eHarmony forced to sell out to homosexuals
I think I need this one explained to me. Why should eHarmony, a dating site that specializes in long term relationships between a man and a woman be forced to cater to the homosexual lifestyle? Dr. Neil Clark Warren founded the site with the express intent of fostering that kind of heterosexual relationship. Now, despite the fact that there are homosexual dating services online, the defendant, Eric McKinley, decided he wanted to join eHarmony, instead of a service that specializes in homosexual relationships. How can anyone call that discrimination? Let’s look at some for instances.
Since I know a lot about the automotive industry, let’s start there. I now work at an independent repair facility, but I have worked at both General Motors and Ford service shops. Both of those shops had one thing in common; they were specialists in what they did. The General Motors shop worked on vehicles manufactured by General Motors and the Ford shop worked on vehicles manufactured by Ford Motor Company. They did not work on vehicles manufactured by another company. The reason behind this is simple. They know their own vehicles quite well, but the others, not so much. Would it be discrimination if an owner of a Ford vehicle took it to a General Motors shop and was turned away? I don’t think so because the owner would be asking for a service the General Motors shop did not provide.
Let’s look at another example. I really like a good hamburger. If I go to, say a seafood restaurant and ask for a hamburger, is it discrimination because they refuse me something they do not provide in the first place? Again, I don’t think so. If I want a hamburger, then I need to go to a restaurant that serves hamburgers.
Maybe these two examples are over simplified, but how hard can it be to understand this. If you are homosexual and you are wanting to find another homosexual to enter into a long term relationship with, why would you even consider going to a service that specializes in heterosexual relationships? I believe the reason is simple. The homosexuals are crying about their civil rights, but this has nothing to do with civil rights and everything to do with them wanting to force their way of life on those who want nothing to do with it.
So, despite the fact that eHarmony was minding their own business and not discriminating against anyone, they are now the victim of a lawsuit and are having to pay $50,000 in court costs, along with $5,000 to Eric McKinley. I really wish they had stuck to their guns, but I suppose I can understand why they didn’t. That kind of money is no small change.
Personally, I believe homosexuality is not a healthy lifestyle and I believe the Bible teaches that it is a sin. However, I do not believe your or I have the right to control the acts two consenting adults engage in, as long as it is not done in public. By the same token, I do not believe homosexuals should have a carte blanche right to force those of us who believe homosexuality is a sin to accept it as normal behavior and at the same time, accuse us of discrimination for not doing so. In my opinion, calling eHarmony’s business model discriminatory to homosexuals is akin to slapping the African Americans and other minority groups in the face. If you want to see real discrimination, just look at some of the history of our country in general and the southern region in particular. Groups like the African Americans, the Jews, and the Irish have faced real discrimination, much more than someone being denied a service that wasn’t even being offered in the first place.
That’s my take!
Larry
Absolutely.
There really isn’t any valid reason why eHarmony should be forced to change its business model.
The Vegan cafe in Portsmouth shouldn’t be required to serve me a steak. If I want steak, I should go somewhere else.
This is exactly about a person forcing his way of life on someone else. If the government was threatening to shut down gay-dating sites, then he could claim some kind of discrimination. But the fact that a heterosexual dating site exists does not constitute any kind of persecution.
I’m an Eagle Scout myself, and I keep watching the ongoing attack on the BSA. We’ll see how that goes …
Wickle,
Thanks for coming to see me at my new site.
You are exactly right. The homosexuals are attempting to force themselves into our way of life, This story has nothing to do with discrimination, but they have found they can get much better results by crying discrimination. Sad, but true.
These people pushing this gay agenda is not wanting to force themselves into our way of life, they are wanting to FORCE us away from our way of lifestyle.
They do not want their sin called sin! They do not want anyone to speak out against them and the evils of their lifestyles. For example a Christian posted a video on youtube about this agenda and called them out on hacking up the bible and making it fit what they want it to say…. but of course the gay groups rallied and had this video removed from youtube….so much for free speech ay?
You can see the video here:
http://hollywoodtrenches.vox.com/library/post/sodom-and-gomorrah-your-hometown.html
This is a great article Larry. People are confused about ‘Rights’ in America. When they say ‘rights’ they often mean ‘entitlement.’ They want to change the social standards to encompass any behavior AND they want the rest of us to pay for it.
It is impossible to reconcile freedom of choice standards with the Gay agenda that does not allow me to choose not to do business with them.
eHarmony forced to sell out to homosexuals
How sad! Larry, I absolutely agree with your view of the situation. Homosexuality is sin, and no amount of twisting the gospel of Christ can hide that fact. Neither you nor I hate them, but we certainly don’t want them forcing us to give up our beliefs, compromising what we know to be true. Neither should we have to accept their lifestyle as normal.
Actually, I think Eric McKinley saw dollar signs and decided to relieve some of Dr. Warren’s hard earned money from him. The lawyer representing Mr. McKinley should be ashamed.
I don’t have a lot of use for some lawyers. Most of them seem to be a greedy bunch of folk. By the same token, there is no way a judge should have even considered this case. It should have been declared a frivolous lawsuit.
This is the most rational article I’ve read about this and it makes perfect sense. I think that someone with a little bit of money should indeed pursue a lawsuit against a seafood restaraunt for not serving burgers or a vegan restaraunt for not serving steaks and see what happens. I guarantee it will be thrown out with a STERN tongue-lashing from a judge about wasting the court’s time on something so frivolous. This whole fiasco is about a group of people who are trying to force their lifestyle on someone else. You’re here, you’re queer. Fine. We get it. But if I don’t want to incorporate your lifestyle choice in my own personal private business, I shouldn’t have a legal obligation to do it. It’s the same as forcing physicians to choose between performing abortions and rejecting their religious beliefs, or losing their license for refusing to do so.
Thanks for the comment, Jay. The homosexual movement is focused on trying to force their view of normal onto the rest of us and it has gotten to the point to where we have almost no recourse. The first accusation that is thrown at anyone who resists is discrimination and they try to equate themselves to the African Americans who have struggled for so long, just to get basic civil rights. This issue is not a civil right, but rather an attempt by the homosexuals to make their lifestyle choice to appear as normal as heterosexuals.