When the Supreme Court released its opinion on same-sex marriage, the presidential twitter account stated “Retweet if you believe everyone should be able to marry the person they love. #LoveIsLove.” Someone should have reminded them of another president who famously said “It depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is” because that would change the kind of love that is being discussed. According to the past #LoveWins articles, we know that there are counterfeits that seem like love but are just lust, just the physical, just the emotional, forced, and/or free instead.
Like any counterfeit, if it does not match up to how the world works, then it must be a fake. Here is a representational example of that from a local independent paper where I live. This is relationship advice posted on July 24th of this year:
“I am in an open relationship. Why do people feel so free to judge what they don’t understand?
Judgment usually comes from someone who is trapped, looking out at what they might be missing. You do you. If you and your partner are happy and it works for you, that’s all that matters. You’re responsible for pursuing your fulfillment. Sometimes, one person can’t meet all those needs.” 
Issue 1. The advice self-contradicts. The author here is judging people who judge. Because of this, she falls into the same category she puts those who judge into. This makes her advice just as valuable as theirs so the advice of the others should be considered. Either that or the author’s advice does not matter just like the others, making it pointless and so the advice of the others should be considered.
Issue 2. The advice makes love just an emotion. We addressed this in part 2, the goal of any relationship is much more than mere happiness, because if it wasn’t, the relationship would be one of lust. Additionally, even if something ‘works’ it does not mean that it ought to be – this is what we discussed about the difference between ‘is’ and ‘ought’ in part 2 as well. For example, codependence in a relationship makes some people happy and ‘works’ for them but is a very unhealthy thing.
Issue 3. the goal that the advice gives can never be reached. It says that ‘one person can never meet the needs of fulfillment;’ of course not, but neither can 3, 10 or all of mankind put together. Only God can meet that need. Blasé Pascal wrote:
“What else does this craving, and this helplessness, proclaim but that there was once in man a true happiness, of which all that now remains is the empty print and trace? This he tries in vain to fill with everything around him, seeking in things that are not there the help he cannot find in those that are, though none can help, since this infinite abyss can be filled only with an infinite and unchangeable object; in other words by God himself.” 
Why is that? Because love requires the immaterial soul, as we discussed in part 3. So if the advice is followed, they cannot reach what is sought. That is just folly.
The whole point of this LoveWins series is this: if love is only defined subjectively then the meaning of it depends on the person, culture, or a court. That would logically mean that love could be just lust, just the physical, just the emotional, forced, and/or free. However, if that is the case we cannot say that ‘love is love’ or ‘love wins’ because the claim of those statements depend on the definition of love being unchanging and understood universally. So, just like the relationship advice above, the idea of subjective love must be counterfeit.
Now what is the true kind of love? Remember when we stated that love requires an immaterial soul in part 3? That is the key to understanding this kind of love. If there is an immaterial soul, that would have to come from somewhere. Material things can only create material things. Something immaterial must have created the immaterial. The first immaterial thing that created both the material and immaterial is God and is what “Paul” preached to us in part 1.
Because this love is grounded in the nature of God this makes love objective. Because of that there is a ‘telos’ or purpose for that love, one that both Christians and others should try to perfect. Examples of this perfecting is demonstrated in the autobiography ‘A Severe Mercy’ by Sheldon Vanauken and in the novel ‘Till We Have Faces’ by C.S. Lewis.
The perfect example of this love is in the life of the ‘God-man’ Jesus whose life on earth is chronicled in the books Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Because that love is real love; that love will ultimately win.
 Emphasis is mine and only done to match the points made against it. Also it has been edited slightly by truncation to aid in the precision of the points and to remove any vulgarities.
 Pensees 10.148