eHarmony forced to offer same-sex dating services; Update: And now, a class-action lawsuit
Scroll down for updates…
So, this is “progress?” eHarmony, a Christian-targeted dating website, gets sued by a gay man demanding that the business match him up with a same-sex partner. The New Jersey Attorney General intervenes on behalf of the gay plaintiff and forces eHarmony to change its entire business model. To be clear: The company never refused to do business with anyone. Their great “sin” was not providing a specialized service that litigious gay people demanded they provide. This case is akin to a meat-eater suing a vegetarian restaurant for not offering him a ribeye or a female patient suing a vasectomy doctor for not providing her hysterectomy services. Sadly, eHarmony has settled . I wish they hadn’t, but I understand the decision given the chilling antics of the anti-Prop. 8 mob. The company agreed not only to offer same-sex dating services on a new site, but also to offer six-month subscriptions for free to 10,000 gay users. Behold the submission:
Coming soon to EHarmony — Adam and Steve.
The Pasadena-based dating website, heavily promoted by Christian evangelical leaders when it was founded, has agreed in a civil rights settlement to give up its heterosexuals-only policy and offer same-sex matches.
EHarmony was started by psychologist Neil Clark Warren, who is known for his mild-mannered television and radio advertisements. It must not only implement the new policy by March 31 but also give the first 10,000 same-sex registrants a free six-month subscription.
“That was one of the things I asked for,” said Eric McKinley, 46, who complained to New Jersey’s Division on Civil Rights after being turned down for a subscription in 2005.
The company said that Warren was not giving interviews on the settlement. But attorney Theodore Olson, who issued a statement on the company’s behalf, made clear that it did not agree to offer gay matches willingly. “Even though we believed that the complaint resulted from an unfair characterization of our business,” Olson said, “we ultimately decided it was best to settle this case with the attorney general since litigation outcomes can be unpredictable.”
The settlement, which did not find that EHarmony broke any laws, calls for the company to either offer the gay matches on its current venue or create a new site for them. EHarmony has opted to create a site called Compatiblepartners.net.
Warren had said in past interviews that he didn’t want to feature same-sex services on EHarmony — which matches people based on long questionnaires concerning personality traits, relationship history and interests — because he felt he didn’t know enough about gay relationships.
eHarmony had been previously sued by a lesbian looking to force the company to match her up with another woman and by a married man who sought to force the company to hook him up in an adulterous relationship.
Perhaps heterosexual men and women should start filing lawsuits against gay dating websites and undermine their business. Coerced tolerance and diversity-by-fiat cut both ways.
***
GayPatriot West gives eHarmony’s capitulation thumbs down.
Update 4pm Eastern 11/20. Geez. Now, a California judge has approved a class-action lawsuit by gays against eHarmony. When it rains, it pours:
(onlinedatingmagazine.com – November 20, 2008) A California Superior Court judge has certified a class action lawsuit against eHarmony.com for discrimination against gays and lesbians in California. The news comes one day after eHarmony settled a case in the State of New Jersey where a gay man accused the company of discrimination. In that settlement, eHarmony agreed to open up a service that matches gays and lesbians.
That announcement had no affect in the California case, which is moving forward.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- GayPatriot » eHarmony Forced to Provide Same-sex Dating Services
- Leaning Straight Up
- California prop 8 - Page 2 - ChristiansOnline.CC - A Christian Forum
- Jesus is Lord, A Worshipping Christian’s Blog » Blog Archive » eHarmony Forced to Offer Same-Sex Dating Services
- Prop 8 Goes to Court; Voting, why bother? « Riggword Weblog
- eHarmony Goes Gay
- Radio Vice Online » Tolerant left heads to court - demands private business change
- Gay-rights activists ask court to declare the California constitution unconstitutional « Right Minded Online
- eHarmony Forced To Couple Gays « Blog Entry « Dr. Melissa Clouthier
- Right Wing News
- So Wrong I Don’t Know Where to Start » Freedom Folks
- This ain’t Hell, but you can see it from here » Blog Archive » eHarmony forced to sell toasters
- Tolerant left heads to court - demands private business change | Conservative247
- eHarmony Settles Lawsuit and Now Forced to Cater to Same Sex Couples « Trust, But Verify
- fiery dog » Hypocrisy of Homosexuals
- Webloggin » California: Redefining Democracy?
