Weddingbee Boards

No, that doesn't seem like a good thing. Companies are being told what sort of services they have to provide. It's like suing your local hamburger stand for not serving Thai food or Mexican...It makes no sense at all. There have already been gay dating services. If the people who sued wanted a gay dating service, have at it...There are plenty of sites. I find this quite unfair...and a rather silly lawsuit. Making businesses cater to your needs...and NOT be their business anymore--is really just wrong.

Rosy, gay people could use the site, but it will be geared toward male-female matches. NOT serving people on the site, would be discrimination, but NOT giving them the options they want, is telling them what sort of business to run. If the options they want don't exist on that site, they can go to many others, just like if I want Thai food but I'm at a burger joint, I can still go get Thai food down the road--I don't sue and force the burger shack to start serving Thai. 

I see this sort of lawsuit as forcing people against their will to do something they don't want. It's rather unfair..This is not how you get people on your side, and it will only infuriate and upset people, not make them more sympathetic to your cause. 

Plus, when reading the article about this, I saw that eHarmony will have to note on their pages that the way people are matched will be based on male-female hetero research...So it may or may not be a valid way to match gay people...Are they gonna sue now so that the folks at eHarmony can now do research to find the best ways to match gay people for compatibility?

Rosy, I'm going on the assumption that sexual orientation is not a choice for most people. Now, there IS free will in what businesses a person chooses to use. Now, eHarmony didn't discriminate against gay people on their site---Gay people could use it, but the people who brought forth the lawsuit didn't like the choices being offered--that it was opposite gendered instead of same-gendered. Instead of going to another business that did offer what they would want, they chose to sue a private business for not offering what they wanted.  To me, it seems like if I go to a men's clothing store (as a woman) and the sign outside states that it has men's clothing, and I am not served b/c I'm a woman, that's worthy of a lawsuit. If I go to the men's clothing store and expect to have women's clothes stocked on shelves and sue, that is just asinine and pointless... I could buy any of the merchandise--I'm not being discriminated against. I just didn't like the choices. I could have gone down the road to a women's clothing store or a store that has both types of clothes, so suing seems a stupid option. And it would be seen as ridiculous for me to tell the men's clothing store to suddenly start selling women's clother...or kids, or change their style of clothing just because I didn't like the option.

If you are denied service based on who you are, that's one issue that is law-suit worthy. If you just don't care for the choices offered, it is childish and silly to sue. You can go to another business. 

Some sites match people based on religion--All kinds of religions, Jewish, Muslim, Christian, etc...

I did a quick search and found a Jewish Dating site for Jewish Singles. If I'm a Christian and I expect to be matched up with another Christian on a Jewish dating site, then should I sue the Jewish dating site for discrimination? It's their right to make their service for Jewish people. I could use this service, but I'll be matched with a Jewish person who is expecting to be matched with another Jewish person... Instead if I want to be matched with someone from a Christian background or have the option to not be matched based on religion, then I could just go to another site.

Now it seems that people could sue this site just b/c they don't offer matches on ALL religions...So now the Jewish dating site needs to include options for Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Taoist, Atheist, Agnostic... 

Also, I found several gay dating sites by putting in a simple search...Are these sites now required to include searches for straight people too, so they can be matched with other opposite-gendered people? 

Telling one business what they can and cannot do...Suing them to offer different choices that pleases any and every faction of the population now opens the door for anyone to be sued to offer any service that any other person or group might decide they want. Personally, if I owned my own business, I would not want to be told how to run it and what products to offer...

Hey, I'm saying that as a gay person you can use e-Harmony's service, but you wouldn't be matched up with same-gendered people--I'm sorry if that's not your cup of tea or your preference or what you would want. My "crappy analogies" were to state essentially that a person should choose to only use businesses that have something good to offer them--I use businesses that will offer me something I want. If they DON'T offer what I want, I go elsewhere. I don't sue them.

