eHarmony sued in California for excluding gays

Why doesn't someone just open up a Gay E-Harmony? Call it AIDS-Harmony.

There are hundreds of fag-loving sites that cater to the gaaaaayyyyy populace.

I wonder if the fags would be happy if those sites were sued for discrimination by straight loons!

Wouldn't work. Gays are more inclusive than straights.

Only to turn the regular people into wearing pink tutus!

I think I'll sue every cocksmoking fudgepacker for wasting valuable taxpayer money on a bullshit lawsuit.

Won't work. E-Harmony provides a specific product(matchmaking services for hetero couples) based on specific long term research and development. In order to provide what the plaintiffs are seeking, E-Harmony will have to create an entirely new product based on further R & D. In order for the plaintiff to win, they'd have to show that the existing product can be directly adapted for their use.

The Supreme Court "speaks for society?" Since when?

That's a good question, Wilbury, but, as I said, the fact that we cannot always agree on what is fair doesn't mean that society cannot impose a definition on its members. After all, we can't all agree on what justice is, either, but that doesn't mean that we can't have courts.

The Supreme Court applies social concepts, or, rather, its understanding of concepts that society more-or-less agrees upon.

For a recent example, see: Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. _____.

The following link highlights all occurrences of the word "social" (as well as a few other words) in a reproduction of that opinion, along with a summary. Upon reading the text for meaning, you can see that the Court applies social concepts to reach its decision.

Note that the first part, the Syllabus, is not part of the Court's decision.

Link:

http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache...urt social concepts&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=11&gl=us

Is a men's clothing store discriminating against women?

Is a producer of women's designer dresses discriminating against men?

Is a restaurant that does not offer kosher food discriminating against devout Jews?

Is a restaurant that serves pork discriminating against Muslems?

Is a chain of restaurants that does not have a store in a predominantly black neighborhood racially discriminating?

Is the Girl Scouts a discriminatory organization because they don't let adult men join?

Is the local skydiving club age discriminating because they have no provision for serving people who need walkers?

Not seeing a problem here. eHarmony, unlike various other services, is for heterosexuals only. So?

What if it were a dating service for white people only?

It's not like the site can't handle gay people. It's that it won't. Are you under the impression that serving gays will be prohibitively difficult or something?

Not seeing a problem with it. Such a business would probably forgo a lot of white customers with that policy but if that's what they want to offer...

If it's so easy and demand is sooooo strong, I'm sure some other business will come along to fill that need (eSodomy?).

( AdaptationNation beat me to the eSodomy gag)

We call those country clubs. About the only place where the world makes sense anymore.

"For white people (particular white men) only" is about the only scandalous thing there seems to be. There are award shows and the like specifically meant for blacks, latinos, women, etc.

So fair is what a court says it is without any objective standard. Fantastic.

There are homosexual matchmaking sites that could not offer a woman like me the match I would be looking for. There is nothing wrong with that because there are plenty of sites that do offer what I would be looking for. Why cry and pout about not getting what you want when it is available elsewhere. I am now going to sue every restaurant in town for not offering meals that are bovine protein free because they don't cater to my medical needs.

E-Sodomy?

That was funny AN.

Not only does it not provide options for homosexuals, last I checked, your application to join was far less likely to be accepted if you weren't Christian!

Funny how that is, ain't it. I really wish they'd get it over with and start marketing themselves as what they are - a Christian dating network.

I thought everyone knew that already.

At any rate, it all has an Sharpton/Jackson feel about it.

We're not talking about an award show.

The principal is the same. Those awards shows are geared toward a subset, as is this internet service.

An award show does not equal a business.

Should gynecologists be forced to take a quota of male patients?

A dating site founded by a fundie? I bet it states somewhere that they will sue you if you find somebody and you have sex without breeding a little soldier for God's army.

Are fundies not allowed to be entrepreneurs? Entrepreneurs that target and cater to a certain demographic.

I don't want to tell a fundy what they can and can't do any more than I want them telling me what I can and can't do.

Are they complaining because the other sites do serve homosexuals?

Let them cater to their own fundy subset. It keeps them out of mine

^ So fundies are second-class citizens? :flow2:

An awards show IS a business.

Die in a gas chamber you stupid Kraut!

:hitlerdance: