eHarmony agrees to provide same-sex matches

The well known Christian rooted site eHarmony was sued to force it to provide homosexual matching as well as heterosexual. Now, the site has been moving to a broader audience than just Christians, but it certainly makes you wonder whether you can take a statement of “we just want to live and let live” at face value:

google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hqWaIhebV73ULjPWUfwRcEX-7oPgD94I3LF00

TRENTON, N.J. (AP) — Online dating service eHarmony is adding another personality trait to its 29 dimensions of computability.

The California-based company will begin providing same-sex matches under as part of a settlement with New Jersey’s Civil Rights Division.

Garden State resident Eric McKinley filed a complaint against the online matchmaker in 2005.

Under terms of the settlement, the company can create a new or differently named Web site for same-sex singles. The company can also post a disclaimer saying its compatibility-based matching system was developed from research of married heterosexual couples.

Neither the company nor its founder, Neil Clark Warren, admit any liability.

In addition, eHarmony will pay the division $50,000 to cover administrative costs. It will pay McKinley $5,000 and give him a free one-year membership to its new service.

onenewsnow.com/Headlines/Default.aspx?id=326218

townhall.com/blog/g/1951f750-72d4-4253-96d0-46cc77259678

So much for conscience clauses, freedom of religion …

So much for freedom of associations and free speech…

You can bet that this lawsuit was directly pursued to obtain just this action … forcing a person to provide a service they never intended, did not want and one they found objectionable …

It is a culture war … you have to think and act in the “proper” way or face he consequences …

You can loose your lively hood and your soul … or submit to the immoral culture … some choice :eek:

Interesting article. I don’t mean to seem rude, but why is this in the Politics section?

Perhaps because they call this tyoe of activity being compelled to be “Politically Correct” …

It s “Politically Correct” to celebrate homosexuality [the action and the actors: lesbians and gays], transgendered persons, transvestites, all sexuality … and their organizations: NAMBLA, Rainbow Sash, etc …

It is “Politically Correct” to sue Catholic Hospitals to force them to perform sex change operations in San Francisco - even though there are many hospitals in San Francisco who do those operations everyday … to force the ‘catholic’ organization to accept the culture …

You know the Boy Scouts had to deal with the gay issue years ago when a former Eagle Scout/Adult leader sued the Scouts because they kicked him out because he was gay.

The scouts barley won in the supreme court.

After that, the United Way threaten to pull their funding if they continued to discriminate. The Boy Scouts basically told the UW to stick their money where the sun don’t shine.

Good for them.

I do fear the the more these things go on, the more and more they are going to be forced on organizations and businesses.

This is the slippery slope - slowly we will loose our ability to have any opinion at all (if it’s not totally PC) lest it be considered hate speech or descrimination.

I can absolutely see protesting at an abortion clinic being viewed as a hate crime. It’s only a matter of time. :frowning:

~Liza

Absolutely UNBELIEVABLE!!

I don’t get it. :confused:

How does a NJ court get to tell a California based company how to operate its business on the World Wide Web?

I can see telling it it couldn’t advertise without being “non-discriminatory” but how can it dictate operating procedures?

And what does this mean for companies like CatholicMatch.com?

A very short matter of time, I fear.

Especially with all the backing received by Obama from NARAL and Planned Parenthood ~ I am sure this will be on their agenda as well. FOCA won’t be good enough for them and this is where we will be.

I have been reading some excellent books on demography and nevermind globally falling birthrates, the infiltration of the homosexual agenda into our lives is also having its effects.

Again, in my humble opinion, many things have already been set in motion. Prayer, penance, fasting and the mass…this is where our Hope lives!!

Blessings and peace,

Kimberly

Here’s an editorial on the eHarmony situation.

gopusa.com/commentary/mmalkin/2008/mm_11211.shtml

I just thought about this, if this happened to eHarmony, could they force Catholic dating sites to do the same?

I met my wife on CatholicSingles.com

:eek:

p.s.

See our success story on there here

catholicsingles.com/new/testimonial-1.html

Well, that’s my question too. And Catholic Singles further “discriminates” doesn’t it by not matching divorced people without annulments?

Where are all those people who said that gay marriage shouldn’t bother us since it didn’t affect us?

To clarify Corki’s post, we don’t dictate which members can contact each other…our focus is both fellowship and romance. If someone is seeking an annulment that is great, it’s a positive step and we welcome those members. That doesn’t mean however they are yet free to marry in the Church. If another member chooses to consider that fact, it’s certainly a valid position. That doesn’t mean meaningful friendship and fellowship should be dismissed either.

