All I can say is "preach brother preach"

My message may surprise gays here or those who support gay rights as heterosexuals. I am a gay man who is OKAY with eHarmony not providing same-sex search options. Let's be objective.

1) The creator of eHarmony is a (more or less) devout Christian who used to be close buds with James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family. His stance on homosexuality is clear.

2) eHarmony was not created for the purpose to single out homosexuals. It was genuinely created as a dating site for men to find women and women to find men. It's not like they stood around and delighted in the fact that gay search options would not be featured.

3) I can't sue Apple for not offering a software title that Windows-based PCs offer; that's nuts. eHarmony did not slander homosexuals on its site or even suggest anything derogatory. To my knowledge, the actual eHarmony service itself did not promote any type of intolerance to the "homosexual agenda" or those who identify themselves as homosexuals.

4) If you're gay, don't go to eHarmony.com, plain and simple. Just about every other site other there offers same-sex options and some are BETTER and FREE (OKCupid for example).

5) Here's something I live by: don't go somewhere you're not wanted. It's not oppression to not be allowed to join eHarmony as someone seeking a same-sex relationship because A) eHarmony doesn't keep me down. B) It didn't take anything away from me or tell me I have to change. C) As long as the dating site market has choices that meet my needs, there's no real reason to be upset.

I can just go elsewhere and spend my dollar at another site - their loss.

Bottom line is the eHarmony folks weren't intentionally trying to be exclusive from the site's inception. What they do after that and what they communicate in response to accusations of unfair discrimination is another thing however.

This is completely ridiculous. Where will it end?

Yes, next thing you know they'll start banning whites-only dating sites. Oh that's right, those are illegal.

Gosh, next thing you know they'll start banning interracial marriage because it interferes with the beliefs of some religions, like, oh wait for it, many Christian denominations. Oh but that would be illegal too.

Does eHarmony ban jewish people to since they aren't with the owner's Christian values? What about Hindus?

California has a law banning discrimination against people on the basis of sexual orientation. If they wanted to discriminate, they should have incorporated somewhere else.

How about if we have a website the EXCLUDES blacks or people of color? How about if it excludes only Catholics? Sorry, when we march down the path of exclusion, we eventually will arrive in the city of Hateville.

I agree with John Aravosis.

This is comparable to a "whites only" situation.

A business, online or otherwise, cannot legally exclude a protected class of people like blacks or women - or gays.

Its called discrimmination against a minority group. Its illegal – and I think it should be illegal.

Yes, Ryan and Rick. Where will it end? I'm just so tired of how gays beat up straight kids on the playground, how gay churches use the law to exclude straights from institutions like marriage, how many straight people live lives in a lonely celibate closet because the gays around them are too intolerant to allow them to have a love life, how many hate crimes against straights result in handicap and death.... yes, where will it end? When will guys like you be allowed some freedom and justice and peace of mind?

Oh wait a minute.....

(If this is all you have to complain about...)

Thanks, TJ, for showing your prejudice. Of all the subjects you picked to comment on you choose this one. I wonder why? (*sarcasm*) It's hatred like this blog - thinly disguised though it is - that makes it so extremely painful to be gay in the United States today. I hope you're happy hurting others.

"Here’s something I live by: don’t go somewhere you’re not wanted."

For goodness sake, if I followed your "logic" I'd be sitting home a lot with no where to go because I wasn't wanted. I still believe in equal rights and we all know about the "separate, but equal" drinking fountains, bathrooms, and where the less than equal folk had to sit on the bus. Let's go forward with civil rights and not back to a time when it favored a "special-rights" group of people.

And a note to TJ Holmes, "Pardon me, but I think your bigoted-slip is showing."

So, if gay people were to live by the creed "Don't go somewhere you're not wanted", Stephen, that does not leave us a lot of options. What, maybe San Francisco, NYC, Chicago. I certainly would not be welcome in the town I do live in if it was generally known that I'm gay.

As for your point #1, you are saying it's completely OK to be a bigot if you're a Christian. And that's supposed to be a good thing?

And I can't honestly believe you're equating civil rights to whether or not I can buy Microsoft Office at an Apple store.

Your "arguments", such as they are, are pretty pathetic.

Separate, But Equal.

