When news broke last week that the homosexual lobby in New Jersey had won a decision against online dating service eHarmony, we were once again reminded that the pursuit of “equal rights” for homosexuals is often an attempt to impose their agenda. It would behoove us to learn from this that the Left, and particularly the militant homosexual wing of the Left, will not stop until they have defiled all that we hold dear and have corrupted all we hold incorruptible.
In what proved to be another case of discrimination victim (gay Eric McKinley) vs. business owner and “bigot” (Neil Clark Warren, founder eHarmony), we learned that McKinley had gotten his little feelings hurt when he learned that eHarmony had no options for men to meet men on their website. According to USA Today, when McKinley saw that only straight couples could meet on eHarmony he found it “very frustrating… very humiliating to think that other people can do it and I can’t."
McKinley filed suit in 2005, and with the help of the New Jersey Civil Rights Division, reached a settlement which resulted in eHarmony paying $5,000 to McKinley, $50,000 to the New Jersey Civil Rights Division, and opening a sister site for gays which will “include photos of same-sex couples, as well as individual same-sex users, in advertising materials used to promote its same-sex matching services.”
For years, bloggers and writers for www.queerly.com have asked why those “bastards” at eHarmony “discriminate against queers?” And they have been especially outraged that Warren founded eHarmony with ties to that “homo-hater” Dr. James Dobson at Focus on the Family. Pay attention folks: There’s a plot afoot here.
When Leftists cry “discrimination” they are usually criticizing the exercise of someone else’s choice in the name of choice (imagine that). Sites like “queerly,” groups like GLAD or NAMBLA, and books that extol “queer theory” spread their vileness by casting everything in a negative light via the presumption that every person or entity that does not include homosexuals is anti-gay (which would be like saying the owner of a knife store is necessarily anti-gun).
Thus homosexual lobbyists presume Warren purposely founded his site to exclude gays instead of adopting the more rational posture that he created the site to appeal to his Christian customers.
What the gay community does not often admit is the fact that www.match.com has had a site where men can look for other men for some time. But militant gays aren’t happy with having only some options available to them – they want all options available to them. Regardless of who owns the sites (or businesses), and regardless of what religious affiliation that site (or business) might have, every knee shall bow to the gay agenda or face discriminatory charges. (See folks, it’s not the pursuit of equal rights that’s taking place here; it’s the attempt to impose an agenda.)
The other reason I bring up the fact that www.match.com provides dating/relationship services for homosexuals is to demonstrate once more that the tactics of the Left are not simply anti-choice but anti-free market.
Ideally, a business survives in the free market by offering a service for which customers are willing to pay. If enough customers want a service that is not offered and you have the capital to start a business that offers it, then you have an opportunity to make quite bit of money. And there are many such opportunities because the tastes and desires of American customers are diverse. But militant gays cannot tolerate diversity. Therefore, instead of launching their own version of eHarmony they go to court, interfere with the market, and force Warren to allow homosexuals to form relationships on his website.
This is exactly what our incoming president and the Leftists in congress want to do to privately owned radio stations. Even though the Left already has liberal talk radio via tax-payer-funded N.P.R. and the glorious “Air America” network, which has proven unable to attract the advertising dollars necessary to pay staff salaries, they want to tell the rest of America’s radio station owners what can and cannot be aired based on political ideology. It’s not that they will then listen to the stations; it’s just that they want to control the stations.
As you read various opinions about McKinley v. eHarmony remember that the people who were truly discriminated against were those who had chosen eHarmony over other relationship services (such as match.com) because of its Christian principles as well as the stockholders of eHarmony who own it because it had a specific niche in the market. (I say “had” instead of “has” because it’s novel feature was greatly diminished thanks to the outcome of the case in New Jersey.)
And no matter what the bloggers at queerly.com write you must also remember that this: like all other leftist endeavors, was simply a power play. If you don’t believe me, consider this: After the decision against eHarmony was made in McKinley’s favor, USA Today reported that he said he “might consider” using the site now.
In other words, after all the suing, all the “discrimination,” and all the hurt feelings, he’s not even sure he wants to use eHarmony; but he was certainly sure he wanted to punish the site’s founder for making a decision with which he did not agree.