- Businesses and Civil Rights « lookingforlissa
- “The Insane Rage of the Same-Sex Marriage Mob” « Fairfax Family Forum
- Jules Crittenden » Do As We Gay
- same-sex dating services Forced At eHarmony | Citizen-Right
- BizzyBlog » Couldn’t Help But Comment ….. (112008, Morning)
- EHarmony.com bows to al-Gayda « Jane Q. Republican
- But what if he still doesn’t like me? : Brigitte Pellerin Online
- ProWomanProLife » But what if he still doesn’t like me?
- Bent Notes » Blog Archive » A perfect case study in wrong
- The Obligatory E-Harmony Blog Posting…. | Political Byline
- eHarmony, etc. | BitsBlog
- eHarmony forced to offer same-sex dating services | Sex+Metropolis
- Should eHarmony be forced to offer same-sex dating services? » A Couple Things » A couple things about politics, sports, travel, and other stuff.
- The canary isn’t dead, but he’s singing show tunes « Vox Clamantis in Deserto
- The Colossus of Rhodey
- dustbury.com » The return of “separate but equal”
- Arts & Ammo » eDisHarmony
- Eharmony « Muse Free
- eHarmony forced to offer homosexual dating options | conservativeintelligencer.com
- eHarmony BOGU’ed (Bends over, greases up) « Bear off his nut
- About Contact Archives RSS Columns Photos * About * Contact * Archives * RSS * Columns * Photos Michelle Malkin eHarmony forced to offer same-sex dating services; Update: And now, a class-action lawsuit « Conservative Thoughts and Profundity
- Militant Heterosexuals Sue Gay.com to Force it to Offer Content For Straights (NOT) « BUUUUURRRRNING HOT
- Enough Already | America Needs Me
- Enough Already | America Needs Me
- links for 2008-11-21 | FullosseousFlap's Dental Blog
- Rights, Shmights « The Pugnacious Irishman
- The Mud Pit » Targeting eHarmony
- Spiritual Warfare is Real, but Don’t Worry…Be Happy « I Took The Red Pill (and escaped the Matrix)
- Finding a Roommate Online: It’s illegal to ask sexual orientation, race, or religion to choose a roommate. (Updated 11/21/08) | Ft. Hard Knox
- The Angry Gay Mobs Are Domestic Terrorists | THE TYGRRRR EXPRESS
- Justice and Freedom? « Doc Cochran’s Weblog
- Michelle Malkin » eHarmony and the tolerance mau-mau-ers
- al-GAYda - eHarmony Settles
- That’s Odd?… Gays Sue eHarmony- Ignore Muslim Singles « Conservative Thoughts and Profundity
- Dating service gets hammered by homosexual activist « Seeing Red AZ
- Schaschlik « abseits vom mainstream - heplev
- It’s Official. We’ve Lost Our Minds | Sick Up And Fed
- eHarmony Forced to List Gays | All American Blogger
- David’s Blog of Common Sense » eHarmony Forced to Set Up Gay and Lesbian Couples
- Obama’s Gun Grabbing Attorney General
- F3 Coalition - [Faith. Family. Freedom.] » Blog Archive » Podcast: Obama’s Gun Grabbing Attorney General
- Zitate! « abseits vom mainstream - heplev
- The eHarmony lawsuits : barethoughts.com
- The Rainbow Mafia « The Underground Conservative
- Plumb Bob Blog » eHarmony Wimps and Caves
- Gay rights protesters disrupt church services - Page 5
- Stones Cry Out - If they keep silent… » Post-Vacation Catch-up Links
- eHarmony forced to offer same-sex dating services « Top Daily Digest Reading
- Gays of Intolerance | Times & Seasons
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Proposition 8
Mudville Gazette
» The five-year plan
Legal Insurrection
» Is "Finish the Job" the New "Peace With Honor"?Sister Toldjah
» WaPo and NYT to Obama: We love ya, you stylish deep thinkerPundit & Pundette
» Hiding the decline: Deniers made them do itPower Line
» More From the East Anglia ArchivesFounding Bloggers
» Did The New York Times Just Tell Glenn Reynolds To “STFU”?Doug Ross @ Journal
» 'Hope is fading fast' --- the T-Shirt
Like incest, humans have a natural abhorence to homosexuality. It’s part of the human makeup. Just because a vocal crowd of deviants scream that its natural doesn’t make it so.
