If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Neil Clarke Warren, eHarmony founder: "I'm tired of people destroying my business because I hate the gays and don't want them to marry"   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 85
    More: Obvious, eHarmony, Neil Clark Warren, Levi Strauss, it gets better, Family Equality Council, Quaker Oats, cultural war, Betty Crocker  
•       •       •

4452 clicks; posted to Business » on 16 Feb 2013 at 2:14 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



85 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-16 11:23:49 AM
So don't use the site. Problem solved
 
2013-02-16 11:27:31 AM
"I have said that eHarmony really ought to put up $10 million and ask other companies to put up money and do a really first class job of figuring out homosexuality,"

They have to spend that much money to study homosexuality, and you can find a bible in a cheap motel room and learn everything you need to know about Christian mentality.

he also noted. "At the very best, it's been a painful way for a lot of people to have to live."

The only painful part about it is having to live on the same planet with delusional, psychotic, violent idiots who can't think for themselves.
 
2013-02-16 11:29:26 AM
"...we literally had to hire guards to protect our lives because the people were so hurt and angry with us, were Christian people, who feel that it's a violation to scripture,"
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-02-16 11:59:17 AM

PhiloeBedoe: "...we literally had to hire guards to protect our lives because the people were so hurt and angry with us, were Christian people, who feel that it's a violation to scripture,"


Good moral Christian people I'm guessing.

encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com
 
2013-02-16 12:34:33 PM
I am very liberal and have no issue with same sex dating, relationships or marriage.  I see no reason why they shouldn't be able to use a dating website.

That said, I don't really see why the dating website should have been forced to include same sex dating if they didn't want to.  Some dating websites are for people of different ethnic backgrounds, this one was for opposite sex couples.  Let them be exclusive if they want.  Why force them to include yourselves because then you are just giving money to people who secretly despise you.

This is assuming that there were other dating websites that allowed same sex couples at the time.  If there were no other options then I could understand how it might be more of an issue.  Even still though, if they excluded me then I wouldn't want anything to do with them.
 
2013-02-16 12:41:00 PM

The sound of one hand clapping: I am very liberal and have no issue with same sex dating, relationships or marriage.  I see no reason why they shouldn't be able to use a dating website.

That said, I don't really see why the dating website should have been forced to include same sex dating if they didn't want to.  Some dating websites are for people of different ethnic backgrounds, this one was for opposite sex couples.  Let them be exclusive if they want.  Why force them to include yourselves because then you are just giving money to people who secretly despise you.

This is assuming that there were other dating websites that allowed same sex couples at the time.  If there were no other options then I could understand how it might be more of an issue.  Even still though, if they excluded me then I wouldn't want anything to do with them.


If eHarmony doesn't want to run personals for same-sex couples, fine.  But when their founder talks of using the money you pay for those personals to finance snake-oil "cures" for homosexuality that do only harm, I don't want to help support that in any way.
 
2013-02-16 12:52:32 PM
"I have said that [company name redacted] really ought to put up $10 million and ask other companies to put up money and do a really first class job of figuring out homosexuality,"

What is there to "figure out" here?  Some people are attracted to members of their own sex.  Mystery solved, dumbass.
 
2013-02-16 12:53:16 PM
While I find Neil Clarke Warren rather distasteful, in my book, this one takes the cake:

static.christianmingle.com

Talk about pretentious.
 
2013-02-16 12:57:55 PM
Find God'd Match For You?

Is God being a dick again?

"I know who your soul mate is, but you're going to have to find them on your own".
 
2013-02-16 01:08:00 PM

jake_lex: The sound of one hand clapping: I am very liberal and have no issue with same sex dating, relationships or marriage.  I see no reason why they shouldn't be able to use a dating website.

That said, I don't really see why the dating website should have been forced to include same sex dating if they didn't want to.  Some dating websites are for people of different ethnic backgrounds, this one was for opposite sex couples.  Let them be exclusive if they want.  Why force them to include yourselves because then you are just giving money to people who secretly despise you.

This is assuming that there were other dating websites that allowed same sex couples at the time.  If there were no other options then I could understand how it might be more of an issue.  Even still though, if they excluded me then I wouldn't want anything to do with them.

If eHarmony doesn't want to run personals for same-sex couples, fine.  But when their founder talks of using the money you pay for those personals to finance snake-oil "cures" for homosexuality that do only harm, I don't want to help support that in any way.


That's kind of what amazes me about someone forcing him to create a website to include same sex couples.  They know that this whackjob wants to try and 'cure' homosexuality so why try to find a way to give him more money.  I'd say they would have been far better publicly objecting to his methods.  That way the whole world can see him for who he really is.  I know for a fact that now I'm aware of his beliefs I will never use E-Harmony.  I'm sure other straight people would feel the same way too.
 
