[More Cowbell]

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.