Now we have another lawsuit by Gay and Lesbian groups.  This time it is against a Christian psychologist who went into business bringing couples together and helping to form wholesome relationships.  The problem is these are heterosexual couples.  Neil Clark Warren, the founder of eHarmony.com was targeted by the Attorney General of New Jersey in which state eHarmony is based.  The Attorney General's office began looking at the company early in 2005 when a homosexual man filed a complaint with the state alleging that the company's policy of matching only opposite-sex couples violated New Jersey's anti-discrimination law, which covers "sexual orientation."

Now, instead of fighting this battle anymore eHarmony has decided to settle out of court thus saving what could be tens of millions of dollars in fines, legal fees and damages.  As part of the settlement eHarmony has decided to launch a new matchmaking website for homosexual singles called CompatiblePartners.net, which will be aimed solely at the homosexual community. Also as part of the settlement, eHarmony will advertise the website in homosexual media outlets, will allow the first 10,000 users to register free and will pay $50,000 to the attorney general's office and $5,000 to the man who filed the initial complaint. It also will post a statement on the new website saying its matchmaking strategy is based on research involving heterosexual couples and not homosexual couples.

eHarmony says it did not violate the law but felt the need to settle the case. It was represented by Theodore B. Olson, who served as solicitor general in President Bush's first term. 

Jim Campbell, an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund, a religious liberty legal organization, told Baptist Press "This situation just demonstrates once again those involved in the homosexual agenda will not tolerate anyone who doesn't embrace their views and promote their ideas," adding "Unfortunately, in this case, eHarmony surrendered to their demands. We feel they could have had a valid argument and could have taken a stand against this."

In a statement, Olson said eHarmony wanted to keep the matter out of the courts.

"Even though we believed that the complaint resulted from an unfair characterization of our business, we ultimately decided it was best to settle this case with the Attorney General since litigation outcomes can be unpredictable," Olson said. "eHarmony looks forward to moving beyond this legal dispute, which has been a burden for the company, and continuing to advance its business model of serving individuals by helping them find successful, long-term relationships."

The New Jersey attorney general's office in July 2007 had found "probable cause" that eHarmony had violated the state's anti-discrimination law.

What next???  From earlier posts I pointed to no less than nine civil suits filed by or in behalf of Gay Rights Groups or gay individuals against church affiliated people, church entities, as well as para-church organizations.  The only thing left "religionly" speaking is the church itself and the people who pastor or lead them.

Now, this just in from an interview I read in the New York Post: According to an official with Lambda Legal Defense - which is the legal arm of the gay movement - churches are soon to be the target of investigations and possible civil and criminal proceedings.  Arnold Mondella, of the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, says that there are several states in which "hate-speech" and "anti-defamation" laws including GLBT as a "protected class" can be used and tried against churches, para-church organizations and other groups restricting gay-rights and promoting hate.  If they can "prove" that preaching homosexuality as an abomination is a promotion of hatred or if a church denies gays membership in their congregations, or if a pastor or church as a whole denies the use of its building or property for gay weddings then these suits would be filed against, but would not be limited to, pastors, church trustees, and possibly the entire membership which votes on the exclusion of gays in any aspect of church life. 

Pastors would be fined and jailed for hate speech when they preach against homosexuality in any way.  Churches stand not only to lose tax-exemption but possible confiscation of property if it is believed that "klan-like rallies promoting hatred against this protected class," are being held.  Judicial rulings to allow the performance of same-sex marriages on church property could also be forthcoming.  Furthermore, pastors who are licensed to perform weddings will be required to perform same-sex marriages or face civil and criminal trials. 

Lambda legal has teamed up with the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD); the International Gay and Lesbians Rights Commission, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force and our old friends at the ACLU to study and review any and all possible avenues to begins its all out assault on the churches.

Once the Obama Courts (certain to be filled with a number of Ruth Bader Ginsburg type appointees) overturn DOMA and every state constitution and constitutional amendments recognizing marriage as between one man and one woman, then they will go full throddle after any religious group that denies them "due process."

I wonder if they would sue God if a 7.6 quake along the San Andreas Fault dropped San Francisco into the Pacific.  I'm sure some gay guys mother would try!

If the Republican Party wants to retake the White House in 2012 then it has to appeal to the common voter. Who is this "common voter"? He/she votes with his/her heart not with the brain. He/she votes on the charisma of candidates not the content. Youth and minorities vote based on color not the character. But the GOP can give the voters all sides if it would "bite the bullet."

Since the "average" voter now cast his/her ballot based on externals rather than issue and morals, here would be the RX for the GOP's defeat and the solution to lead to victory... Use the Democrats "outward" appeal but keep and continue to promote traditional-conservative principles. Keeping in mind that issues and content is of secondary importance at best to the "average" voter, the Republican Party would be basically changing its complexion.  How would they do that?  By first remembering it is appeal and youth rather than substance that 50 percent of the population looks for.  A majority of today's voters cast ballots based on feelings, on perception that they will get something out of the deal, and on eloquence.  To most voters issues that don't seem to affect them aren't issues.  They are merely details they "feel" they can do without.

The party of Lincoln and Reagan would do well to remember that very little thought goes into the voting booth.  Thinking requires a lot from today's population and that could be too taxing to one's simple life.  Higher taxes don't mean a thing to people who don't pay taxes.  Liberal-Radical judges don't mean a thing to people who are only looking out for themselves and not the country.  A Majority of people now vote, as it were, for themselves, not for the country as a whole.  So, dear leaders of the GOP, you need to learn from the current state of affairs in politics.  It's not about issues its about looks.

That being the case, the Republicans should elect African-American Michael Steele as its RNC Chairman. This would put a black into the national GOP leadership.  Don't spend too much time touting the former Maryland Lt. Governor as a fiscal and social conservative as this would cloud the brains of thesimple-minded average American.  His leadership experience could guide the party into developing grass roots voter appeal, especially the young and the middle class.  He could even get a glance from middle and upper-middle income African-American's - the one's who actually pay taxes instead of living off of tax payers through welfare, earned income credits, Wick programs, federal subsidies and food stamps.

Then, in the primaries, GOP voters should pull the lever for Bobby Jindle of Louisiana. He would only be 40 years old, would have a proven record of executive leadership and (this is very important) has parents (both) who were born outside of the U.S. In fact, Jindle would qualify for the Presidency by just two months as his mother was seven months pregnant with him when she arrived in this country.

Finally, Jindle should appoint Sarah Palin as his running mate. She will still be under 50, would have six rather than two years of executive leadership and would have spent the previous four years studying up on national and international issues.

What this plan does is LOCK OUT THE WHITE MALE. The GOP is constantly being branded as the party of the rich white male. So, since American voters are now more prone to vote based on looks rather than substance, then throw them a bone. Give them youth, leadership, looks and NO WHITE MALES!! How could the GOP be branded as a racist, sexist, old man's party ever again?

When elected, the new President along with Republicans in congress would then roll out their agenda for a conservative resurgence.  Having dodged such issues as Supreme Court appointments, lowering taxes and spending, fixing the economy, protecting our country from terrorist attacks and restoring traditional values through example rather than eliminating values through legislation and litigation, the GOP leadership just talks about it new look and feel and prove (at least outwardly) it truly means CHANGE.  It won't be "Change You Can Believe In" (to quote the Obama campaign), but "Change You Can Actually See."  Remember the old adage:  "Don't believe anything you hear and only half of what you see"?  Well, at least you will "see" the change!  That's better than just plan old talk!