Many of their supporters who are going along with the crowd probably wouldn’t participate in the abominable act if pressed. Maybe the deviants should require their supporters to put their money where their mouth is, so to speak. Prove they really sympathize. I have a feeling the crowd would thin out very quickly.
The reality Digshot, is that most people are polite and won’t tell you to your face how disgusting the idea of same sex coupling is.
NOW GO OFF AND CRY IN YOUR CORNER LITTLE BOY.
What good would that do?
I imagine the gay dating services are probably on eHarmony’s side on this one, not only because they wouldn’t want to be forced to offer straight dating services, but more importantly, they probably don’t want to have to compete with eHarmony.
Otherwise it sounds like you consider the gay community some sort of monolithic entity and the actions of one can be punished by an action against another.
Know who else thinks homosexuality is a sickness that can be cured?
SCIENTOLOGY.
Funny, though, I don’t see nearly as much vitriol toward the local L. Ron Hubbard temple as I do toward others.
Sure as hell seems that way, chapoutier.
Tolerance – as eaglehaslanded shows – is not enough. Approval will be gained, by force, if necessary.
My vote for good image of the day award.
Hess was gay. Rohm was gay..and he wasn’t persecuted because he was gay..he was killed when he became a threat to Hitler.
Hitler was most likely a male prostitute in vienna.
your ‘history’ is the PC BS version.
you should try digging a little deeper.
from the previous link..
Fear is a destroyer of business acumen. e-Harmony could have nailed these turds by proving in court that their *intent* was non-discriminatory.
What is next? All films involving heterosexual relationships in their content MUST include something homosexual?
If plaintiffs suing about race discrimination in the US must prove intent, then why is it that Homosexuals suing over discrimination based on sexual preference (note it is called sexual preference and not *necessity*- hmmmm) do not have to prove intent?
Easily fought. Easily won. If yer not a coward.
The homosexual crowd can be easily be shrunk to size given their small numbers. Their allies make them a significant lobby (you know the heterosexuals who feel guilty that they are in the majority on the planet and like being part of a cause while wearing their “not me” buttons).
Lack of imagination leads to brain death and other needless maladies.
Bear1909 out.
“…and hell followed with him.”
PS: Why won’t the Congress pass a law of the land about homosexual marriage? And if the civil rights laws provide a context and a spirit of lawfulness for homosexual marriage- why isnt such a law enforced?
That sounds suspiciously like freedom of association and capitalism. God forbid.
Does manhunt.com allow straight women to register (I’m at work, so I can’t access it right now)? I’m feeling class action lawsuit about my civil rights.
/heh.
and of course Goering was gay.
Hess was gay. Rohm was gay.
Hess was sick. Rohm was sick.
The Nazi homosexuals had enough sense to stay in the closet and not publicly advertise their sexual escapades. Too bad the homosexuals didn’t stay in the closest in this country.
Elie Wiesel, sent to the Buna factory camp in the Auschwitz complex, for example, acknowledges this in his book Night:
The head of our tent was a German. An assassin’s face, fleshy lips, hands like wolf’s paws. He was so fat he could hardly move. Like the leader of the camp he loved children…(Actually this was not a disinterested affection: there was a considerable traffic in young children among homosexuals here, I learned later) (Wiesel:59).
In Treblinka, the narrative account of the Treblinka uprising, Steiner records the story of another Nazi administrator, taken from interviews with survivors:
Max Bielas had a harem of little Jewish boys. He liked them young, no older than seventeen. He had a kind of parody of the shepherds of Arcadia, their role was to take care of the camp flock of geese. They were dressed like little princes…Bielas had a little barracks built for them that looked like a doll’s house…Bielas sought in Treblinka only the satisfaction of his homosexual instincts (Steiner:117f).
