eHarmony Settles Suit, Agrees to Offer Same-Sex Matching Services

It's time that hate groups like Focus on the Family and their business ventures, like eHarmony, are held accountable for their actions. If eHarmony was so interested in getting people married, they would have helped defeat prop 8 in California and prop 2 in Florida.

This is a dangerous precedent. Why doesn't the guy just start his own dating service? He is free to do that. The purpose of the website is for heterosexual marriage. Can I sue SONY because my television preference is a 43 inch widescreen, which they don't offer? Another slap in the face for common sense.

I went to craigslist and found the following dating categories: women seek women, women seeking men, men seeking women, men seeking men and then misc. romance and casual encounters. Does the lack of these last two categories on other sites constitute discrimination against those not wanting a long term relationship? Are computers capable of discrimination? What if the algorithm that eHarmony uses gives a better result for heterosexual users than for homosexual users, will the algorithm be declared discriminatory? This opens a large can of worms. I think the truth here is that the gay community does not like the guy who started eHarmony and is attacking him in every way that they can, even these dangerously invalid ways.

interestingly enough, I always noticed how 1950's era the tv ads seemed...where both members of the couples portrayed were of the exact same ethnicity....Asian/asian Black/Black....and of course, mid-western white wonder bread/white. These may ostensibly have marriage as a final destination, but are really glorified hook up or dating sites. More enlightened people choose their mates on the basis of attraction and compatibility, whether or not that is in reference to religion, skin color or of course, sexual preference.

interestingly enough, I always noticed how 1950's era the tv ads seemed...where both members of the couples portrayed were of the exact same ethnicity....Asian/asian Black/Black....and of course, mid-western white wonder bread/white. These may ostensibly have marriage as a final destination, but are really glorified hook up or dating sites. More enlightened people choose their mates on the basis of attraction and compatibility, whether or not that is in reference to religion, skin color or of course, sexual preference.

"Would you have the same reaction if they refused to serve...jews? " Yes. If they didn't serve Jews, I'd go to JDate. Who cares? Can't this guy find a different service to use? I voted against prop 8 (i.e. I voted in favor of gay marriage in California) , but if gay marriage is legalized we're going to get a lot more garbage like this which makes me hesitate. The government shouldn't allow discrimination. But private individuals have the same right to free association that gays want, to associate or not associate with who they please. I'm tired of hearing people say "we're not going to let you vote on our rights!" If we don't solve this democratically, which laws should opponents of gay marriage break? Democracy and law is a good thing, even if it messes up quite frequently. Should we say that gay people are being sexist for refusing to date members of the opposite sex? Standards like that are clearly insane when the situation is reversed.

Forgot to add -- I don't agree with the lawsuit at all. Dating sights pertaining to certain demographics shouldn't be forced into expanding outside their medium. We have plenty of dating sites available to us, so why didn't McKinley go to one of them? Besides, a straight girlfriend of mine went through eHarmony once, to find a stable guy. They wound up matching her with a schizophrenic who was trying to wean himself off of his anti-psychotics, and eventually turned into a half-crazy stalker. I'd do Manhunt anyday of the week in comparison to that.

Anyone from Anytown: No, we can't expect everyone to instantly tolerate us. However, you also can't expect everyone to simply fall in rank behind what you believe we should be allowed to do. You laugh at us with our "gay rights" while you want to sit there and pontificate about "religious freedom"? Please. Every religion has had plenty of freedom in this country...perhaps a little too much freedom, seeing as how some wanted to turn this democracy into a theocrasy...and almost succeeded. Sorry to say, but not everyone follows the decrees from your 5,000-year-old storybook. It is not the ultimate tie-breaker. Nothing new has been added to it in over 2,000 years. It's old, outdated, and aside from some general moral backgrounds, it needs to be retired to the fiction section of a library where it belongs. Judge not, lest ye be judged.

"Doesn't feel good?" Too bad. Would you have the same reaction if they refused to serve blacks, jew, redheads, fill in the category?

Hmmmm. This doesn't feel good. This is about telling a business who they can and can't serve, what they can and can't do. I think people went after eHarmony because it "worked" and I use that tentatively. Who knows how long those marriages will last either? But I suppose the GLBT community wanted relationships that might last too. Is it necessary to force a business to cater to people to which their business never worked before? eHarmony matches men with compatible women---that's what they do. Do I trust them to match me to a compatible man? No. Do they even know first thing about being gay? No. What do I want their services for? I want someone who knows how to match gay people... This is not a restaurant in Selma we're talking about here, where all people should be able to eat the food served there. The product from eHarmony is a heterosexual relationship---they don't offer Homosexual ones....and they won't be good at it when they try.