Comments (numbered for convenience only)
1) A common argument is that the person is 'made new' and all the damage to the current/potential relationship caused by the non-virginity is thus nullified. Lets say someone kills someone else, on repenting and being 'made new' the damage caused to the dead person remains. Lets say someone tears out his/her own eyes, on repenting and being 'made new' the damage caused to his/her own body remains. This is all tangible evidence that being 'made new' cannot apply to all worldly entities.
Then the argument becomes it applies to the spirit only, i.e. the spirit is made new. And non-virginity is entirely a spiritual problem. But non-virgnity is largely an awareness problem: if the person had no recollection of being a non-virgin, and nobody else in the world had any recollection to proof of that person being a non-virgin either, then how is it knowable that this person is even non-virgin? The awareness of being non-virgin resides in memories, which I would think pertain more to the corporeal world. If so, the memories alone are sufficient to show that being 'made new' does not nullify lack of virginity.
2) A lot of people are treating forgiveness as forgetting or not factoring in past behavior. Okay, if the guy repents every time after he beats his wife, the wife should forgive and forget each time and not hold his past against him. Similarly, if someone cheats on you in a relationship, you are obligated through forgiveness to act like it never happened and continue the relationship.
Another problem with this approach is that it can create holes in a person's history. If someone has any history he/she doesn't like anymore, should it be treated as if it never happened and you suppose that the history has no bearing on the person's current being?
3) Yet another argument is that it isn't very Christ like to refuse to date someone because he/she isn't virgin. Christ seeks a relationship with everyone, but you can only have one romantic relationship (in the least, one at a time). Thus analogies to Christ's relationship with someone and your relationship with your spouse fail in the sense that the maritial relationship is exclusive and consequently involves discretion. You're going to be rejecting a lot of people with regards to a martial relationship whom Christ would not reject, thus how is that that your criteria for picking a person is expected to be Christ-approved? Whatever criteria applied will be of a nature that from a Christian perspective the criteria is superifical and self-serving.
4) Romantic relationships shouldn't be treated as charities. Rejecting someone unappealing to you is in many ways nicer to the person than accepting someone with very unattractive characteristics. On being rejected, the person may find someone else who finds him/her less disagreeable in a romantic sense and consequently may experience more peace/intimacy in that relationship.