Never Was.
Never Will Be.

your argument is ridiculous... eHarmony rejected folks WITHOUT providing a reason, and without letting folks know that they didn't provide same sex dating services ...

and now that they've been found out, they'll pay a small fine and cash in on a new business venture... for all you folks complaining, quit... eHarmony's not complaining, they're getting ready to go to the bank.

Stephen S: You're right, let's be objective. If a restaurant hung a "White People Only" sign on the door, you'd apparently be fine with that because people shouldn't go where they're not wanted. Unfortunately for you, but fortunately for everyone else, the law says that's not OK.

In response to the original post's series of questions like "Can a heterosexual now sue those sites for not providing them a straight match?" - Of course. Anyone can sue anyone for anything. Always could, always will be able to.

Why don't you just stick to reading the news.

Just because other dating sites don't discriminate, that doesn't mean it's OK that eharmony does.

I'm trying to see how a net reduction in bigotry is a bad thing. Your ridiculous slippery slope is nonsense. The financial and material resources needed to expand eHarmony are negligible and will only serve to increase their income.

I'm with Clint, why don't you NEWSREADERS just READ the news and stop trying to opine on cultural subjects.

I think I'll start a dating service for WHITES only. How does that sound, TJ?

Oh blogger TJ pleeze!! This isn't a free service, so I'm sure E Harmony will donate all that "sinful" money they make to the poor around the world....yeah right.

eHarmony didn't say they wouldn't match gays, but they took their money anyway. That's fraud.

And the idea that I "shouldn't go where I'm not wanted" is just silly. We'd still be doing that "white only" and "black only" thing if we all followed that advice.

Just because the black community is the ruling class in America now doesn't mean you have to be bigoted like the whites were.

A simple rule for determining if something is is discriminatory or not:

Replace the word 'gay' with any race or religion. If you can then loudly voice that opinion in a large crowd of racially and religiously mixed people without the fear of having the snot kicked out of you then it's not discriminatory.

CNN better wake up and realize this is a NEW DAY.

Beating up on "the gays" isn't going to be tolerated anymore. Well, maybe in the "Old South" where they still vote Republican but this election has awakened CHANGE in this country and WE ARE NOT GOING TO GO TO THE BACK OF THE BUS again!

So your assumption is that Compatible Partners and eHarmony are separate but equal.

Sounds familiar, TJ?

I would expect more empathy and intellect from a journalist of color.

How about we do this:
Only gays can go to Magic Mountain, and hetros can only go to Disneyland. Or, how about only heteros are allowed to buy PCs and gays buy Apple. Does it make business sense? No.
So, if it's not a business decision, it is based on bigotry. It really is that simple.

To followup on Skippyjack's comment.

If the restaurant hung a sign that said, "Only straights allowed", would that be ok? Of course not. That is what they actually did.

Rick, Comparing gays as chickens in a steak house! People have rights based on the Constitution and court rulings. They are not food or items on a menu. What a phony comparison.

This is no different than Curves Fitness. They are a niche business that caters to a women only clientele – and actually exclude men from working out there – because that is their business model.

For eHarmony it is about service, not membership exclusion based on sexual preference. The lawsuit didn't request membership in eHarmony – it asked for man on man matching. That is service.

eHarmony also doesn't provide the service for married people looking for affairs (already sued for), they don't match people looking for short term flings, they don't match group sex partners, they don't match men to men or women to women. It is not their expertise, their niche or business model. With niche – eHarmony or gay.com are just another dating website, and Curves is just another gym.

Is it discrimination if the new gay matching website fails?

Wow TJ.....just wow.

I thought you were an okay guy.

eHarmony is a business and not a religious institution. In this country, a business can't discriminate against a particular group of people by refusing to sell to them. eHarmony doesn't exclude any one except gays. If you're black, Jewish, Hispanic, Christian, Muslim, white, atheist, etc.; eHarmony will sell you their service.

But if you're gay, eHarmony will not sell you their service. Discrimination is discrimination and we wouldn't put up with this if they excluded blacks, Asians, and others.

Your reasoning is that of a four year old. These arguments are specious and that's a charitable word to describe them.

Shame on you.

Well, apparently all one has to do is say "I'm a 'Christian" and that justifies any kind of bigotry and discrimination they wish to select. Of course, the media goes right along with this automatic identification of right wingers as "Christian" as if there aren't hundreds of other denominational choices within the greater religion – and the fact here is that apparently the owner chose to associate with Focus on the Family. And what does James Dobson have to do with Christianity other than his own self-claim to represent an entire religion?

I'm getting tired of people claiming a special right to bigotry based on nothing more than deliberately choosing a narrowly-defined sub-cultural "religious" belief that demands they persecute other free citizens or they can't "worship."

Ricwla – eHarmony's sole service is male-to-female matching. How can they sell their male-to-female service to a person looking for a male-to-male service? It is not discrimination.

Niche services exist in every industry and market – it is a companies imperative to come up with a unique service based on its expertise that sets it apart from its competitors.

A bridal store only provides the service of selling bridal dresses. If you want a tuxedo – the bridal store isn't sexist. You can enter the store – but there is now service for men. Gay.com isn't sexist toward straight people – they just don't have a heterosexual service. A butcher shop provides the service of meat – they aren't discriminatory towards vegetarians.

This isn't the "separate but equal" racial water fountain of the 60's – this is asking that water fountain provide a different type of water to anyone that asks. That water fountain will not provide Avian for one user – tap water for another – and Fiji for yet another. It provides one water – if you don't want it – go to another water fountain.

What a buffoon. Take him off the air.

Oh, TJ. Think about what you're saying. ):

So, how long does eHarmony have to continue their gay website before they are allowed to pull the plug because it loses money?

The militant left are shooting themselves in the foot. They are awakening the silent majority.

This is like a whites-only dating service. eHarmony has a dating algorithm. No one is saying anything other than let gay men and women who want it to use it. It costs eharmony nothing and it will now offer its service under a different brand name.

eHarmony refused to make its product available to everyone. The law says you can't discriminate.

Discovery,

eHarmony excluded same-sex matching based on the owners' religious based prejudices toward gay people.

You don't need a "niche" market for heterosexuals – that is like saying you need a "niche" market for whites.

Gays are in the minority by a huge percentage. The purpose behind anti-discriommination laws is to prevent a small minority from being excluded precisly b/c they are different and in small numbers.

You simply do not get the basic concept behind anti-discrimmination laws and measures.

Newt,

The tyranny of the majority – is that it?

eHarmony needs to include same sex couples in their main site for all couples. Then it is not an issue if their same-sex site fails.

Perphaps that is what eHarmony is hoping will happen by creating a seperate entity.

We should call out eHarmoony on this fact – we are not stupid.

'Silent majority?' How Nixonian of you. Join the rest of the human race in this century, Newt. We're a lot more tolerant now.

Discovery: I'm pretty sure that Curves can't actually prohibit men from joining, but I'm not sure. Your other examples are incorrect though. I'm a man, and I can go into any bridal store and buy a gown. I could even try it on if I liked. Likewise, a vegetarian can buy meat from any butcher. Yes your company can target a niche market, but you can't prevent people outside your chosen niche from using your service.

I think the big problem for eHarmony is that they're selling the public this idea that they've done so much quantitative research in the field of successful marriages that they can choose a perfect mate for anyone who signs up for the site. We know this is a bit of a snow job; people are unique, and no one can really predict who their perfect mate will be. If eHarmony lets people (read: gay people) use their service for whom they've done no supporting research, and those people find matches, it will expose the truth about the value of their research.

Question for TJ – Do you think being gay is a choice?? It's NOT!

Why would someone "choose" a lifetime of discrimination. In many states I could still lose a job or be denied housing (the list goes on) just for being a gay person.

IT"S DISCRIMINATION!

Seriously? If you substituted ANY other race/religion/ethnic group for gay in this pathetic whine, TJ, I highly doubt CNN would allow it to be posted on this site. In fact, I doubt they would allow you to post it on ANY site without rebuke. And I'm sure that if eHarmony was discriminating against any other protected minority group, your attitude about it would be completely different.

What a shame that ugliness like this is allowed by a supposedly respectable news organization.

Newt-

I think the silent majority is what finally woke up on election day this year. Your comment is a bit too late... I guess you are "Newt" who prevailed on election day 1994 only to be shown for the big hypocrite he and his movement were?