Yes, you surely know more than people at the Holocaust Museum, all the scholars, etc.
Let me guess…9/11 was an inside job, too? The world is really flat? We never landed on the moon? Obama is a secret Muslim terrorist? And gays want to indoctrinate your children?
Geeze. Get some help.
speaking of help, you need to get rid of the hatred of anyone who disagrees with your gay fascism.
you cannot dispute what I say. the homosexuals that Hitler killed, got in the way, like rohm.
take your tin-foil off and get back on your meds.
and that is absolutely TRUE…as you admitted earlier…moron.
Need I quote you from above? You PROMISED to do this.
What I’m saying is, if a site that caters only to matching heterosexual couples is forced to start catering to gays who want to be matched with someone of the same sex, why should other dating services catering only to any singular group (gays, Jews, Catholics, blacks, Latinos, liberals, conservatives, evangelicals, etc.) be let off the hook then?
This goes to something fundamental–the government forcing a business to run the way it sees fit. Should clothing lines be forced to manufacture plus sizes? Should KFC be forced to carry vegan alternatives to chicken? This isn’t a lunch counter argument. We don’t have paying customers who are not getting served at all based on an arbitrary distinction. eHarmony chose a niche just like Taco Bell chose a niche. People are free not to patronize those businesses if they don’t need or want to find a date with someone of the opposite sex or a chalupa.
#290:”And gays want to indoctrinate your children?”
Is that what they call it now?
The truth is, one could be arrested for just about any reason, or none at all towards the end of the Third Reich. You could be hanged for appearing to be a deserter. It is all beside the point.
You could be shot for being a constitutionalist and advocating a weaker central government.
They arrested burglars. Doesn’t follow that we then should allow burglary.
I told you along time ago for you to do just that. You obviously have ignored my advise.
I don’t normally like to feed the trolls but there are some things here worth responding to.
Liberal / progressive article of faith #1: no one can reasonably disagree with any liberal position. In order to disagree you must be motivated by hatred or ignorance. It is this precise mentality that makes it impossible to have an honest debate with them.
That’s nonsense, of course. Everyone has something that, but for the law, they wouldn’t willingly tolerate. I have a strong hunch that if the law allowed it this poster would assault Christians. He is unable to realize this because anything that he doesn’t want to tolerate, by definition, shouldn’t be tolerated by anyone (See Article of Faith #1).
Be careful what you wish for. If the conservatives in this country ever decided to vent their outrage in the manner of their Progressive counterparts I promise you that you will come out on the wrong end of it.
In this assertion you show an astounding ignorance of history. Well, not really astounding, you are a Progressive after all. Less than five years ago the Democrats were where the Republicans are now. They were out of power, utterly defeated and some people thought they would go the way of the Whigs. Five short years. Your belief that Obama’s election represents an end game or final victory is childishly naive. It’d be cute, if only you weren’t so malignant.
Actually it defies human nature.
I’ll take a moment to savor the irony that this is a core Christian value you’re touting the virtues of. Having done that I’ll suggest you try practicing a little of what you preach. Hatred and contempt drip from your every word.
So, can a bunch of us move into your house? If not, why not? You just said we should all be able to live where we want. “But that’s my house”, you’re no doubt thinking. Good answer. Now, take whatever brainpower resides in that little pinhead of yours and expand the idea of private property to the national level. It’s called “soverignty”, and every nation in history has exercised it.
American culture, English language and Judeo-Christian religions exempted, of course.
You would take from people that produce and give it to people who don’t. You would use force, in the form of government, to do this. That isn’t justice, it’s slavery.
Capitalism has done more tangible good for more people than any government, philosophy or religion in history.
Here we are back to article of faith #1.
Way to indulge your inner Stalin there, buddy.
Actually, you’ve never been right. Welfare, immigration, gun control, foreign policy, taxes… Progressive policies have been ineffectual at best and most have actually done demonstrable harm.
