[A fundie lawyer commenting on eHarmony's discrimination lawsuit filed and won by a gay person. Previously, eHarmony would not match gay singles.]
"It’s basically the power of the government being used to force people across the country to accept beliefs that they know are not moral,"
36 comments
"It’s basically the power of the government being used to force people across the country to accept beliefs that they know are not moral,"
Oh the irony. You mean like slavery, murder, rape and domestic violence? Put any gospel channel on the TV and this is what they're asking you to accept.
It's an atatck on freedom? Yeah, definitely, the freedom of the close-minded to discriminate against the portions of society which contradict their world-view.
No-one's forcing anyone to believe anything. They're just forcing a website to not discriminate. It impinges on your freedom not one tiny little bit.
I know it's not going to happen but please, at least try to grow up.
No one is asking anyone to accept those beliefs, simply to tolerate their existence, like civil human beings. Not spending millions of dollars to repeal and suppress the rights of a tax paying minority, based solely on YOUR religious viewpoint.
I had no idea that not allowing you and your ilk to discriminate at will against anyone who does not share your world view amounts to discrimination.
Where's that pie chart?
"It’s basically the power of the government being used to force people across the country to accept beliefs that they know are not moral,"
You mean like the power of the government being used to prevent gay couples from marrying? Yeah, that is a tragedy.
I ... ummmmmm ... I hate to say it but I'm pretty much in agreement with this. I mean I'm not up on all the facts but if eHarmony is a privately owned company it's up to them who they choose to match up.
I could understand the argument if it were an airline refusing to seat gays or something but it's just one dating site out of many. There are plenty of sites that only match gay people ... or so I've heard.
I can understand how it's a little bit of a gray area and people's opinion on just where the line is drawn differs. I'd admit that my line is drawn pretty far to one side. I just think, at least in cases where the business is not the sole provider of a service, they should be allowed to discriminate as they see fit. If you open up a bar and decide to only let white people in, it makes you a complete dick but it's your right to do that. I'll avoid your shitty bar, you'll lose yourself a helluva lot of business and five years from now you'll be bitching that the tolerant guy down the street is running a chain of nightclubs while your place looks like Moe's tavern ... without Carl, obviously.
Nobody should be forced to help a a gay guy get laid. Everyone SHOULD but nobody should be FORCED to.
Bullshit.
If it's designed correctly, users should probably not even notice anything except perhaps a single extra question somewhere in their profile asking if they wish to receive matches for men, women, or both (and it should be set by default to the opposite gender only for current users).
From there, it's a few changes on the backend, where it no doubt currently assumes males are interested only in females, and vice versa, but will have to be made to return results based on the user's orientation as stated in their profile instead.
It's a change that a first year comp-sci student could make in seconds. I hope they don't try to pretend it'll cost them billions or anything, or that the "gay mindset" is so different that they'll have to come up with a completely new matching scheme.
@Tomby Stone: If you open up a bar and decide to only let white people in, it makes you a complete dick but it's your right to do that.
Is that actually legal? EDIT: No, it isn't - http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/restaurants-right-to-refuse-service.html
@Tomby Stone,
I personally have no desire to use the site of a company that clearly did not want me as a customer. As you said there are plenty of gay matching sites out there. I am thinking the guy in Jersey who originally filed the suit will be the only single signed up on it and will probably spend a lot of time as their "featured profile".
The outrage being expressed over this from Shackelford and other religious nuts is irony defined considering Focus on the Family worked tirelessly to use the government to remove my right to marry here in CA. The only freedom being attacked here is the freedom of fundies to openly hate and oppress people they deem less than equal.
It's a change that a first year comp-sci student could make in seconds. I hope they don't try to pretend it'll cost them billions or anything, or that the "gay mindset" is so different that they'll have to come up with a completely new matching scheme.
@Knotilus, From what I have read, this is a completely different site called "Compatible Partners" so the good Christian clients won't have their "freedoms attacked" by seeing gay profiles on their site. The new site will include a disclaimer that reads something like "these survey questions were compiled for heterosexual couples".
Why is E-Harmony being sued? Yeah, they should get over themselves and match gay folks but they do not have to if they do not want to. How many gay datting services are out there (how many FREE ones)?
Though I do support pissing off fundies.
Why is E-Harmony being sued? Yeah, they should get over themselves and match gay folks but they do not have to if they do not want to. How many gay datting services are out there (how many FREE ones)?
Though I do support pissing off fundies.
"It’s an attack on freedom, and people better get ready to fight."
Oh good. I've always wanted to fight Dobson.
In all respects I actually agree with the lawyer here. Hate to say it guys, but the government just forced a private entity to change its moral position. That shouldn't happen. Why, in a free society, couldn't a gay person create the same kind of website and run it exclusively for gay people? There's nothing wrong with that. And the notoriety of eharmony discriminating against gays should have been enough to push people away from it. We've started running to the government over every little thing. This has to stop. eHarmony's run by a biggoted group of asshats? Fine, don't use the site. Go someplace else.
I agree that eHarmony shouldn't of been sued, but this guy kind of goes overboard on the attack on freedom bit.
On the other hand, can I sue Male2Male for not serving heterosexuals?
As soon as same-sex marriage is legal (again) you'll be marrying some lucky woman. Yup, sorry, tis the law. You HAVE to marry gay once the law's been passed (I know it isn't so, but imagine the fun).
Lettin the coloreds take up MY seats on the bus instead of standing in the back like they should is basically the power of the government being used to force white people across the country to accept that people of ther races are equal to their own even though they know they aren't. It's an attack on freedom.
::pistol whip to the face::
yes, much better.
I actually have to say I completely agree with this. I'm not a homophobe. But if somebody wants to be a homophobe, that's completely up to them. Aren't there a shitload of gay personals websites out there? There's also black singles, Christian singles, Jewish singles, and the like. And let me ask you this. eHarmony is creating a separate site for gays. Let's say that site doesn't make enough money for them to keep it open. Then we're right back where we started. This is not the government's business. But it does present opportunity. I'm gonna find all the personals sites that are aimed at one group and sue. Gonna be Rich Bitch!
>Lettin the coloreds take up MY seats on the bus instead of standing in the back like they should is basically the power of the government being used to force white people across the country to accept that people of ther races are equal to their own even though they know they aren't. It's an attack on freedom.
The bus companies are run by the city government. eHarmony is not. It's different. The government is not allowed to discriminate. Private businesses cannot be held to the same standard.
Kelly Shackelford?
Any relation to Rusty?
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
