Suing your way to forced accomodation
Lawsuit forces eHarmony–founded as a Christian dating services–to offer gay dating services.
NEW YORK (Reuters) – Online dating service eHarmony has agreed to create a new website for gays and lesbians as part of a settlement with a gay man in New Jersey, the New Jersey Office of the Attorney General said on Wednesday.
The settlement was the result of a discrimination complaint filed by Eric McKinley against eHarmony in 2005, which will be dismissed under the settlement agreement.
eHarmony was founded in 2000 by evangelical Christian Dr. Neil Clark Warren and had ties with the influential religious conservative group Focus on the Family.
The New Jersey complaint is not the only legal action to be brought against eHarmony for failing to provide a same-sex option.
In March, lawyers in California brought a lawsuit against the company on behalf of San Francisco resident Linda Carlson, who was denied access to eHarmony because she is gay.
Can no private enterprise cater to an exclusive demographic? Undoubtedly eHarmony could profit from such an addition to its service, but why should it have to? The settlement has more to do with forcing private enterprise to create product for an interest group rather than forcine that business to sell to that group.
Related posts:
No, but their caving could give dumbasses the misconception that eHarmony was on the wrong side of some kind of imaginary discrimination.
I asked for a hot dog at BK, but they don’t make them. Was I denied? Um, no, because I could still purchase another menu item, even though I have no use for “chicken fries”.
They weren’t forced to do so. Those chose to do so per a settlement. No one has mandated said man on man action, unfortunately.
If you’re a gay, aren’t you denied access to the dating service by not having the choice of searching for other dudes? Thusly, being denied access to the dating service?
Um, no, But that’s not the same. Presumably, in your scenario, the establishment serves a product that could be enjoyed by both whites and blacks.
eHarmony broke no laws. They didn’t refuse anybody any service, which is different than not providing a service their accuser desired. . .Now they are being forced to provide it.
Do you think it’s right that eHarmony should be FORCED to set up a gay dating service?
“Can no private enterprise cater to an exclusive demographic?”
Is it cool to cater to white folks and put up a sign that says “no blacks allowed”?