Posted on 10/05/2007 7:52:09 AM PDT by reaganaut1
eHarmony allows clients to discriminate on the race of potential mates. Even though it's only acting on the wishes of its clients, matching services that discriminate by race may violate a statute dating back to the Civil War that prohibits race discrimination in contracting. Think about it. eHarmony is a for-profit company that takes $50 from black clients and refuses to treat them the same (match them with the same people) as some white clients. A restauraunt would be in a lot of trouble if it refused to seat Hispanic customers in a section where customers stated a preference to have "Anglos only."
Isn't it obvious that people should be able to date who they want and specify their preferences on a dating site?
In the next paragraph, Ayres criticizes eHarmony for not facilitating homosexual relationships.
Whaaaa! Eharmony didnt fix my life!
eHarmony also takes $50 from white people and refuses to match them with black people, so the argument is moot.
Should we just allow the government (or Rev. Moon) simply assign us spouses? Nothing could be more fair than that... </sarc>
People of any race are treated the same - they are matched with people that have similar preferences.
If they can’t find anybody on the site, tough luck. I’m white and an “eHarmony reject”.
What’s next, not allowing clients to specify if they want to date a male or a female?
They should be prohibited from discriminating on the basis of race, sex, religion, age, marital status, or physical appearance. Customers should simply post that they are available and then go out with whatever man or woman gets randomly selected for them.
The only problem is that the government won't be able to extract any tax revenue from eHarmony after it quickly goes out of business.
There used to be a Constitutional right of the people peaceably to assemble, which meant that you could assemble with whoever you wanted.
That right apparently got written out of the Constitution around the same time that the "separation of church and state" and "emanations from the penumbra" provisions got added.
Well, the author fails to understand that it was completely legal to have “separate but equal” well after any Civil War legislation.
Just ask racist Southern Democrats for what they were allowed as legal into the 1960’s.
The author is ignorant.
I’d be getting laid 10 times a week if I wasn’t particular about race, sexual orientation, intelligence level, drug use, number of teeth and favorite team in the Southeastern Conference. It just so happens that I am particular about all of those things.
LOL.
I met my wife through eHarmony. We've been married for almost 3 years now, and just had our second child.
Lots of the eHarmony "rejects" aren't really rejected - there's just no one who meets their specific criteria at that precise moment. eHarmony told me I had no matches for the first week, but then started sending me matches. Six months later, I met my future wife.
Wow, I thought I was the only one.
eeeewwwwwHarmony?
Wrong. It treats them exactly the same -- it takes their $50 and asks (in the survey) their race. It's not like if one answers 'black' one is refused.
Refused service, that is. They'll take your money no matter what your race is, and provide you with the same sevice.
“written by a professor at the Yale law school.”
I would have never guessed that Ian was a professor at a law school. His premise is just plain ignorant and the arguments they are making about e-harmony are just foolish. However, professor or not, a liberal is ignorant and foolish, so no real surprise there.
What’s next, not allowing clients to specify if they want to date a male or a female?
^^^
Bingo!
Probably also the goal of the perv-activists to prohibit species discrimination.
I say you should be able to screen by any criteria you want, its your money and life or have I fallen asleep and Hillary won and we have to date whomever the government picks.
Simple answer - the screening selection should be made by the person submitting their personal choices, but that person should include their own status within that classification. For example, “ 6 ft. 8 guy seeking female 5 ft 4 or shorter who enjoys wearing a collar and leash.”
Interesting, the attacks on EHarmony.
First from the homosexuals because there is no homosexual matches
Second from the black community because people are permitted to choose race, which happens at most other dating sites.
What will the next victim group be?
EHarmony has a Christian perspective.
It is fair game.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.