Your post is so over-the-top I actually suspect it’s a parody. Assuming it isn’t though I’d like to point out that it’s a perfect encapsulation of Liberal thought: viscious, self-righteous, fueled by emotion and hostile to facts & logic.
It’s going to be a long four years.
It could force a business to defend itself on the same grounds as eHarmony should have defended itself.
By the way. I am suing General Motors, Ford and Chrysler because they don’t offer specialized bicycles and wheelchairs as transportation devices.
They are in fact in the business of selling transportation vehicles to the public and are therefore required not to discriminate against those with disabilities preventing them from operating a motor vehicle like a car or truck.
I demand that they build such items and I demand that the first 10,000 people needing one, get one for free, along with 6 months worth of free maintenance.
Those supporting this eHarmony suit must agree with the premise of a suit such as this.
James Felix.
Good points. Well said.
eaglehaslanded go eat you rotting meat and leave those of us alone who would prefer a gourmet meal.
Problem with this country is, it’s cornering a large portion of its population and hasn’t left anywhere for us to go. We won’t all capitulate. If they keep pushing, the lids gonna blow off.
Garathorn, what you describe will happen quicker than you think….in fact, it is happening now…forces are mobilizing….the revolution will happen sooner rather than later….let the pigeons loose…
Excellent!
Any questions?
Debate with the brain-dead is pointless.
Already that way on TV shows, can’t swing a dead cat without hitting a program w/o some fairy prancing around in it.
Wonder why the image they portray on TV is that they’re all sweet and peachy, how bout some truth in programming and not just the rose colored glasses version. Oh wait, that wouldn’t be acceptable.
Ok. Let me see if I have this right…You ultimately disagree with what the lawsuit is meant to bring about and you want to bring it against an entity that probably agrees with your side but is being selected solely on the basis that it is run for the benefit of gays?
Wow. That’s just….dumb.
Too much namecalling and invoking of Hitler here! Be of good cheer. See my #219 and consider that, when Bert Parks returns from the beyond to sing “There he is, Miss America,” we’ll know at least some gays will still not be happy.
I saw this comment on the LA Times website and thought it was a great idea. It’s time to teach them that what’s good for the goose is good for the gander, eh??
I had the impression that this thread had long since jumped the shark with all the Nazi talk, but it was worth wading through to get to your post. Well said.
In my opinion, I believe there are some liberal posters here that do not follow the article of faith #1 you describe, but they seem to be in the minority.
I shuddered when reading the “we’ll take over teaching your kids the correct way” tirade. I guess I shouldn’t be so surprised to see references to Nazi Germany after that, but it just seemed so off kilter to discussing government intervention in a business where servicing heterosexual couples is discriminatory but focusing on homosexual only couples is not.
Children should be taught to the tolerant and respectful of homosexuals. They cannot be taught to be homosexuals anymore than they can be tough to have blond hair or be six feet tall.
They should be taught to love everyone. Black, White, Asian, Muslim, gay, straight, old, young, atheists, religious people. They should not be taught that Americans are superior, but that all peoples are equal. They should be taught to embrace diversity and fight inequality wherever they see it.
It is a choice.Many homosexuals were found to have been molested as children plus the experimentation factor with it by kids that had little or no moral teachings by their parents.
I believe it was Paul that said,”We fight not against flesh and blood,but against powers and principalities…spiritual wickedness in high places”.
What we’re up against in this country is no different than the Sodomites of old….demonic spirits of perversion and discord acting through fleshly hosts tearing at the very fabric of society.
Remember…even Jesus Christ became angry and ran the defilers of the temple out!!!!(HINT HINT)
E-Harmony could match gay men to gay women and vice versa, therein lies the loophole. Match them with the most incompatable pairings possible. There is no law against running a poorly run company. Eventualy they will take the hint and look elsewhere.
Agreed. Would that we could teach homosexuals to be tolerant and respectful of others.