Enough conservative cultural wedge issues and pro-discrimination rants dominating the media!

Am I seriously reading this disguised homophobia on an official CNN site with the official little CNN logo up on the tab? Wow.

EHarmony is a for-profit company. They should be subject to anti-discrimination laws. I have no problem with a private website doing this, but this is a public company, and they must cater to all individuals.

Companies should not be allowed to do this in the same way certain restaurants are not allowed to cater only to whites or certain shops only hiring hispanics.

Militant Left? Maybe you don't have an education; however, we have equality here in the USA. Bigots and the right-wingers can't understand something as simple as our Constitution.

The name calling from the right (Newt), is a perfect example of how poor education and self-importance can skew your thinking.

Oh, I forgot... it isn't exclusion if it's against a gay or lesbian. If you have any ANY intellictual curiosity, check out the ACLU. It isn't just for freedoms.

I'm straight. Can I get set up with a date on gay.com? I don't think so. Should I sue gay.com and force them to provide a dating service for heterosexuals?

Yvonne wrote:

I’m straight. Can I get set up with a date on gay.com? I don’t think so. Should I sue gay.com and force them to provide a dating service for heterosexuals?

There is nothing stopping you from posting an ad on gay.com looking to hook up with men. You won't get any answers because the men there aren't looking for women... but you can post an ad if you like.

Therein lies the difference...

Oh yvonne. ..gay.com has a bisexuals room and used to have a straight room.

Another wingnut talking point shot down due to willful ignorance.

Buh-bye.

Gary SF: isn't 'black people of color' redundant?

Why is TJ so "full of himself?" I don't find him a good reporter. Difficult to understand. Kind of weird subject coming from him too. What is his deal?

Yvonne, do it. Seriously. You won't find any straight men willing to get on GAY dot com but hey if that's where YOU want to go to find STRAIGHT guys, then please do sue gay.com. Or maybe YOU just like BISEXUAL men.

Well, I just read about the head of the South Carolina GOP who just resigned from a White Only Country Club so he could run for Chairman of the RNC. IOKIYAAR, ya know!

Yikes. TJ, you just got a whole lot less attractive.

But Yvonne, it's a little different than what you're saying.

If you're white, should you be allowed to participate in the Miss Black America pageant? Would you sue if they kept you out? There's a historical reason for the contest, which still exists in some form.

A somewhat silly comparison, but there are those that cater strictly to minorities – to give to them what they don't get from those that cater to the majority. Gay.com fills a void because of eHarmony. Who knows, maybe gay.com's dating service will fall by the wayside now that eHarmony has jumped in.

Yes Yvonne, you can get a date at Gay.com. You may not like the offerings but you aren't precluded from trying, unlike at eHarmony which wouldn't accept applications from gays or lesbians at all.

Idiot.

Yvonne - you might have done some research first. You can sign up on gay.com as a woman and search for men. Your success rate might be pretty low, but you can do it.

So no, you probably shouldn't sue gay.com.

Yes, Yvonne, you can. Gay.com would be happy to let you search through profiles of men seeking women. They aren't bigots.

I want to sue George Bush so I can get a billion-dollar no-bid contract for work I don't have to actually do.

Yvonne-

I think you can, at least on the gay dating sites I've seen. Men seeking women and vice versa are usually choices. You might not find many matches but they are there on the sites I've seen. These discrimination laws are probably the reason. Eharmony should have to follow the same laws.

Yvonne – If you feel the need to do so, then go for it. I find your perspective interesting in that you, as a straight person already have all the rights and protections of the Constitution. Your relationships are recognized by our national government. Ours are not. Ours aren't recognized in the majority of these United States. I wonder how you would feel it the shoe were on the other foot? Would you be opining to sue everyone that discriminates against you? You have no worries about someone taking away your right to marry or join a dating club. They are generally aimed at straight people. No worries, you appear to be safe. We're still trying to fight for the right you take for granted; marriage. Yet, Yvonne, you feel put upon like you are being discriminated against because of the eHarmony debacle. It may help for you to start looking at the big picture. Equal rights for all and no more second-class citizens whether you think that infringes on your right to be bigoted or not. Just walk a mile or so in my shoes for once.

