EHarmony Case Exemplifies True Gay Activist Agenda
eHarmony ordered by the courts to offer same sex services
The Issue: Pasadena, California based eHarmony, an online dating service that doesn’t match members of the same sex has been forced to match gay individuals as part of a settlement from a lawsuit filed in the state of New Jersey. The Prop 8 opposition bases their opinion on support of civil rights, but activists in the gay community have now targeted the decisions of private business in their quest for equality.
According to the Los Angeles Times, eHarmony needs to either allow same sex singles to use their site’s service or create a separate site that provides services for same sex singles (which they have opted to do). They are also paying $50,000 to the state of New Jersey and $5,000 to the plaintiff.
Analysis: The ugly side of the gay rights movement
If eHarmony, a private business, wants to market to a specific market sector, that is their choice. There are several examples of breaches to organizations’ right to privacy:
- The Boy Scouts (a private organization that doesn’t allow gay scout leaders) has been sued and compelled to allow gays to join.
- The Catholic Church operated an adoption service in Massachusetts and closed their doors rather than comply with a court order to allow same sex couples to adopt their children.
The civil rights movement and freedom of speech sound great when it’s speech that you agree with, but the First Amendment also protects speech that you may not agree with. Churches, eHarmony and the Boy Scouts should be protected by the First Amendment.
If the gay community wants equal rights, then they should also respect the rights of others to think and feel differently. Forcing their opinions on others makes them the bigots.
Your last paragraph could also be argued in opposition (by just changing who “they” refers to), but that’s not really relevant to this article.
If you look at the political commentary on this from the same-sex marriage rights supporters, you’ll see that most of them aren’t agreeing with this verdict either. Andrew Sullivan has a few links to a couple more mainstream gay right supports (Dan Savage, etc.) and their blog entries.
I think that if you disregard the extreme views (of both sides) and look to those with respectable opinions (even if you disagree with their opinions) most will agree that this was not a victory for their rights.
If eHarmony would just go back to saying it’s a Christian dating web site, like it did before it became popular, then this could have been avoided. Other big dating web sites see this as an opportunity to increase user base and profits, so they support both hetro and homo orientations.
Rediculous! These plaintiffs are silly and petty; start your own homosexual match making site and we won’t complain we were not invited! Our system is wrong and out of whack these days.
When you examine the profile for the New Jersey’s Attorney General Director for discrimination issues (Mr. Vespa-Papaleo), a lot gets explained about why Eric McKinley was even allowed to use the system to harrass eHarmony in such a grotesque way:
Mr. Vespa-Papaleo serves as Executive Director of the New Jersey Commission on Civil Rights. He is on the Executive Board of the GLBT Rights and Labor and Employment Law Sections of the New Jersey State Bar Association. In June 2007 he was elected Chairman of the New Jersey Civil Union Review Commission, following his work on amending state law to provide legal protections for sexual and gender minorities. Director Vespa-Papaleo is a member of the New Jersey State Bar Association, and the Lesbian and Gay Lawyers Association.
Born in Puerto La Cruz, Venezuela, Director Vespa-Papaleo became a naturalized citizen of the United States in 1988. A resident of Bergen County, New Jersey, Mr. Vespa-Papaleo and his husband were married in California in June 2008.
(more details about him on the Attorney General’s web site)