A gay man sued e-harmony for discrimination. Michelle Malkin is upset about it, and was kind enough to name him so that her minions may subject him to righteous Christian harassment.
"New Jersey plaintiff Eric McKinley can now crown himself the new Rosa Parks -- heroically breaking down inhumane barriers to Internet matchmaking by forcing a law-abiding private company to provide services it was never created to provide."
To be clear: eHarmony never, ever refused to do business with anyone. The company broke no laws.
It is typical for conservatives to throw in the "private, law-abiding" adverb when defending corporate behavior. The thing is that this is demonstrably false in this case. It is illegal to discriminate against potential customers based on sexuality in California and New Jersey. Malkin's villain of the week wouldn't have had a case if E-Harmony was completely "law-abiding". Nor would Malkin have anything to be outraged about.
"Neil Warren, eHarmony's founder, is a gentle, grandfatherly businessman who launched his popular dating site to support heterosexual marriage. A "Focus on the Family" author with a divinity degree, Warren encourages healthy, lasting unions between men and women of all faiths, mixed faiths or no faith at all."
This paragraph is pure stroke-inducing absurdity. Why does Malkin go through so much trouble to convince us that Warren is a good, "grandfatherly" man. That is of no relevance to anything. He either discriminated against gays or he did not. His level of grandfatherlyness is worth precisely two wet shits to the issue at hand. It is terribly sad to know that this was written by a grown, educated woman, using the argument tactics of a weeping ten year old girl caught wearing lipstick. 'But I'm a good girl mommy!! I love you so much!!'
I also loved the assertion that trolling an online dating site is a perfectly natural and healthy way to find the love of ones life. (As long as it's straight) One wonders what Malkin has to say about the Christian grandfatherly wholesomeness of Russian bride dealers, or this guy from Denver:
"U MUST SEND A PHOTO WITH YOUR EMAIL OR U WILL NOT GET A RESPONSE;;NO EXCEPTIONS;;NO DUMPTRUCKS!!!!!!!
COME SPEND SOME TIME WITH ME IN MY 14TH FLOOR PENTHOUSE IN BEAUTIFUL DENVER CO..WHAT A VIEW OF THE ROCKIES+THE CITY.U RELAX ALL WEEKEND WHILE I COOK U GOURMET MEALS+PLEASE U IN THE BEDROOM.WE WATCH FOOTBALL ALL WEEKEND+MOVIES.
ME;;
6"3;;222LBS;;DARK CURLY HAIR;;HAZEL EYES;;GOLDEN BROWN BABY SOFT SKIN;;
INTERNATIONALLY EDUCATED;;PROFESSIONAL SINGER,MUSICIAN,MOVIE PRODUCER"
http://lincoln.craigslist.org/m4w/925835940.html
This case is akin to a meat-eater suing a vegetarian restaurant for not offering him a rib-eye, or a female patient suing a vasectomy doctor for not providing her hysterectomy services.
Um. No. While straight sex and gay sex may be fundamentally different from each other (Though not necessarily so. 'Hitting it from the back' is, after all, a perfectly common practice among straight couples.) the shell game of finding a date is fundamentally the same no matter what one is looking for. A better metaphor would be a grocery store that sells nothing but meat because the store owner has an imaginary friend in the sky that tells him not to cater to vegetarians.
"The company agreed not only to offer same-sex dating services on a new site, but also to offer six-month subscriptions for free to 10,000 gay users, pay McKinley $5,000 and fork over $50,000 to New Jersey's Civil Rights division "to cover investigation-related administrative costs." Oh, and that's not all. Yield, yield to the grievance-mongers:"
The woman who sees thinks wearing a checkered scarf is a show of support for terrorism complains about 'grievance-mongers'. Too easy, let's move on.
I have enormous sympathy for eHarmony, whose attorney explained that they gave in to the unfair settlement because "litigation outcomes can be unpredictable." The recent mob response to the passage of Proposition 8, the traditional marriage measure in California, must have also weighed on eHarmony management's minds. But capitulation will only yield a worse, entirely predictable outcome: more shakedowns of private businesses that hold views deemed unacceptable by the Equality-at-All-Costs Brigade.
Perhaps heterosexual men and women should start filing lawsuits against gay dating websites and undermine their businesses. Coerced tolerance and diversity-by-fiat cut both ways.
'If you continue to force straight dating sites to expand their customer base and increase their profits we just might force you to do the same. Just you wait.' You know, I do remember a time when I was somewhat scared of these folk. Seems a thousand centuries ago.
http://townhall.com/columnists/MichelleMalkin/2008/11/21/the_eharmony_shakedown
No comments:
Post a Comment