eHarmony To Settle With Gays, Again.

The online dating site eHarmony settled a lawsuit Tuesday in California by agreeing to be more inclusive with gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgenders, who are looking for love.

In 2005, Eric McKinley, a gay man from New Jersey filed suit against eHarmony for not offering matchmaking for gays and lesbians.

eHarmony agreed to a settlement with the New Jersey attorney general, who had claimed eHarmony violated state anti-discrimination law by refusing to offer matchmaking services to gays. The settlement in the case, McKinley v. eHarmony, says the company would pay McKinley $5,000 and will provide him a one-year complimentary membership.  eHarmony – which was not found in violation of the law – agreed to create a separate Web site called Compatible Partners, post photos of gay couples and individuals on the Web site, and use photos of gays in advertising.

Ironically, eHarmony’s attorney was Theodore B. Olson, a gay marriage proponent who is currently challenging California’s ban on same-sex marriage in Perry v. Schwarzenegger.

Olson commented on the McKinley case, saying that eHarmony chose to settle because of the unpredictable nature of litigation.

“We believed that the complaint resulted from an unfair characterization of our business,” eHarmony said in a statement. “We ultimately decided it was best to settle with the Attorney General since litigation outcomes can be unpredictable.”  (like maybe you could win?)

But apparently gays wanted more.

Linda Carlson, of California, sued the online dating company in May 2007 for the same reasons – seeking class action status. eHarmony responded by saying that the case is essentially moot because of their settlement in New Jersey.

Antone Johnson, the online dating service’s vice president of legal affairs, told the Daily Journal then, that the California case, Carlson v. eHarmony, shouldn’t go anywhere. “Now that we’re entering the same-sex matching market, we fail to see what the Carlson plaintiffs could achieve through further litigation.”  Regardless, the case was granted class action status.

Now under this week’s proposed settlement filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, eHarmony will noticeably link both of its straight and gay Web sites together and allow their subscribers to use both services (straight and gay) without paying double fees. The company also agreed to set up $2 million settlement fund will be established with approximately $500,000 to be designated as a fund for claims.

eHarmony’s plan to throw in the towel and cater to gays seems like a huge departure from the original vision of the founder, Dr. Neil Clark Warren, who developed the site, based his compatibility models around traditional marriage. Or is it?

According to his personal website, Warren earned his Ph.D. in clinical psychology from The University of Chicago, where he also served as a counselor and adjunct faculty member. He received his Masters of Divinity degree from Princeton Theological Seminary and completed his undergraduate degree at Pepperdine University. In addition, Warren is a former dean of Fuller Theological Seminary Graduate School of Psychology.

Warren started out marketing eHarmony primarily to the Christian community, partnering with Christian organizations like Focus on the Family and saying his relationship matching site would be “based on the Christian principles.”

On October 7, 2000, Warren shared with the Dallas Morning News his reasoning for launching his matching website.

“This society is decimated by broken marriages,” said Warren. “Seventy percent of all Americans today have been touched by divorce – either their own marriage or that of their parents.”  Warren says his motivation for launching eHarmony was that”no one else has taken on this task. Singles have been desperate, and the church has done a miserable job helping people select one another.”

But once the site became a household name, Warren knew in order to continue to grow he would need to reach out to other demographics.

A 2005 article by USATODAY.com talks about eHarmony’s – specifically Neal Warren’s  former partnership with Focus on the Family, and their bitter divorce (pun intended).

“eHarmony increasingly is seeking out secular audiences through online partnerships, including promotions on USATODAY.com and other news sites owned by USA TODAY’s parent company, Gannett.”

“As part of that effort, Warren is trying to distance himself from Focus on the Family and its founder James Dobson, a longtime friend.”

Warren says he will no longer appear on Dobson’s radio show, and he recently bought back the rights to the three books Focus on the Family published —Finding the Love of Your Life, Make Anger Your Ally and Learning to Live with the Love of Your Life - so he can drop Focus’ name from their covers.

“We’re trying to reach the whole world — people of all spiritual orientations, all political philosophies, all racial backgrounds,” Warren says. “And if indeed, we have Focus on the Family on the top of our books, it is a killer. Because people do recognize them as occupying a very precise political position in this society and a very precise spiritual position.”

Regardless of Warren’s departure from God’s view of marriage, many pro-family conservatives are nonetheless angered over what they view as a betrayal of the dating site’s core values.

Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans For Truth about Homosexuality, wrote a public note to Warren saying it was a “shame” that his company did not follow the lead of the Boy Scouts of America, when they took a stand to fight for their principles against homosexuality, refusing to settle for the New Jersey Supreme Court decision that stated anti-discrimination laws required the Scouts to be inclusive of gays.

The case LaBarbera was referring to, Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, an assistant scoutmaster, James Dale, was barred from serving in the group after he announced in a publication that he was gay and participating as co-president of his college’s gay/lesbian alliance organization. Dale was notified by the Scouts that their bylaws “specifically forbid membership to homosexuals.”  Dale fought and a New Jersey court ruled that because the Scouts are a “place of public accommodation,” it cannot deny any person “advantages, facilities and privileges” on account of “sexual orientation.”   The Scouts argued that as a private organization, they have the right to adopt whatever prerequisite they deem necessary for the good of their members. Ultimately, the case went before the United State Supreme Court which sided with the Scouts saying: “A state requirement that the Boy Scouts retain Dale [a homosexual] would significantly burden the organization’s right to oppose or disfavor homosexual conduct.”

In the note, LaBarbera tells Warren that his organization is encouraging singles to use “other dating services that have not sold out their God and their moral beliefs for the almighty dollar.”

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, agreed with LaBarbera, calling the compromise inappropriate.

“To those of us in the pro-family movement who hailed eHarmony’s commitment to the virtue of traditional marriage, the company’s actions are distressing and damaging,” said Perkins.

A judge must approve the California settlement. A court date is scheduled for Feb. 3.
Antone Johnson, the online dating service’s vice president of legal affairs, told the Daily Journal he sees no reason for the case to proceed in California now that eHarmony will offer an online matchmaking option for gays. The new service, Compatible Partners, will be launched under a settlement with the New Jersey attorney general, who had claimed eHarmony violated state anti-discrimination law by refusing to offer matchmaking services to gays.
The California case, Carlson v. eHarmony, has been granted class action status.
“We believe that this case is now essentially moot, and we’re confident that we will prove that in court,” Johnson told the Daily Journal. “Now that we’re entering the same-sex matching market, we fail to see what the Carlson plaintiffs could achieve through further litigation.”
But plaintiffs’ lawyer Joshua Konecky told the publication there is still an unresolved issue. “There’s also a monetary damages component of this case that wasn’t addressed one way or the other for the settlement in New Jersey,” he said.

Carlson v. eHarmony

Related posts:

1. Schwarzenegger Won’t Stand Up For Will Of Voters Who Passed Marriage Between A Man And Woman
2. President Obama to Extend Job Benefits to Gay Partners
3. California’s Gay Marriage Ban Extended
4. Christian Doctors Settle Lesbian Suit
5. California Pro-Gay Marriage Campaign Launches

Short URL: http://www.christianlawjournal.com/?p=13421