eHarmony Was Bullied Into Submission By Homosexual Activists.

As I have written repeatedly, "when you accept and celebrate something that is abnormal and unhealthy, as if it were normal and positive, you turn reason and common sense on its head". An excellent example of this is a recent lawsuit and settlement by eHarmony.com . eHarmony, is an on-line Christian owned dating service, that was bullied into providing services for homosexual singles.

Michelle Malkin wrote in a recent article: "The company never refused to do business with anyone. Their great “sin” was not providing a specialized service that litigious gay people demanded they provide. This case is akin to a meat-eater suing a vegetarian restaurant for not offering him a ribeye or a female patient suing a vasectomy doctor for not providing her hysterectomy services. Sadly, eHarmony has settled . I wish they hadn’t, but I understand the decision given the chilling antics of the anti-Prop. 8 mob. The company agreed not only to offer same-sex dating services on a new site, but also to offer six-month subscriptions for free to 10,000 gay users".

E-Harmony obviously caved in due to the intimidation and bullying tactics that the gay activists have been using to influence businesses nationwide. As I have written in my previous article,"My Views on Homosexuality", this same tactic was used on the psychiatric profession, 40 years ago, in order to force them to remove homosexuality from its list of mental disorders.

The following is a comment on Malkin's article from a Prop. 8 supporter and an excellent rebuttal from a clear thinker.

eaglehaslanded said:
'This case is akin to a meat-eater suing a vegetarian restaurant for not offering him a ribeye or a female patient suing a vasectomy doctor for not providing her hysterectomy services.'
No, actually it’s like a lunch counter in Mississippi refusing to serve a Black person.

On November 20th, 2008 at 9:07 am, NJ-Aviator said:
NO. You could not be MORE WRONG. You really need a review of logic.
This person was not refused a service that the business offered. This person demanded a service the business DID NOT OFFER.
Michelle’s analogy was spot on. Yours was off in space.
And that’s the problem with the left. No logic.

Here is the link to Malkin's entire article and comments page. http://michellemalkin.com/2008/11/20/eharmony-forced-to-offer-same-sex-dating-services/