2013-02-16 01:13:44 PM

vpb: PhiloeBedoe: "...we literally had to hire guards to protect our lives because the people were so hurt and angry with us, were Christian people, who feel that it's a violation to scripture,"

Good moral Christian people I'm guessing.

[encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com image 259x194]


There is so much double think packed into his sentence that I may have to go lie down for a bit.
 
2013-02-16 01:38:34 PM
Would this be defensible if he also banned miscegenation?
 
2013-02-16 01:45:13 PM
So stop basing your business off of your own personal prejudice.  Ta-daa!
 
2013-02-16 02:01:21 PM
I'm going to pray for him, so that he may have more compassion for gay people and the sort of bigotry they go through.
 
2013-02-16 02:18:11 PM
FTFA: It seems his company's decision to launch a separate service for gay and lesbian singles called Compatible Partners in response to a lawsuit filed against eHarmony in 2008 for not offering LGBT matchmaking brought along its own set of challenges.

"Separate but equal." Where have I heard of this before?
 
2013-02-16 02:25:04 PM

The sound of one hand clapping: That said, I don't really see why the dating website should have been forced to include same sex dating if they didn't want to...Let them be exclusive if they want.


Yeah the guy's a douche, but given that the internet is an equal footing area, I don't understand how someone can be forced to open a business because of a lawsuit? If there's a market, someone will open a gay dating site. In fact, now there are tons I think.

/nttawwt
 
2013-02-16 02:28:59 PM
we literally had to hire guards to protect our lives because the people were so hurt and angry with us, were Christian people, who feel that it's a violation to scripture," Warren, who deemed himself a "passionate follower of Jesus" in the interview, added.

And I'll buy that if you also never eat shellfish or wear cotton/wool blends.
 
2013-02-16 02:31:57 PM

timujin: And I'll buy that if you also never eat shellfish or wear cotton/wool blends.


Dude, they aren't Orthodox Jews.

/still drunk
 
2013-02-16 02:36:31 PM
Read the story in Arianna Huffington's voice, puked a little in my mouth
 
2013-02-16 02:36:39 PM
I'm still amazed at how stupid this guy is at not wanting to take advantage of a growing market to expand his business to just because of an archaic Biblical Law.

As we talked about in other threads. It's pretty pointless to follow this Law of Leviticus if you ignore all the other ones.
 
2013-02-16 02:37:38 PM
FTA: "we're Christian people, who feel that it's a violation to scripture," Warren, who deemed himself a "passionate follower of Jesus" in the interview, added

The fallback position of Christian bigots: ' teh Bibles made me do it'.
 
2013-02-16 02:46:56 PM
That's cool.  I hate the Christians and don't want them to preach.
 
2013-02-16 02:47:13 PM
Nice how the Christian response to things not going your way is to kill people.
 
2013-02-16 02:51:17 PM

Somacandra: timujin: And I'll buy that if you also never eat shellfish or wear cotton/wool blends.

Dude, they aren't Orthodox Jews.

/still drunk


So the rules in Leviticus don't apply?
 
2013-02-16 02:55:15 PM
I met MsBuzzcut v 2.0 on Eharmony, thankfully this was before this guy really ratcheted up the bigotry. Neither of us would have joined the site knowing what we know now.

Their matching system did work out a hell of a lot better than some of the other ones. Less spammy too.

/End pointless story bro
 
2013-02-16 02:57:21 PM

The sound of one hand clapping: I am very liberal and have no issue with same sex dating, relationships or marriage.  I see no reason why they shouldn't be able to use a dating website.

That said, I don't really see why the dating website should have been forced to include same sex dating if they didn't want to.  Some dating websites are for people of different ethnic backgrounds, this one was for opposite sex couples.  Let them be exclusive if they want.  Why force them to include yourselves because then you are just giving money to people who secretly despise you.

This is assuming that there were other dating websites that allowed same sex couples at the time.  If there were no other options then I could understand how it might be more of an issue.  Even still though, if they excluded me then I wouldn't want anything to do with them.


The problem was they lied about their service even to straight daters.

A friend of mine raised Catholic (not active in the church) was paired with an Orthodox Jew male as a "perfect match".

The site was and is prejudiced towards Evangelical Christians but they didn't have the guts to just come out and declare that. The marketing lies were intentional to try to snare as many subscriptions as possible.
 
2013-02-16 02:57:28 PM

PhiloeBedoe: "...we literally had to hire guards to protect our lives because the people were so hurt and angry with us, were Christian people, who feel that it's a violation to scripture,"


Oh don't worry, NCW, Christians don't practice Jihad. Well...they don't call it "Jihad" anyway, which should help some.
 
