More political correctness run amuck...

[MobBoss]

http://www.comcast.net/news/technol...&fn=/2007/06/01/678175.html&cvqh=itn_eharmony

LOS ANGELES - A Northern California woman sued the online dating service eHarmony on Thursday, alleging it discriminates against gays, lesbians and bisexuals.

Linda Carlson said she tried to use the Internet site in February to meet a woman but could not based on her sexual orientation. When Carlson wrote to eHarmony to complain, the company refused to change its policy, according to the lawsuit filed on her behalf in Los Angeles County Superior Court.

The lawsuit claims that by only offering to find a compatible match for men seeking women or women seeking men, the company was violating state law barring discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Sigh. I mean really wth is it with people? As far as I can tell, the founder only gives advice for traditional male/female relationships....not gay or lesbian relationships. If his business, which is based upon his area of expertise, only allows for male/female matches, should he be forced to alter his business to include gays/lesbians when such is not in his field of expertise?

I dunno, this just smacks of frivilous lawsuit to me. Its akin of a homosexual going say to a christian counselor and demanding advice on homosexual issues. Its just crazy.

 

[Godwynn]

It's his business, maybe they should try Match.com or set up their own and strike it rich.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

This a good one MB. Hmmm...

...

Hmm...

...

Ok Im ready to make my ruling.


eHarmony should not have to change its business practices, but henceforth it should prominently state in all of its advertising that it offers its services to heterosexuals only. [/gavelbang]

 

[LucyDuke]

I don't see discrimination here. They didn't say she couldn't use their site, just that they didn't offer the service she wanted. She was free to use what was available. If I can't find a straight man in a gay bar, can I sue?

 

[Mr. Dictator]

This a good one MB. Hmmm...

...

Hmm...

...

Ok Im ready to make my ruling.


eHarmony should not have to change its business practices, but henceforth it should prominently state in all of its advertising that it offers its services to heterosexuals only. [/gavelbang]

and we have a winner.

 

[Godwynn]

The website has two options: I am a...

Man seeking a Woman
Woman seeking a Man

Nope, don't see a Woman seeking a Woman in there. Obvious.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

I don't see discrimination here. They didn't say she couldn't use their site, just that they didn't offer the service she wanted. She was free to use what was available. If I can't find a straight man in a gay bar, can I sue?

The only difference is that eHarmony hasnt been advertising itself as a 'straight bar'. If it merely states that it helps people find good relationships, and then discriminates against certain people, or is unable to offer its services to them, its deceptive advertising. In fact, they dont offer their services to people, only to straight people.

 

[Harbringer]

You cant sue a place for something they didnt offer.

 

[Perfection]

You can sue anyone for anything, the real question is will it not be thrown out of court like it should be.

 

[LucyDuke]

The only difference is that eHarmony hasnt been advertising itself as a 'straight bar'. If it merely states that it helps people find good relationships, and then discriminates against certain people, or is unable to offer its services to them, its deceptive advertising. In fact, they dont offer their services to people, only to straight people.

You're right, and I knew it was a bad example when I made it. I just couldn't stop giggling.

But I still don't see discrimination. At no point did eHarmony decline to allow Ms. Lawsuit to use their service.

 

[MobBoss]

Well, this stuff kills me. Plus I have an actual personal interest in it as well. My wife is working on her Masters Degree in Family and Marriage counseling with an emphasis on Christian themes.

It really bothers me that she could face such a lawsuit from someone like this, frivilous or not.

 

[Perfection]

Well, this stuff kills me. Plus I have an actual personal interest in it as well. My wife is working on her Masters Degree in Family and Marriage counseling with an emphasis on Christian themes.

It really bothers me that she could face such a lawsuit from someone like this, frivilous or not.

I wouldn't be too worried, this would be an extremely rare occurance (unless for some bizzare reason the lawsuit sticks, which I highly doubt) which would be easily defeated. Worry about spilling juice on yourself and staining your nice shirt, not this.

 

[Stylesjl]

I'm pretty sure it will be thrown out in due time. Isn't the justice system great?

 

[C~G]

That would be pretty much same as walking into restaurant that offers only fish and saying that you are allergic to fish.
Do they have to start making stakes so they don't discriminate you? Even if you are starving, no.

Discrimination only comes to the picture when you rebuke someone's use of services based into their characteristic, not the other way around. Here's the woman rebukes those services and wants new service.

Unless of course there have been such ruling that forces dating services to offer services both to men and women and not only to one gender. In that case we might have actual case here cooking.

I don't like dictating such rules since it's probable there would be chance for gay dating services to being hugely popular if normal dating services won't offer such chance to meet. Especially if it happens in Internet and not locally.

My wife is working on her Masters Degree in Family and Marriage counseling with an emphasis on Christian themes.

It really bothers me that she could face such a lawsuit from someone like this, frivilous or not.

I think that is an issue inside the church and none of business for others.

 

[Rambuchan]

I dunno, this just smacks of frivilous lawsuit to me.

Exactly. This is a case of litigation culture run amock. Not of political correctness. She wouldn't have been able to bring a PC minded case of discrimination if the litigation culture didn't exist.

 

[AL_DA_GREAT]

So now you have to help imoral acts if you have a dating service.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Its not very surprising that theyre hostile to gays. If youve ever seen the eHarmony commercials, its obvious that all of the deliriously happy couples are Republicans and serial Bush voters. Including the Don Knotts impersonator who seems to be the founder of the company. In some of the later commercials they started throwing in an occasional black couple and and Asian couple. I wonder if the black or Asian guy specifically stated that they wanted to date white chicks, would they get the same treatment as gays? "Sorry, we cant help you."

But I still don't see discrimination. At no point did eHarmony decline to allow Ms. Lawsuit to use their service.

I dunno, it seems like in order for her to use the service, she's got to swear off women and go back to guys.

 

[Harbringer]

Its not very surprising that theyre hostile to gays. If youve ever seen the eHarmony commercials, its obvious that all of the deliriously happy couples are Republicans and serial Bush voters. Including the Don Knotts impersonator who seems to be the founder of the company. In some of the later commercials they started throwing in an occasional black couple and and Asian couple. I wonder if the black or Asian guy specifically stated that they wanted to date white chicks, would they get the same treatment as gays? "Sorry, we cant help you."


I dunno, it seems like in order for her to use the service, she's got to swear off women and go back to guys.

Please please pleaseeeeee tell me your being satyrical.......

 

[Bozo Erectus]

You mean the part about the people in the ads being Bush voters? Its that they dont seem to be very bright, I guess

 

[LucyDuke]

I dunno, it seems like in order for her to use the service, she's got to swear off women and go back to guys.

That's pushing it. She doesn't have to swear off women at all. (And don't forget some homosexuals didn't "start out" heterosexual so there might not be any "going back to".) A service exists to help women find men, or men find women. If she'd like to find a man, she's perfectly free to use their service. If she'd like to find a woman, well, sorry, that's not something they do. Just because they don't offer the particular service she's looking for doesn't make them discriminatory.

For the record, I find it idiotic that they don't offer man-seeking-man or woman-seeking-woman matches. I don't see any reason it would be harder to implement than what they've already got, and it would broaden their potential customer base. But it's not like they're legally obliged to.