TJ I noticed you started with: "There are dating web sites that cater to Black people. Can someone sue because they won’t be matched with a white guy or gal?" The reason you didn't ask "There are dating web sites that cater to White people. Can someone sue because they won’t be matched with a black guy or gal?" IS BECAUSE that racism that DID exist before you were probably born has been fought and won, thus that "example" would be illegal today. So I find your very blatant insensitivity to the struggles of gay people shocking. I am SURE the "white only" crowd back in the dark ages of civil rights would have also found many arguments against blacks being allowed on a White only site [if that had existed back them]

Um, Yvonne, gay.com's niche market includes bisexual men and women. So if you were a man looking for a woman or vice versa, that wouldn't be a problem. As a rule gay businesses don't exclude heterosexuals.

And TJ has just given me another reason to stay away from CNN. If I want to watch reactionary, bigots (and I don't) I'll watch FOX.

Sorry, but as a gay man this is kind of ridiculous. There are lots of businesses that don't offer anything I like. Do you know what I do about it? I shop somewhere else.

I imagine I'm not alone in that endeavor. Some stores have the item I want. Some stores don't have the item I want. Sometimes both stores have the item I want and I buy he one that is cheaper or has the best customer service. It is a crazy plan, but it works for me.

I should never think.

Okay one more thing. So we believe eHarmony as a company doesn't like gay people. So I am going to sue this company and force them to create a service so I can then give them my money?

Two points you have failed to understand completely.

First, no one has forced them to do this. They have agreed to do so. If they thought that what they were doing was not illegal, they could have gone to court. They had the option. The court is not forcing them to do anything. So quit lying.

Second, the site was brought before the commission because it BARRED gay and lesbian people, not because it failed to adequately provide matches. Sites that cater to the African-American community do allow non-African-American's onto the site. White people can join. They might not find any matches, but they can join.

eHarmony expressly forbid non-straight people from signing up and enjoying it services.

It is clear from this post that you have a very lose relationship with the truth. That is shameful. Shame on you. Shame on CNN for allowing such lies to be perpetrated on its site. Shame. Shame. Shame.

I don't think Yvonne is coming back...

TJ, I guess you don't believe in, "Brown vs Board of Education"?

im gay and find nothing wrong with eharmony not allowing men for men. there are plenty of gay friendly sites. all this guy did is get eharmony to make another site for gays and that will just bring in more money for them.

So if a private business can be coerced into changing their business model and beliefs against their will, will my church be targeted next in being coerced in to performing gay marriages?

[...] Here's what he had to say on CNN's blog about eHarmony's recent decision to launch... after settling a discrimination lawsuit... [W]hat this case does now is open up a whole new world of possibilities and consequences. [...]

Tj Holmes is not even good at reading the news, much less a good reporter/correspondent. That's why he's on daytime. TJ–CNN should not give you a platform for your opinions. You're as bad as some local reporters.

Wrong, wrong, wrong! T.J., what has gotten IN to you? I thought that you of all people would understand that "gayness" isn't something that you choose.

I am straight, and yet I understand that gay people don't think of themselves as "choosing a lifestyle." If I were gay and went to the Lamborghini showroom, I would expect the same service as a straight person.

The idea that eHarmony shouldn't change its service because "Lamborghini doesn't offer a four door station wagon" or whatever is the wrong analogy. The right analogy is: If eHarmony expects to sell a service or product, they must make it available to EVERYONE. Much in the same way, the Lamborghini dealership needs to extend its services and products to a general public that doesn't discriminate - theoretically, at least.

- Sammy
Boston, MA

what are the prests and preachers so hard up now that they are willing to scare the hell out of the american people by saying if you are gay or you voted for Obama you better go to church and confess or you are not going to go to heaven that way they put more of our money in their pockets

these people have civil rights just like the rest of of do so leave them alone. they do not bother you you do not need to bother them

Hey Rick, please take a look at the Philadelphia Daily News article on the front page about the United States Postal Service, Dec. 1, 2008. I'm sure you would get quite a response from your viewers over the way the postal service is "handling" their mail. It is absolutely appaling and it should certainly be brought to light on a natioinwide stage such as yours.