2013-02-16 03:00:55 PM

PhiloeBedoe: "...we literally had to hire guards to protect our lives because the people were so hurt and angry with us, were Christian people, who feel that it's a violation to scripture,"


So none of them:
1. Eat shellfish.
2. Wear clothes of two different materials.
3. Shave.
4. Have any tattoos.
5. Work on Sunday.

Just checking.
 
2013-02-16 03:02:05 PM

lohphat: A friend of mine raised Catholic (not active in the church) was paired with an Orthodox Jew male as a "perfect match".


Well, that's understandable. It's based on 29 dimensions of compatibility. You'd have to get to like 37 dimensions before religious background would come into play.

/Yes, I'm not serious.
 
2013-02-16 03:02:16 PM
As a liberal Christian, I can't wait for people like this guy to cease being around...on the planet..at all.

/Did a fist pump when Falwell bit it.
 
2013-02-16 03:06:03 PM

vygramul: Would this be defensible if he also banned miscegenation?


Looking at some of the data Okcupid releases people do a pretty good job of this without the site's help. It was really surprising if you're interested in that kind of thing.
 
2013-02-16 03:14:08 PM

lohphat: PhiloeBedoe: "...we literally had to hire guards to protect our lives because the people were so hurt and angry with us, were Christian people, who feel that it's a violation to scripture,"

So none of them:
1. Eat shellfish.
2. Wear clothes of two different materials.
3. Shave.
4. Have any tattoos.
5. Work on Sunday. Saturday

Just checking.

 
2013-02-16 03:14:11 PM
Obvious retard is leaving obvious money on the table in the matchmaking business. How has this guy kept his job as CEO?
 
2013-02-16 03:14:46 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-02-16 03:15:15 PM

Carth: vygramul: Would this be defensible if he also banned miscegenation?

Looking at some of the data Okcupid releases people do a pretty good job of this without the site's help. It was really surprising if you're interested in that kind of thing.


Where might one find said data?  I'm kind of curious to see what else it tells.
 
2013-02-16 03:17:23 PM
They reject you for being an atheist too, or at least they still were as of a year ago.

Imagine if they let everyone else in, but banned Catholics or Jews or aircraft mechanics.
 
2013-02-16 03:21:51 PM

The sound of one hand clapping: Carth: vygramul: Would this be defensible if he also banned miscegenation?

Looking at some of the data Okcupid releases people do a pretty good job of this without the site's help. It was really surprising if you're interested in that kind of thing.

Where might one find said data?  I'm kind of curious to see what else it tells.


Here you go. Some races have it easier than others but was still surprised by it.
 
2013-02-16 03:38:25 PM

Carth: The sound of one hand clapping: Carth: vygramul: Would this be defensible if he also banned miscegenation?

Looking at some of the data Okcupid releases people do a pretty good job of this without the site's help. It was really surprising if you're interested in that kind of thing.

Where might one find said data?  I'm kind of curious to see what else it tells.

Here you go. Some races have it easier than others but was still surprised by it.


Appreciate the link.  That was quite an interesting read.  Some stuff was expected, some was quite surprising.
 
2013-02-16 03:44:34 PM
i291.photobucket.com

oblig
 
2013-02-16 03:55:13 PM
As two letters on the guacamole bacon lettuce tomato sandwich, and a lefty to boot, well... I don't think that this guy should have been forced by law to provide services to anyone. Here's why: Because eHarmony is an online business, neither time nor geography is a limiting factor. It's not like a hotel or a gas station. A person who wants to use a dating site can choose from among all the dating sites that exist, not just the ones that are "local" as "local" has no real meaning. Competition between online services approaches free market conditions, and the arguments for allowing the free market to solve the problem rather than government intervention actually work in this case.  That being said, I can understand why the law of the state in which his business is headquartered was applied in the way that it was. It is the law, but the law is an ass.

I also think that starting up a separate service that does support same sex date matching is areasonable and fair solution, and probably technically easier to implement also than changing eHarmony. Supporting the matching of M to M or F to F, supporting M to either M or F, F to either M or F, would have to require changes in the application logic and likely to the database as well, and would likely require migration of all of the existing eHarmony profiles that assumed M matched to F alwaysinto the new system that has the ability to match any gender to any gender. Starting fresh with a new DB and new application makes more sense to me from a technical standpoint. From a business standpoint, it makes sense too as the two businesses would be marketed differently to their different customer bases.

He doesn't sound like a bad guy. I thoroughly disagree with his opinions, especially with the one that homosexuality is a disease that needs curing (yuck!), and I think he's incorrectly identifying who is ruining his business, but I don't think it makes him a bad person or a hateful person. The people who are threatening him, those are the hateful people.
 
2013-02-16 04:14:06 PM
No one said he had to start a separate business.  They said if you are openly discriminatory you cannot do business in this state.  This man is so dedicated to his beliefs that he went directly against them, doing what was wrong, to ensure he could make money in a state that wont permit him to discriminate

Its what republican jebus would do!!
 
2013-02-16 04:16:17 PM
Know what I never get tired of? Guys like the idiot that founded eHarmony revealing their true nature when its important to his business model that he be thought of as a kind and caring guy, and he turns out to be a bigoted farkwit.

Keep complaining publically TEH GAYS ruined your business model, dumbass.
 
2013-02-16 04:20:12 PM

Somacandra: The sound of one hand clapping: That said, I don't really see why the dating website should have been forced to include same sex dating if they didn't want to...Let them be exclusive if they want.

Yeah the guy's a douche, but given that the internet is an equal footing area, I don't understand how someone can be forced to open a business because of a lawsuit? If there's a market, someone will open a gay dating site. In fact, now there are tons I think.

/nttawwt


THESE.
 
2013-02-16 04:22:15 PM

PhiloeBedoe: "...we literally had to hire guards to protect our lives because the people were so hurt and angry with us, were Christian people, who feel that it's a violation to scripture,"


Only a violation of the specific parts of this 2000-5000 year old collection of stories that you choose to follow today. There's plenty you are ignoring, because you have never called for the execution of a woman who committed adultery, and you've probably eaten shrimp or lobster or at the very least, not condemned those that do.
 
2013-02-16 04:23:22 PM
God smites your company and you're complaining about it?
 
2013-02-16 04:51:03 PM

Thanks for the Meme-ries: [i291.photobucket.com image 750x600]

oblig


I was starting to wonder if I'd see that pic before I made it to the bottom of the thread.
 
2013-02-16 04:55:26 PM

grimnir: As two letters on the guacamole bacon lettuce tomato sandwich, and a lefty to boot, well... I don't think that this guy should have been forced by law to provide services to anyone. Here's why: Because eHarmony is an online business, neither time nor geography is a limiting factor. It's not like a hotel or a gas station. A person who wants to use a dating site can choose from among all the dating sites that exist, not just the ones that are "local" as "local" has no real meaning. Competition between online services approaches free market conditions, and the arguments for allowing the free market to solve the problem rather than government intervention actually work in this case. That being said, I can understand why the law of the state in which his business is headquartered was applied in the way that it was. It is the law, but the law is an ass.


Yeah, it's very much a case of "the law is blind" here.

The law is written as broadly as possible - "if you provide a service, you may not discriminate on grounds of [stuff], [more stuff], sexual orientiation...".

It doesn't make exceptions for types of services, or online services, because *in general*, it's the right thing to do.  If any online store refused service to gay people, that'd be scummy as hell, and you'd want the law to step in and put them down.  Dating sites kind of exist in a weird place where certain types of "discrimination" are what people actually want, but the law has to apply equally.
 
2013-02-16 04:55:34 PM
"When the attorney general of the state of New Jersey decided that we had to put up a same-sex site "

Seriously?  It's a friggin website - and someone was able to sue them and successfully force them to include people they don't want?

That'd be like me suing Fark after they ban me for trolling.
 
2013-02-16 05:14:45 PM

Three Crooked Squirrels: While I find Neil Clarke Warren rather distasteful, in my book, this one takes the cake:

[static.christianmingle.com image 535x90]

Talk about pretentious.


Christian Minge? It's not bad, and as long as the sobbing doesn't start until after sex, it's fun.
 
2013-02-16 05:45:55 PM

Fark_Guy_Rob: "When the attorney general of the state of New Jersey decided that we had to put up a same-sex site "

Seriously?  It's a friggin website - and someone was able to sue them and successfully force them to include people they don't want?

That'd be like me suing Fark after they ban me for trolling.


I think I actually get the argument behind the addition of the same-sex site.  The AG probably forced them to stop willfully discriminating against gay people, akin to not serving blacks in certain restaurants prior to the Civil Rights movement.  I doubt that the AG mandated that a new site be set up, but rather that eHarmony must, as a company, accomodate LGBT people in some form or another.  The eHarmony folks probably thought the best way to 'preserve' the eHarmony brand name was to create an entirely separate site for gays.  Of course, this means that all dating sites probably shouldn't be allowed to discriminate based on race, religion, or sexual orientation in New Jersey either, but those sites probably haven't been sued (yet).

I could be entirely wrong too and the AG forced them to open up a completely new website.  I'm honestly not familar with the particulars of the case beyond what this article detailed.

/$0.02
 
Displayed 50 of 85 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report