What Next?

EKY Sportster · 11-25-2008, 01:57 AM

cheerdad Wrote:UH....yea they did...thus this lawsuit.

A friend of mine, who is gay.....when eHarmony came out, tried to use their service to find a date. He did receive an email from the staff, very nicely stating that their company did not accomodate persons who were gay/lesbian. This was a VERY nice letter and he didn't think anything about it. It was no big deal. But after some more thought about this, (I can't believe I am going to say this...lol) but I do have to take back my earlier post and agree with the majority on this. Although, I do not agree with some of the analogies that have been presented, some actually have been quiet ridiculous, but....this compnay should not have been forced to find a date of gay/lesbian people. But, then again, government has forced companies to make sure they hire percentages of people, based on community population, of minorities...Affirmative Action. A great example of this is flight attendants. 98% of flight attendants are female. It took a lawsuit for airline companies to hire male flight attendants. Years ago, it took a law suit for airlines to allow their flight attendants to get married if they wanted too, start a family, be able to work past 28. So, I guess it all in the eye of the beholder. Make sense???

That is not what I meant. What I was saying is that no one is forbidden from using the site because of who they are. It is just that some people aren't going to find on the site what they are looking for, such as gay or lesbian relationships. Obviously a bi-sexual person could get on there and find a date if that person wasn't looking for a same sex partner. But for pure gay or lesbian persons, eHarmony at least wasn't the site for them.

**More Cowbell** · 11-25-2008, 10:19 AM

thecavemaster Wrote:I think, in a later post, I said that this particular thing (eharmony) did not, in my opinion, rise to the level of a civil rights issue because other companies did offer it. I see your point about the "not on the menu" aspect and don't disagree. However, my general thought is to err on the side of civil rights, with a careful distinction between legitimate issues and bogus litigation. Yours is a good post.

Thanks for the compliment.

I personally think that stories like this are bogus and trivialize actual discrimination, such as if two people were denied the ability to rent an apartment because they they are gay. That would be illegal, what happened with e-harmony is not.

In my opinion, cases like this are frivolous and waste taxpayers' money by tying up the courts.

cheerdad · 11-25-2008, 12:33 PM

sherman14 Wrote:Homosexuals are not a minority or a race. They are any race thats just "batting" for the other team.

I've read this and read this, and have ignored it for several days, because if I had responded when I first read it, I would have lost my cool and that would not have been a good thing, but I can't put it off any longer.

Homosexuals are a minority, with only 12% admitting they are gay, that constitutes a minority. Most major companies and larger cities have implemented policies against discrimination against sexual orientation. In the Fortune 500, nearly 90% prohibit discrimination based upon sexual orientation. My point is, just because you do not like people that are homosexual, do not feel like they deserve the same quality of life as you have or will have when you grow up, is your problem, because they (homosexuals) definitely do not have a problem with you. You know, they (homosexuals) believe that you are "batting" for the other team!!!!!

cheerdad · 11-25-2008, 12:40 PM

More Cowbell Wrote:Thanks for the compliment.

I personally think that stories like this are bogus and trivialize actual discrimination, such as if two people were denied the ability to rent an apartment because they they are gay. That would be illegal, what happened with e-harmony is not.

In my opinion, cases like this are frivolous and waste taxpayers' money by tying up the courts.

Cowbell...EXCELLENT !!!! This is probably the most accurate, sane post that has been published on this topic!!!

**PHS#1** · 11-28-2008, 12:56 AM

god loves everyone

oneijoe · 12-02-2008, 08:33 PM

:thatsfunn :thatsfunn

And if gas keeps going down, it may be the same when he leaves office.

Who'd have thought that possible a few months ago ??

Confused

hh:

cheerdad · 12-02-2008, 11:41 PM

oneijoe Wrote::thatsfunn :thatsfunn

And if gas keeps going down, it may be the same when he leaves office.

Who'd have thought that possible a few months ago ??

hh:

True, but look how it ripped us off in the mean time!!

courtdog · 12-02-2008, 11:44 PM

cheerdad Wrote:True, but look how it ripped us off in the mean time!!

That's why you should be ****ed at Nancy and her dems in congress.

~~Mr.Kimball~~ · 12-02-2008, 11:45 PM

oneijoe Wrote::thatsfunn :thatsfunn

And if gas keeps going down, it may be the same when he leaves office.

Who'd have thought that possible a few months ago ??

hh:

I have many times here lately thought back to that $1.49 BP sign and the stab at Bush. It already is the same price . It is $1.49 in Campbellsville right now.

**thecavemaster** · 12-03-2008, 09:53 AM

Mr.Kimball Wrote:I have many times here lately thought back to that $1.49 BP sign and the stab at Bush. It already is the same price . It is $1.49 in Campbellsville right now.

Americans bought a lot of fuel economy cars. Americans drove less. Iraq has become more peaceful. A combination of factors (including price gouging) drove the price up: a combination of factors have sent the price down. It's all a part of a grand "strategery."