Archive for the 'Singles' Category

eHarmony Will Provide Same-Sex Matches

Published
by
Ray Fowler
on November 26, 2008
in Homosexuality and Singles
. 5 Comments

Hello and welcome to RayFowler.org. If you are new here, be sure to subscribe by email or feed reader so that you don't miss any future posts. You can also check out the Top Posts page to get a feel for the site. Thanks for visiting!

The online dating service eHarmony will provide same-sex matches as part of a settlement from a lawsuit complaining that the company discriminated against same-sex singles.

The settlement is the result of a complaint New Jersey resident Eric McKinley filed against the online matchmaker in 2005. McKinley, 46, said he was shocked when he tried to sign up for the dating site but couldn’t get past the first screen because there was no option for men seeking men …

Neither the company nor its founder, Neil Clark Warren, acknowledged any liability. Under the settlement, eHarmony will pay New Jersey state division $50,000 to cover administrative costs and will pay McKinley $5,000 … Pasadena, Calif.-based eHarmony said it plans to launch its new service, called Compatible Partners, on March 31 …

Theodore B. Olson, an attorney for eHarmony, said that even though the company believed McKinley’s complaint was “an unfair characterization of our business,” it chose to settle because of the unpredictable nature of litigation.

I don’t see why this is discrimination. If a person walks into McDonald’s, orders a hamburger and is denied service because he is gay, that is discrimination. But if the same person is turned away because he orders steak, that is not discrimination. It is simply not on the menu. The same conditions apply to every person who walks through the door.

eHarmony is a private company offering a specific service: the matching of compatible men and women for relationships based on years of research on male/female relationships. As long as they provide this service to all men and women equally, it is not discrimination. Mr. McKinley was not turned down because he was gay. He was turned down because he asked for a service that eHarmony did not provide. eHarmony also does not provide compatible matches for nannies, nurses and college roommates. Should their company be sued for that?

I don’t understand why a private company like eHarmony which provides a specific service of matching compatible men and women should be required to expand their service to match same-sex couples. Surely there are other online dating companies that provide this service. And of course it works the other way. A dating company that caters to same-sex couples should not be forced to expand their services to include male/female matches. I think this whole case sets a dangerous precedent.

So, what do you think of all this? Is this a case of discrimination? Should eHarmony be required to provide same-sex matches?

Related post: Statistics on Living Together Before Marriage
____________________________________________________________

Did you find this post helpful? Click to subscribe by email or feed reader so that you don’t miss any future posts.

Living Together Before Marriage Series

Published
by
Ray Fowler
on July 24, 2008
in Christian Living, Marriage, Sexuality and Singles
. 3 Comments

Here are links to all four posts in the Living Together Before Marriage series:

New Temptation for Senior Adults

Published
by
Ray Fowler
on September 25, 2007
in Seniors, Sexuality and Singles
. 0 Comments

I found this Lifeway article interesting on the new temptation for senior adults to live together outside of marriage.

In 2007, the “Boomer Generation” officially retires. This is the year that people who were born in the 1950’s are eligible to retire from work. The truth of the matter is that the population of America is growing older and this is changing the landscape of our communities and our churches.

One disturbing trend is the number of “senior adults” who are living together and in turn, being sexually active. Recent reports tell us that “the majority of HIV carriers will be over the age of 50 by 2015, and that even now about 15 percent of new infections occurs in this age group.” (Sex Ed for Seniors; US News and World Report; August 13/August 20, 2007)

Many pastors have also reported that the most disturbing trend in their aging church is the number of couples who are living together. In today’s society we might expect that this number is increasing, but what is interesting is that the majority of these couples are over the age of 55. Many senior couples are living together for financial reasons. Although they want the benefit of companionship, whether made single by death or divorce, many decide that they simply do not want to get remarried.

As a pastor I can testify that this is increasingly becoming a problem. Whereas “living together” used to be a temptation more directed at the young and single, it is becoming just as big a temptation for the older and single.

The Lifeway article recommends that churches take the following four steps in addressing this situation:

  1. Preach and teach God’s design for loving relationships.
  2. Develop a small accountability group for seniors.
  3. Help seniors find alternative avenues.
  4. Confront in love and support unconditionally.

HT: MMI

The Pros and Cons of Online Dating Services

Published
by
Ray Fowler
on May 18, 2007
in Singles
. 0 Comments

Covenant Life Church recently put together a paper on the subject of online dating for the single men and women in their church. I like the paper’s opening line: “Don’t you wish it was as easy for you as it was for Adam and Eve?”

The paper identifies some of the benefits of online dating sites:

  • Interaction with a much larger group of singles
  • Can evaluate a potential date before meeting face-to-face
  • Many participants are interested in a serious relationship
  • Positive examples of couples who met and got married,

as well as some concerns to consider:

  • Expensive - from $30-$50/month
  • Time-consuming - can distract from other priorities
  • False hope - very few relationships actually end in marriage
  • Safety issues - potential predators, liars, con-men/women
  • Potential compromise - in the areas of values, standards or beliefs
  • Self-focus - can reinforce self-focused view of relationships
  • Loss of protection from church community - You lose the benefit of dating someone known by others you trust.

What are your thoughts on online dating? Have you or people you know had positive or negative experiences with online dating sites? What did people do before the internet?

HT: Between Two Worlds

Married or Single For Better or For Worse

Published
by
Ray Fowler
on May 10, 2007
in Marriage, Quotes and Singles
. 2 Comments

Here is an interesting take on marriage and singleness from John Piper:

I don’t know which holds out more joys and more hardships. There is no way to know ahead of time, it seems to me. We Christians don’t make our choices that way anyway. This would be clear if all singles not only heard the wedding vows, “For better or for worse,” but also heard the same words written over singleness: “For better or for worse.” Marriage may prove to be gloriously happy, or painfully disappointing. Singleness may prove to be gloriously satisfying or painfully disappointing. Only God knows which it will be for you.

I remember a “Mad About You” TV episode where the wife, Jaime, is particularly frustrated with her husband, Paul. She calls up her friend on the phone and asks her: “Fran, remind me again why I hate to be single.”

I would say marriage and singleness both present a combination of joys and sorrows in life. (See the article Riding the Rails of Life in Marriage earlier in this blog.) We often think of the marriage vows in terms of “for better or for worse.” I like Piper’s extension of that to serving God in the state of singleness as well.