eHarmony founder Neil Clark Warren (www.neilclarkwarren.com)
eHarmony’s gay ads
"So, this is 'progress?'" asked Michelle Malkin in MichelleMalkin.com. To settle a discrimination lawsuit filed by a gay man, the Christian-targeted online dating service eHarmony has been forced to open a matchmaking service for same-sex couples. Maybe straight men and women should start suing gay sites—"coerced tolerance" cuts both ways.
Don't expect gay men and lesbians to rush to use eHarmony's new service, said the blog Queerty. The owner of eHarmony, Neil Clark Warren, has already made his feelings clear by coming up with "all sorts of fun excuses to exclude gay singles"—including the one where he says there's no point trying to help people form lifelong relationships if it's illegal for them to marry. Nobody "wants to get hitched by a homophobic matchmaker."
That's why eHarmony's policies seem self-defeating, said Liz Gunnison in Portfolio.com. "Politics aside, it's surprising from a business perspective that eHarmony has not voluntarily opened its matchmaking service up to the gay community. By failing to do so, it is shutting out a big source of revenue potential."
Still, you'd think that as a private business eHarmony would be free to make that choice, said James Joyner in the blog Outside the Beltway. "Of course, the creation of a separate site for gays—even if it's absolutely identical—will almost certainly lead to more suits in the future."
Comment on this article
Recent comments | 33 total
Since when is a private, not public/government organization mandated to be focused on multiple areas? Does that mean that Starbucks should now broaden their "vision" to include milk shakes, alcohol, sodas? A basic of life is that if you don't like a company or what it stands for go someplace else. The world doesn't, and shouldn't revolve around one person or group. I think it was wrong of e-Harmony to change it's focus and even more disgusting the court forced them.
Sounds like nobody explicitly forced them to do this. They probably would have won the lawsuit. But I think it became more of a hassle than it was worth, so they settled. And I think they finally saw it as a new money making venture. So why not?
And so it continues....eHarmony is a Christian-targeted online dating service; therefore, a goal of destruction or forced entry by the gay community. If they cannot be accepted because of Christian values and beliefs, they will sue to destroy what they cannot have. The fact that it is a private organization is irrelevant. Sometimes, an organization has higher values than just making money from customers they do not want to serve. It's a matter of give me what I want or I'll destroy what you have.
The next thing you know, the web site will be required to match up gays with straights because -- dum-dee-dum-dum -- "separate but equal is never equal!!!" So the "hottie" female will just be forced to date a gay male, and likewise for the macho male and the gay female. Ah, and choice violates equality, right? In fact, making any distinction about anything violates someone's rights -- or at least they might have "standing" to claim it violates their rights. The only thing that is really clear is that the most secure jobs in our fiscally floundering nation are those in the legal field. Cops and firefighters might get laid off; lawyers will always have work in our psychotically litigious society.
Of course the next step will be forced dating of straights with gays. Don't gays always assert that everyone is really gay but just don't admit it?
digg del.icio.us stumbleUpon newsvine reddit furl