By not using e-Harmony's site, you are not being deprived of finding love. Most people in this world find love and have found love pretty well without e-Harmony--gay, straight, interracial, whatever, whoever...and will so in the future either way. AND not have to pay for the "right" to pay hundreds of dollars to be matched up online...

And if you don't care for e-Harmony but want a business LIKE them out there for gay people, why not create your own business that does match people on compatibility for a long-term relationship? Why give your cash to e-Harmony (and a lot of it at that) if you don't agree with them? You don't sue someone so that they will create a business that will cater to what you are looking for...If it doesn't exist already, you could actually make your own site. 

Telling someone what type of business to run is actually wrong in and of itself. Just because you don't like what is being offered doesn't mean you should sue to get what you want--If you don't want the product they have to offer (setting you up in a male-female relationship), then find another site that DOES offer what you want.

Again, I ask you, does the reverse hold true--Should we now sue all other websites that are for people of specific backgrounds, including gay dating sites, so that they will include ALL people?

enmoore I think you gave a really good analogy and example.

To reiterate enmoore's point I don't see where eHarmony says that they only cater (for lack of a better word) to hetero couples. To repost again:

Question:

To empower people with the knowledge and inspiration needed to grow
and strengthen their most important relationships for a lifetime of
happiness.

The are offereing matching services for people, not straight couples, just people. And if they are saying that they match up people, then by not including gays they are being discriminatory. 

Maybe some people think that its just semantics. I think they (eHarmony) is trying to have their cake and eat it to. They don't want to just say Christians because it would eliminate certain customers but at the same time they wanted to be selective about who is able to use the service. You know what thats called? Discrimination. 

I've been pretty aggravated by this thread because people are confusing what eharmony is legally entitled to do and what they choose to do as a business. I am a very strong supporter of same sex rights and ordinarily would not choose to affiliate myself with organizations that do not support or recognize the validity in a same sex reationship or the importance/right of same sex marriage. However, those posters who are arguing against eharmony's new site or their prior refusal to same sex match as a legal violation are simply not correct. While sexual orientation should be a proteced class, it is not. Only race, gender, ethnic heritage, etc. are protected classes. Sexual orientation is not protected by the federal or (to my knowledge) any state constitutions. Therefore, anyone or any organization can discriminate freely based on sexual orientation. Furthermore, even if it was a protected class, from a federal constitution standpoint, there is absolutely no violation for a private entity to choose to exclude same sex couples. The federal constitution discrimination provisions do not protect citizens from private action - only government action. Now, state constitutions can prohibit discrimination on a private level based on sexual orientation, but to my knowledge that has not yet been done (unfortunately). Nor am I aware of other state lor federal legislation making it illegal to discriminate based on sexual orientation. In the absence of any state or federal law, eharmony is not doing anything "wrong" from a legal perspective, and they cannot be made to accept anyone. Now, I realize there was a lawsuit pending based on eharmony's refusal to same sex match. I admittedly have not read any of the pleadings in this lawsuit, so I am not familiar with the plaintiff's arguments. However, I would be very surprised based on the current state and federal jurisprudence if the lawsuit were ultimately successful. Nevertheless, eharmony chose to settle the lawsuit, a condition of which was to offer same sex matching. This was a business decision - not a recognition of its prior violation of any law whatsoever. We are all aware that the law does not recognize or protect all basic human rights, which is very unfortunate. But I take issue with posters claiming that eharmony's prior practices are violations of any law or constitutional right (as the constitution is currently interpreted). The truth is that eharmony did not violate any law - its stance on same sex matching may be offensive (as I believe it is), but it is not illegal. And it may be unethical (as I believe it is), but it is not illegal. I think all of these posts miss the point and are unfortunately dangerous because they inadvertently take away from the main point - what eharmony did in the past or is doing in the furture is its own choice. If we as a society want same sex couples to enjoy the same rights and privileges as heterosexual couples, if we as a society want to recognize that sexual orientation is no more a choice than skin color, race or ethnic heritage is, then we need to focus not on individual companies that are making decisions we might not necessarily agree with but instead on the governments that are not recognizing sexual orientation as a protected class. Of course if eharmony or other companies are acting in ways that are personally offensive, then personal action should be taken - don't subscribe to eharmony, don't offer it your patronage. But it is a waste to be outraged and scream about the injustice of it if you don't realize where the problem and the remedy lie. Unfortunately, eharmony did nothing legally wrong, and they are offering a new service not out of any legal obligation but out of a business decision to end a lawsuit that while probably not destined to be successful will ultimately cost them a lot of money to defend. It makes no sense to single eharmony out without recognizing that it's simply existing in the corporate market the nation has sanctioned. Anyway, this is a very long rant/post, and I apologize for the length and if it has sounded preachy at all.

