Comments for Overlawyered

Comment on “Suit forces eHarmony to offer gay dating service” by Roy B

Roy B — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 14:20:12 +0000

Further on PSaunders comment, did the same ruling require that gay and lesbian dating services set up hetero services? If not, is this ruling not discriminatory in and of itself?

Comment on Debra Saunders on eHarmony suit by “Suit forces eHarmony to offer gay dating service”

“Suit forces eHarmony to offer gay dating service” — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 13:28:15 +0000

[...] (Reuters, Nov. 19, FoxNews.com)(via Friedersdorf, see also Mataconis). Earlier coverage: Jun. 1 and Jun. 8, 2007; Mar. 26, 2006 (married man wants [...]

Comment on Piracy and international human rights, cont’d by VMS

VMS — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 13:27:34 +0000

Well, I guess that the British, historically known for their staunch stance agaisnt piracy, and have in yesteryear fired upon pirate ships and hanged the survivors on the spot, will have to call in the Indian navy who seems to be the only country now willing to use military force to curb piracy on the high seas.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-somalia_20nov20,0,4913179.story

In response to (1), merchant vessels could legally arm themselves, but they probably would not want to. The reason shipping and hence the cost of imported goods is so cheap is that a crew of 15-20 can run a modern cargo ship transporting millions of dollars of merchandise. These ships, even if armed, would stand no chance against an attack by pirates.

If the various navys and other military were allowed to go after these pirates in earnest, the problem would be solved.

Comment on “Suit forces eHarmony to offer gay dating service” by VMS

VMS — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:56:56 +0000

WTF!

Comment on Piracy and international human rights, cont’d by James

James — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:38:07 +0000

What are the legalities of allowing merchant vessels to arm themselves in order to repel pirates?

Comment on “Suit forces eHarmony to offer gay dating service” by P Saunders

P Saunders — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 07:09:25 +0000

This is sorta like forcing a vegan restaurant to serve you a steak because, well, its illegal to discriminate against someone just because they are meat eaters and happen to insist on frequenting your restaurant even though you only serve vegan dishes. Rather than tie up the judicial system, the plaintiff would have been better served by using a dating service that specialises in serving the gay community.

Comment on eHarmony’s 29 Dimensions of… Litigation by “Suit forces eHarmony to offer gay dating service”

“Suit forces eHarmony to offer gay dating service” — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 06:24:14 +0000

[...] said on Wednesday.” (Reuters, Nov. 19, FoxNews.com)(via Friedersdorf). Earlier coverage: Jun. 1 and Jun. 8, 2007; Mar. 26, 2006 (married man wants [...]

Comment on eHarmony’s 29 Dimensions of… Litigation by Michelle Malkin » eHarmony forced to offer same-sex dating services

Michelle Malkin » eHarmony forced to offer same-sex dating services — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 05:59:25 +0000

[...] sued by a lesbian looking to force the company to match her up with another woman and by a married man who sought to force the company to hook him up in an adulterous [...]

Comment on November 3 roundup by Piracy and international human rights, cont’d

Piracy and international human rights, cont’d — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 05:17:00 +0000

[...] Exploit Confusion About International Law”, Wall Street Journal, Nov. 19). Earlier here, here, and [...]

Comment on Prosecutors’ union pushes measure hobbling California lawyer discipline by Richard Nieporent

Richard Nieporent — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 03:26:54 +0000

Maybe they can get Mike Nifong to testify in favor of the bill.