Great post James Felix. That eagle has to be the most over the top bitter, angry troll I’ve ever seen. I would say that they were female, but for the screen name which I assume refers to the first moon landing…..not that a woman couldn’t use that but not as likely. Also kind of ironic, given the hatred by eagle of everything America has stood for in the past. I guess that’s the one thing we did right although, just think if we had put that money into more social programs!
This is a relatively new phenomenon. Gays are suddenly intolerant of others. When did this occur?
No it isn’t. You know that it isn’t.
Such cases could generate valuable case law.
I didn’t consider that. I was thinking of the book title (and film) about a Nazi plot to assasinate Churchill.
Time to pull your heads out of your butt’s(no pun intended)you idiots, just keep pushing and see where it gets you…you think things were bad before you found the closet door knob, just hang on.
Are some commenters here actually trying to argue that sexual activity of any type is NOT a choice?
I assume that were not discussing rape. Right?
eaglehaslanded You are really one sick heifer.
It’s appears it’s time to thin the herd.
When have gays ever been tolerant of anyone opinion other than their own??
Let me explain it, Heather:
To a looney, leftwing liberal, 2+2= 6 3/4. If you try to say it’s 4, then you a racist, facist, nazi, homophobic bigot.
Now do you get it?
Or a sheep.
Um…
So don’t even go there. YOU – in your own hateful words – said you fully support forced indoctrination of anyone you deem “politically incorrect”, and then turned around and threatened our children and our rights as parents.
The mask has slipped off the face of liberalism. It’s no more about freedom than I am the next Pope. YOU prove, single-handedly – what we’ve been saying all along:
You, and pretty much all of the liberal movement, want to force us to accept your worldview while destroying our First Amendment rights, our churches, and our families in the process.
You can’t put that horse back into the barn. I – for one – put your comments on my blog, and hope others here do the same. You’ve made this an open declaration to cultural warfare – we’re warning our allies.
Yes, that is their thesis. Therefore all the hullaballoo about sodomy and abortion, sex ed in k-12, and so on. The pervert lobby is very strong with the left.
When have you heard otherwise? They are intolent of positions that negatively effect them, as is any other group.
What specific positions do you feel that they are intolerent of?
It is dumb. You don’t generate cases just to generate case law. You ever heard of the concept of an actual case or controversy requirement? You are punishing an entity that probably agrees with you and had nothing to do with the original spat. You are doing this solely because you are angry at “the gays” for the original lawsuit and this site serves “the gays” and thus is a member of “the gays”.
How about: Children should be taught to be tolerant and respectful to all people. Focusing on teaching tolerance of a specific class is a bit pointless, as it seems now to be more of a theme of forcing celebration of that class rather than tolerate. Let’s not kid ourselves by pretending it’s only about “tolerance”.
You’re very certain of something that the scientific community is still not certain.
This flies in the face of two philosophies that I would expect would normally be accepted by folks preaching tolerance:
- Bi-curious
- People love who they love regardless of sex (bi-sexuality)
And if they don’t? What is the corrective action? Shouldn’t they be taught to treat people with civility and not be forced to a conception that they must have an emotion to people that is not natural to them?
We teach this. Read Thomas Jefferson.
Being patriotic is not the same thing as believing that Americans are superior.
You keep contradicting yourself. And not just a little, I mean in big, fundamental ways.
In your long tirade earlier you had a lot to say about what sort of people need to be fought, exterminated, have their ideas stamped out etc. If you believe that then obviously you believe that some ideas and some points of view are better than others. Sometimes they are so much better that asserting them justifies violence.
How, then, can you suggest that America shares a moral plane with Saudi Arabia? Or Cuba?
In America gays stage violent, public protests because they are denied the use of the word “marriage”. In Iran they are executed for the crime of existing.
America provides more freedom and a better life for millions. That’s not my opinion; it’s an objective, quantifiable fact. America is an exceptional place, and we damned well should teach our childen that.
If we don’t they’ll end up, well… they’ll end up like you.
Oh, that’s rich. This, from the guy who wants to force us to accept his worldview.
Clearly, your definition of “diversity” (like most of the left) excludes any and all peoples who disagree with you, especially those who do so on religious grounds.