We remain a Catholic site upholding Catholic beliefs about dating and marriage, and as such, we will be watching developments in our industry with a keen interest!

religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2008/11/eharmony-caves-to-lawsuit-agre.html

A settlement Wednesday between eHarmony Inc. and the New Jersey attorney general requires the online heterosexual dating service to also cater to homosexuals, raising questions about whether other services that target a niche clientele could be forced to expand their business models.

The settlement stemmed from a complaint, filed with the New Jersey attorney general’s office by a gay match seeker in 2005, that eHarmony had violated his rights under the state’s discrimination law by not offering a same-sex dating service. In 2007, the attorney general found probable cause that eHarmony had violated the state’s Law Against Discrimination.

This is insane. Why should eharmony be forced in to finding matches for gay people? Aren’t there dating services for gays in existence? I think I set up an account on eharmony, but won’t use it anymore because I don’t want gay men looking at my profile. I think a lot of strait people wouldn’t want gays looking at their profile. What about catholic dating services? Now they’re going to be forced in to finding matches for gays.

They should not be forced to do anything they do not want to do. Most of those online dating services will not show a straight persons profile to a heterosexual. Try not to punish eharmony for something they can not control.

If I ran a business, I’d sell out or shut down before the Government forced me to do anything. I understand there are certain regulations that are required in certain fields, but that is ridiculous.

Supposedly the founder is a evangelical, theology professor of some sort. This guy just rolled over on his morals. I can only assume it was to save a buck. If I am wrong, please correct me.

Career: Assistant professor (1967) and dean (1975-1982), Fuller Theological Seminary’s Graduate School of Psychology; author of nine books; psychologist in private practice, 1967-2000; launched eHarmony Aug. 22, 2000
from: usatoday.com/life/people/2005-05-18-eharmony_x.htm

I know the Church had issues in the past regarding it’s orphanages, and this past USCCB conference they discussed possible federal law that would require Catholic churches to perform abortions. The clips I saw showed bishops stating the might close the hospitals down before they comprise on murder.

How do you all feel about the settlement aspect of eharmony’s decision?

Perhaps the servers are located in New Jersey? :confused:

I don’t think so. Gays and lesbians will not be allowed onto the eHarmony site. Rather, a separate website for dating will be set up for them.

[quote=Wall Street Journal]As part of the agreement, the Pasadena, Calif.-based company will develop and market Compatible Partners, a Web dating service for same-sex couples, and will allow the site’s first 10,000 users to register free. EHarmony will also pay $50,000 to the attorney general’s office and $5,000 to the man who first brought the case.

In a statement Wednesday, eHarmony denied violating discrimination law and said its business had been based on years of researching opposite-sex marriages to understand what makes such couples compatible.
[/quote]

online.wsj.com/article/SB122714242388642779.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

It is wrapped up in this statement

“You could have set an example to Christians and freedom-loving Americans everywhere by fighting on principle for your company’s First Amendment right not to be bullied into submission by a politically correct state bureaucracy,” said LaBarbera. "Instead, you capitulated.
“In addition to hurting the cause of Christianity, you have damaged the cause of freedom and particularly religious freedom in America. It appears that eHarmony is no longer a ‘match’ for Integrity.”

All this ('gay" rights and “gay” marriage) isn’t about equal rights or fainess, it is about silencing the message of the Church and destroying families. An attempt to destroy any sense of morality, but most all kill the message of Christ concerning redemption and salvaton. It is time for those sitting on the fence to wake up and smell the coffee.

Over 350 separate state anti-discrimination laws would likely be affected by the legal recognition of same-sex marriage, according to a new study by The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty.
The Becket Fund surveyed over 1,000 state anti-discrimination laws – specifically those prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender, or marital status – to assess how those laws would affect religious dissenters to same-sex marriage if same-sex marriage were legally recognized.
The study found that all 50 states prohibit gender discrimination in some way, and only 37 states have explicit religious exemptions to these provisions, many of them quite narrow. This lack of robust exemptions could become a problem if (as has happened in some instances) religious objections to same-sex marriage are treated as a kind of gender discrimination. In addition, 33 states prohibit at least some discrimination based on marital status, and only 13 of these states provide religious exemptions, some with a wide latitude of exemption, others with only narrow exemptions. Of the 20 states that prohibit sexual orientation-based discrimination, 18 provide exemptions for religious objection.
becketfund.org/index.php/article/854.html

If this country doesn’t regain its moral bearings, those that believe in truth will have to go underground, into exile or prison.

images-partners-tbn.google.com/images?q=tbn:6g-KFigwdWI8SM:www.familyrightsassociation.com/educate/nazi/nazi_stomp_church.jpg

http://www.secondexodus.com/assets/images/PEOPLE/stmaximiliankolbe.jpg
St. Maximilian Kolbe, pray for us.
Pray that we be brave, as defenders of the Faith and defenders of families.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.