trannsexual employment bill which will only embolden “gay” harassment lawsuits against tradition-minded companies.

10 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Scia, this is actually pretty funny. Although most of what you wrote is “out there” I have to say this: E-Harmony should have the right to refuse service to anyone. I don’t care if they don’t cater to blacks because they’re white supremacists or even if someone has freckles. It is their business to run as they please. As long as they aren’t receiving money from the state to subsidize that business they can deny anyone based on any reason they wish, regardless of race or sex or age or just because they don’t like you.

Ken Weaver

11:50 AM, June 07, 2007  
Blogger SCIA said...

Ken,

I don't think e-Harmony has a right to refuse service to anyone based on their race, sex, or age. I just don't think they need to re-invent water to please a subgroup of people, who in this case happens to be homosexuals.

The services that e-harmony advocates for are for everyone. Black/white/yellow/blue/purple male and females of ALL ages. The only thing is we ALL can not date anyone of the same-sex. We are ALL on the same page and set of rules when it comes to this standard. No one is being discriminated against in this case.

Why then is e-harmony being strong armed into changing the rules to please the sexual desires of a subgroup of people???

Crazy!!!

9:21 PM, June 11, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

“I don't think e-Harmony has a right to refuse service to anyone based on their race, sex, or age.”

Why? It’s their business, why can’t they cater to who they please? And apparently you are contradicting yourself. You stated that you don’t think e-harmony has a right to refuse service based on a person’s sex. This lady is female. They are denying her service because she is either female or the person she wishes to find is female. That’s denying service based on sex.

“The only thing is we ALL can not date anyone of the same-sex.”

Of course not. Most of us wouldn’t want to.

“We are ALL on the same page and set of rules when it comes to this standard.”

So if the U.S. decided to make a law making all religious beliefs and customs illegal I guess that wouldn’t be prejudice either. None of us could follow religion so it would be equal among us right?

Ken Weaver

12:08 PM, June 12, 2007  
Blogger SCIA said...

Ken,

You said:

"And apparently you are contradicting yourself. You stated that you don’t think e-harmony has a right to refuse service based on a person’s sex. This lady is female. They are denying her service because she is either female or the person she wishes to find is female. That’s denying service based on sex."

Thanks for clearing that up. My original statement is in line with what you just said:

"They are denying her service because she is (either) female..."

I do not believe that e-Harmony should deny service based on someone's SEX not their
SEXUAL DESIRES in which you explain by going a step further by saying:

"...or the person she wishes to find is female."

In a debate it is better to not manipulate a statements intentions by juxstaposing them with something that was not meant by the other party.

You said in closing:

"So if the U.S. decided to make a law making all religious beliefs and customs illegal I guess that wouldn’t be prejudice either."

This hypothetical situation is a weeeee bit different than what we are debating. Standards that are to be followed by all if they want to take part in e-Harmony's service and making all religious beliefs and customs illegal so we all are on the same page is not really making your point clear. Try with something that is not so extreme in the hypothetical department and ease up on the emotions.

6:57 PM, June 12, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

“I do not believe that e-Harmony should deny service based on someone's SEX not their
SEXUAL DESIRES”

But sexual desire is what e-harmony is all about! Without sexual desire would you have married the same person, let alone marry at all? Without sexual desire e-harmony has no business. But they are discriminating based on the sex of the parties involved. I am a man, who if went to e-harmony would be looking for a woman. She was looking for a woman as well. So they are denying her service because of her sex. There is no other way around it.

“Try with something that is not so extreme in the hypothetical department…”

Why? What’s the real difference in what you said “We are ALL on the same page and set of rules when it comes to this standard.” and my hypothesis of outlawing religion. If we all have to follow the same rules be it religion, marriage or e-harmony it must be ok with you.

Ken Weaver

11:47 AM, June 13, 2007  
Blogger SCIA said...

Ken,

You said:

"But sexual desire is what e-harmony is all about!"

That is your opinion. e-Harmony is a Christian based dating service, so therefor sexual desires are not part of the alleged "forication" dating service that you are claiming the company holds dear to.

Your hypothosis of outlawing religion and everyone being on the same page is very apples and oranges. Come back to the debate without silly comparisons.

7:51 PM, July 07, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

“Your hypothosis of outlawing religion and everyone being on the same page is very apples and oranges. Come back to the debate without silly comparisons.”

Don’t just say it’s silly Scia, tell me why it’s silly. Why does the comparison not work?

Ken Weaver

9:30 PM, July 07, 2007  
Blogger SCIA said...

Ken,

Outlawing religion and following a set of rules for ONE SINGLE company, e-Harmony in this case, is NOT a comparison. Your example is a hypothetical hyperbole at best without any comparison characteristics.

Try something like ALL dating services must outlaw discrimination based on sexual desires, which is comparable to ALL "religious" companies can not promote sexually oriented discrimination based on their beliefs and values.

Outlawing a culture's value to a company wanting to follow a set of rules is not a comparison.

I understand WHAT your trying to get at Ken, but you need to use apples and apples when making juxstapositions of ideas.

7:54 PM, July 09, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

“I understand WHAT your trying to get at Ken, but you need to use apples and apples when making juxstapositions of ideas.”

Scia, on many occasions you have stated that we all have to follow the same rules in marriage, but homosexuals want the right to marry a person of the same gender which no one is permitted so it’s all okay. I know I posted my question here in this board about E-harmony being able to deny service to her because she is the same gender as the person she wishes to be connected to. However I thought you would be able to get the correlation. Marriage equality is a national issue, just as the outrageous proposition that a vote on outlawing religion would be. Those are the two apples I am comparing.

Ken Weaver

10:34 PM, July 26, 2007  
Blogger SCIA said...

Ken,

I now understand what you were trying to say by clarifying your response.

Thanks.

Scia

8:54 PM, July 27, 2007  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger

Sign my Guestbook from Bravenet.com Get your Free Guestbook from Bravenet.com