You’re too thick to realize it, but fighting inequality is exactly what we’re doing here.
My child will hate no one. I hate no one.
But he will know what behavior is and isn’t beneficial to society and, more importantly, what behavior is and isn’t pleasing to God. Because I know what is and isn’t, and will pass it along to him as his parent.
I suggest you take a moment to read a few of the threads on the right side of this page and review the actions of some of your tolerant gay people.
No, they should not! They need to learn that gays are sick perverted vermin.
Salt, is your oposition to homosexuality due to the belief that it is a choice?
Children should be taught right from wrong and tolerate what is right and be intolerant of what is wrong, i.e. homosexuality.
Englishqueen, I think I’m in LOVE! Do you think a Catholic and a Southern Baptist are a good match?
If you say “no”, I’ll sue you for discrimination!
Actually, Madchef, we should be like our Lord and Savior, Jesus. And love the sinner, but hate the sin.
What specific positions do you feel that they’re intolerant of, not what actions you see as indictive of their intolerance.
Stop your silliness, chapoutier. Some might find it extremely valuable to have a NJ court decide that a website operator has no obligation to provide ancillary services for a group of differing sexual orientation.
You know that in NJ a heterosexual suit against an exclusively gay dating website is much more likely to generate such an opinion.
He and his kind don’t what to accept the scientific method of assigning confidence levels to research and the peer revue process. They only want what they want.
It is a choice. Any type of ____sexuality is a choice. How can you attempt to argue otherwise?
You got it wrong.
Yes, it’s a bit of venom. Something wrong with being angry about this?
OK, I will humor you for a moment.
Gays are totally and completely intolerant of anyone and anything that does not validate and accept them as normal. They hate religion, the hate Conservatives, they hate ever single person who has ever voted against gay marriage.
They demand tolerance for their position, yet offer none for anyone elses.
Where do you see tolerance from the gay community??
I think children have a natural propensity to love everyone, but in some homes they are taught to hate gays, blacks, atheists, muslims, liberals, etc. That certainly happened to a lot of people on this board.
These biases and hatreds are evil. Hopefully, these children have other, more progressive influences in their lives to counter the crap they might be getting at home. Call it whatever you will, but I see it all the time – teachers trying to get kids to “unlearn” what daddy taught them about black people or gays or jews. Call it PC, call it whatever you want. And this is working. Young people’s attitudes towards gays and other minorities are much more tolerant than their parents.
That’s why we are winning. Your kind is dying out.
A democratically voted on, and passed, state proposition.
Eaglehaslanded…Maybe I’m just a Boston College fan
I once went to a wedding of two friends, one of which was Jewish and the other of which was southern baptist, which was presided by a slightly strange and wacky female rabbi and a southern minister. (who was the groom’s cousin).
Rabbi Marsha would utter something very animatedly in Hebrew and then Minister Dan would follow up with a a Bible passage in slow southern drawl.
It was very strange and very entertaining.
Actually eaglehaslanded it is better to teach children to be suspicious of gays because they’re SICK.
This crap will never end with these cretins.
I feel sorry for you. Some idiot taught you that and you aren’t smart enough to understand that it’s not true.
Now a full circle.
These defenders of PC-diversity-tolerance have clabbered milk between the ears….left wing broken records.
Um, I’m going to take a leap here and assume you don’t know many kids. Left to their own devices most of the children I’ve known have had a propensity for cruelty that’s completely appalling, and that needs to be conquered by proper adult instruction. They instinctively identify the outsider (and they always find one) and make that person’s life as miserable as they can.
But if I’m wrong I’ll cop to it. Any parents want to help me out here?
And I am saying you ginning up a false controversy and are doing it at the expense of an entirely innocent party that agrees with your position.
And you are doing so basically out of spite. “Ohhh…we’ll show “them gays” (again as a monolithic entity) good. We’ll sue one of “their” sites for the same thing! That’ll show ‘em!”
It’s a pathetic tactic.
mpChops, behold the tolerance of the Gay Supporters!
It’s so obvious, but I haven’t seen it, so this is what to do:
When that new site, goes live, register. It’s that simple.