Actually, NO, not all people are alike--not research-wise, not from a demographic point of view. Groups of people are unique and complex, and there are many factors to consider when thinking of them in a research situation.

 If you are looking at eHarmony as research, you couldn't say that how ALL people are matched up using whatever algorithm that eHarmony uses works for everyone...I'm assuming they must have used some sort of standarization process or norming data of heterosexuals-both male and female--maybe even info about couples with the most longevity, although I admit that I have no clue what they based that all on or how they came to their conclusions and what sort of results they have had for people, but they have to have statistics they base this on and subjects they used to come to the conclusions they did in the creation of the algorithm--and most likely not just "Oh, they answered ALL of these questions just the same, so they're perfect for each other."

Also, demographics such as male and female preferences might come into play when looking at male-male matches and female-female matches--and homosexual males and females might be looking for something different in a partner preference-wise than male-female matches and from each gender of gay partner, so that could potentially call for the need for the research to be tailored to "male-male" matches and "female-female" matches--I'm guessing the folks at eHarmony haven't been busy researching preferences and compatibility in gay relationships. I'm interested how these matches will turn out...what if they're all duds since they're based on research using straight couples? But wait...I'm just hearing people chime in..."Well, they might be duds, but at least they're offering this option to gay people, and that's a step in the right direction!" Well, that's lovely and wonderful and birds will sing and unicorns will fly over rainbows, but these people will be paying dearly for poor matches if that is the case--And eHarmony will again be the villain since they are offering "shoddy services" to gay people--and someone will probably sue again. And to think that  the crappy service was b/c some dude who went a long way feeling angry and suing people so that eHarmony would offer a gay dating site- for it all to be a sham since it is based on faulty research (ie-research that does not apply to them and their preferences specifically) in the first place. 

Megan, I'm also with you on the discrimination existing for anyone--It's possible, and it can be arbitrary--I've heard of studies where complete strangers in a group disliked each other based on being in a group of "us" vs. "them", eye color, what they were wearing, hair color, hand used for writing, etc...

And, I STILL stand by this---If a business doesn't offer what you want, just go elsewhere--Don't sue.  The fact is that gay people can use this site--They aren't restricted from using the site--BUT it isn't targeted at them AND they'd have to choose "Man looking for woman" or "Woman looking for man." AND the site is of no use to them if they are gay, but it'd be ridicluous to sue any business that isn't of use to your specific needs. And, I have a feeling that a lot of this lawsuit has to do with what eHarmony represents to certain people who don't like them and that suing them was therapeutic since they have been associated with the "religious right" and "focus on the family." AND THEN there's fact that all of this is now *completely* beside the point--The deal is done, and there WILL be a gay eHarmony site.

It seems wrong to restrict businesses in how they run..We now have to include EVERY need of ALL people ALL the time, lest we happen to offend ANYONE, ANYWHERE, at ANYTIME. Sometimes it feels like we are becoming a nation of whiners, hall monitors, and criers waiting with our hands up for the teacher to come take sides. 

So, on that whiny note: I'm still waiting to hear about when straight people can sue gay dating sites to include a "hetero" option...

Thanks, loveatfisrtsightlover. I didn't realize that. I wonder if any of those laws apply to private actors. It's at least a good sign of progress.