Our View: Freedom of association is still significant

Last month, dating Web site eHarmony announced it would settle a New Jersey lawsuit accusing them of discriminating against gays and lesbians by starting a new site specifically for them. They face a new class action lawsuit here in California over the issue.

The service eHarmony provides matches couples according to a system developed by founder Neil Clark Warren, whose intent is to help heterosexual singles find a partner to marry. The site does not allow for same-sex pairings.

However, there are plenty of dating sites out there that do, which makes this trend unsettling. To be fair, eHarmony folded on the suit on its own, concerned about what a verdict against them might force them to do. A jury might well have found in its favor.

Nobody has the right to demand that a private business cater to their needs. Freedom of association not only permits individuals to decide which companies get their money - it also permits companies to decide which consumer markets they want to cater to.

In eHarmony's case, government is not attempting to block other dating services from serving gay customers. In fact, rival site Chemistry.com developed an entire advertising campaign marketing themselves as the alternative to eHarmony's exclusivity. The market has its own way of dealing with discrimination - competition.

There are unintended consequences when people engage in these sorts of lawsuits that erode private rights. One of the arguments presented in favor of Proposition 8 warned that churches would be forced to accept gay marriages. We felt that such arguments were without merit, due to our belief in the right of free association. But churches and businesses are both private entities. If a business can be forced to serve people it never intended to serve, it does make it harder to argue that the same won't happen to churches.