It’s exactly right. Let’s go after Gay.com and other sites like that and ask that they match men with women. It high time we got in their face. It’s time the majority got in the face of some of these loonies and ask them what’s up with them. This tyranny needs to stop. Teh reason it has gone on is that reasonable and good people have gone SOFT!
It is the product of massive indoctrination through the news media, public school and college, entertainment, and valued friendships with other indoctrinates.
Seeing nothing wrong with their own brainwashing, desire to pass it along.
TRANSLATION: How DARE you use our tactic against us. That is just so unfair!
You’re right James…it’s like a flock of chickens will do.They find one in the flock that has an injury and they will proceed to peck the injured bird to death!
People hate what homosexuals are doing. They are taking a perverse, sexual, sin that they choose to engage in and demanding that others condone it and declare it as acceptable behavior. They are seeking, no demanding, equality for an abominable lifestyle.
Christians don’t find adultery, pedophilia, beastiality or any of the myriad of sexual sins as anything but sin. The difference is, those who engage in those acts aren’t demanding that the rest of humankind find them acceptable. I haven’t seen any “Adulterers of America Unite” groups; or “Pedophiles Come Together for a United Stand against discrimination” or “Fornicators for Special Tax Breaks”. Outside of NAMBLA, I haven’t seen any causes like these making any headlines.
These people keep their sins to themselves rather than parading them for the world to see and making demands on the rest of society.
Why should I find something so distasteful and sinful acceptable? Because the deviants demand it? I don’t think that’s going to happen.
Regarding this, as I said earlier on post #238 above:
So, if the proclivity for it, if the type of sexual orientation is not “hard-wired” or “programmed”, due to an unbelievably frequent and unbelievably recurrent occurrence of the same evolutionarily dead end somatic mutation; then, what else could it be assumed to be but a choice, very possibly predisposed to by influences in the oh-so-very-impressionable pre-teen and early to mid-teen years?
What is it exactly that are most of us here are missing?
Hello?
Hello?
Anyone?
Bueler?
James Felix KUDOS!
You can pout all you want sport, but homosexuality is obviously a sickness.
sickness
Noun
1. a particular illness or disease
2. the state of being ill or unhealthy:
The fact that you can’t find a biological tracer proves that being gay is a perversion. A SICKNESS
Scientific methods eaglehaslanded Scientific methods
SPITE??? What are you talking about? It’s a clear defensive strategy. Did you just wake up?
False controversy? False controversy? Look around, Mister. Ain’t nothin’ false about this controversy.
Dating sites that cater to the gay community exist precisely because mainstream dating sites — like, um (anyone? anyone?) eHarmony — don’t. When people don’t have the same resources available to them as the dominant masses, they create their own. It happens in every community that’s been denied access to things that are available to the majority.
But sue away if you like. Maybe you’ll tire yourselves out.
Go talk to as many psychiatrists and other medical professionals you can find and let me know what they say. You know, people that actually know something as opposed to what your parents or minister taught you.
To paraphrase Sam Kinison, move to where the intellectual food is.
You presume too much by saying that I am opposed to homosexuality.
All I’m saying is that there are those here saying that they know that it is not a choice. I haven’t yet seen anything conclusive on that front, personally.
Having doubts about whether it’s nature or nurture is not directly tied to whether or not I tolerate or oppose homosexuality.
I have two MS degrees. Don’t tell me about the scientific method. You’ll get crushed like a grape.
I would give my eye tooth for CSI or some other “crime drama ripped from the headlines” to tackle this issue on an upcoming show:
Gay marchers assault, beat and kill a restauranteur who donated money to a prop 8-style cause.
Would be interesting to see how the homosexual and pro-homosexual writers in Hollywood would paint this. Would rule of gay or rule of law prevail?
Now there’s a novelty: a lawsuit based on spite! (Shh…don’t tell divorce-trial attorneys their secret is out.)
I’m not a religious person and the subject of homosexuality was never discussed when I was a child
THERE IS NO PROOF BOY
Romans 1:20-22 :20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools!