In our sporadic discussions on gay marriage the conversation seems to always turns to this main point; what should society morally tolerate and why do conservatives care?  One of the latest posts on Keith Olbermann  and his tearful defense of gay marriage demonstrates this point.   In it, Andre ponders: I guess the one thing I still don’t get is why this is so important to people on your side of the aisle. If you really want to protect marriage, where are the bans on no-fault divorce?  On the same link, DFV wrongly declares that, “it’s just that with me being the increasingly faith-deprived, secular humanist that I am, I tend to value the collective wisdom of the many over the declamations of the few.  Right.

I might have some cause to sympathize with their views if I hadn’t read Michelle Malkin’s piece on the eHarmony shakedown.  In case you were unaware, here is what has happened: eHarmony, a Christian based website that caters to those looking for serious relationships has been successfully sued by a gay man named Eric McKinley because they do not provide services for ‘men seeking men.’  Tragic indeed!  According to Malkin:

Neil Warren, eHarmony’s founder, is a gentle, grandfatherly businessman who launched his popular dating site to support heterosexual marriage. A “Focus on the Family” author with a divinity degree, Warren encourages healthy, lasting unions between men and women of all faiths, mixed faiths, or no faith at all.

This is the classic case of the oppressed (McKinley and all other gay people) vs. the oppressors (eHarmony and Warren).  Except in this case, McKinley is far from oppressed and has plenty of other dating web site options.  In a story by USA Today, we learn that McKinley had gotten his little feelings hurt when he discovered that eHarmony had no options for men to meet men on their website.  When McKinley saw that only straight couples could meet on eHarmony he found it “very frustrating… very humiliating to think that other people can do it and I can’t.”

But what the militant wing of the gay community will never publicly acknowledge is that they probably have more options for dating than the average Christian single person.  Match.com and other lesser known sites have included men looking for men for years.  But militant gays aren’t happy with having only some options available to them – they want all options available to them. Regardless of who owns the sites (or businesses), and regardless of what religious affiliation that site (or business) might have, every knee shall bow to the gay agenda or face discriminatory charges.   For the Left, its all about creating a new agenda, not introducing and arranging marriages for couples in the name of love.  Moreover, the tactics of the Left are not only anti-choice, but anti-free market.  Militant gays most certainly could have launched a gay web site to compete with eHarmony.  But instead, they go to court in an attempt to change social behavior.  They opt not for competition but political and judicial coersion.    

This is all the same twisted logic that has infected our classrooms, playgrounds, athletic fields, and now our businesses and halls of Congress.  At the heart of the issue is that there are things that necessarily exclude some people.  The response is then to attempt to make those things inclusive through the courts or through legislation, or to shut them down entirely.  The Left will use the ‘fairness doctrine’ in this same nefarious way.  Even though the Left already has liberal talk radio via taxpayer funded N.P.R. and the awesome “Air America” network, which has proven unable to attract the advertising dollars necessary to pay staff salaries, they want to tell the rest of America’s radio station owners what can and cannot be aired based on political ideology. It’s not that they will then listen to the stations; it’s just that they want to control the stations.

In the end, all of the discussions about the humanity, the love, the legalities of gay marriage ring hollow.  When Andre wonders why conservatives even care and when DFV harps about the consensus of European society, the true objections I have are that these things are simply a means to an end.  They are power plays designed to completely transform our society into a socialist wasteland where citizens and businesses kneel at the altar of secularism.  After the settlement was announced (eHarmony has to pay New Jersey $50,000 and McKinley $5,000) McKinley called it “fabulous” and said he was happy with the outcome.  In fact, he was so excited that he is “considering signing up for the new site once it launches.”  So after all of the litigation, all of the cost, all of the discrimmination and all of the ”humiliation” (McKinley words) that has now been solved, McKinley might use the site. 

But it never was about using the site at all.  They just wanted to know they could.