Women Giving up Seats on American Airliners for Religious Accomodation?

[Kat]

Men need to stop thinking with their penises. I mean come on. It's old. Everything is not about what sex you are.

Says Kat showing off hot sexy legs. LOL

I have legs. Men do too. But Touche'

But hey, would that mean I should lose my seat?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Why was the woman moved? The men could have just as easily been moved. This is wrong and part of the problem of lack of or refusal to assimilate

Because from the airline's POV, they can move the woman, presumably to an empty seat, or they can try to find 2 seats next to a man, and move the monks and the other 2 passengers. The first choice is a lot simpler.

You are making making the same mistake here as many others by assuming that the woman's referring to them as monks MAKES them monks.

That was simply her word to describe them and we have no way of knowing if she knows enough about Islam to know what to call them.

 

[Kat]

The more I think about it, the more I do not understand, and can't believe the airline did that.

Lots of times I've voluntarily changed seats to accommodate people. Even to a crappier seat. I think the problem is DEMANDING the seat change rather than asking for it.

I totally agree. If someone asks me (nicely), I doubt I'd have a problem accommodating. The airline really effed up on this one.

I am with you......if I am asked politely. But, I would be ticked if it was just done and that was that.

 

[Brynmr]

Men need to stop thinking with their penises. I mean come on. It's old. Everything is not about what sex you are.

Says Kat showing off hot sexy legs. LOL

I have legs. Men do too. But Touche'

But hey, would that mean I should lose my seat?

Trust me, you wouldn't want to be sitting next to Moslems.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Why was the woman moved? The men could have just as easily been moved. This is wrong and part of the problem of lack of or refusal to assimilate

Because from the airline's POV, they can move the woman, presumably to an empty seat, or they can try to find 2 seats next to a man, and move the monks and the other 2 passengers. The first choice is a lot simpler.

You are making making the same mistake here as many others by assuming that the woman's referring to them as monks MAKES them monks.

That was simply her word to describe them and we have no way of knowing if she knows enough about Islam to know what to call them.

You are making the same mistake as many other posters have by not actually reading the article.

The woman didn't identify them as "monks".

 

[Kat]

Men need to stop thinking with their penises. I mean come on. It's old. Everything is not about what sex you are.

Says Kat showing off hot sexy legs. LOL

I have legs. Men do too. But Touche'

But hey, would that mean I should lose my seat?

Trust me, you wouldn't want to be sitting next to Moslems.

Well, they weren't Muslims, but I will bite.......why wouldn't I??

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Why was the woman moved? The men could have just as easily been moved. This is wrong and part of the problem of lack of or refusal to assimilate

Because from the airline's POV, they can move the woman, presumably to an empty seat, or they can try to find 2 seats next to a man, and move the monks and the other 2 passengers. The first choice is a lot simpler.

You are making making the same mistake here as many others by assuming that the woman's referring to them as monks MAKES them monks.

That was simply her word to describe them and we have no way of knowing if she knows enough about Islam to know what to call them.

You are making the same mistake as many other posters have by not actually reading the article.

The woman didn't identify them as "monks".

I read not only the article but similar accounts from other news agencies. The very title of the article QUOTES her as saying she was forced to move for men she described as Monks..

There has been absolutely no confirmation that they are Buddhist.
.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Why was the woman moved? The men could have just as easily been moved. This is wrong and part of the problem of lack of or refusal to assimilate

Because from the airline's POV, they can move the woman, presumably to an empty seat, or they can try to find 2 seats next to a man, and move the monks and the other 2 passengers. The first choice is a lot simpler.

You are making making the same mistake here as many others by assuming that the woman's referring to them as monks MAKES them monks.

That was simply her word to describe them and we have no way of knowing if she knows enough about Islam to know what to call them.

You are making the same mistake as many other posters have by not actually reading the article.

The woman didn't identify them as "monks".

I read not only the article but similar accounts from other news agencies. The very title of the article QUOTES her as saying she was forced to move for men she described as Monks..

There has been absolutely no confirmation that they are Buddhist.
.

If you read the article, you'd know that she did not actually meet the men in question, and was informed that they were monks by the airline representative at the gate.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Why was the woman moved? The men could have just as easily been moved. This is wrong and part of the problem of lack of or refusal to assimilate

Because from the airline's POV, they can move the woman, presumably to an empty seat, or they can try to find 2 seats next to a man, and move the monks and the other 2 passengers. The first choice is a lot simpler.

You are making making the same mistake here as many others by assuming that the woman's referring to them as monks MAKES them monks.

That was simply her word to describe them and we have no way of knowing if she knows enough about Islam to know what to call them.

You are making the same mistake as many other posters have by not actually reading the article.

The woman didn't identify them as "monks".

I read not only the article but similar accounts from other news agencies. The very title of the article QUOTES her as saying she was forced to move for men she described as Monks..

There has been absolutely no confirmation that they are Buddhist.
.

If you read the article, you'd know that she did not actually meet the men in question, and was informed that they were monks by the airline representative at the gate.

Who know that how? There is still nothing definitive about their identity.

Why am I reminded of the recent Mall shooter who the desperate press wanted to be Hispanic?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Because from the airline's POV, they can move the woman, presumably to an empty seat, or they can try to find 2 seats next to a man, and move the monks and the other 2 passengers. The first choice is a lot simpler.

You are making making the same mistake here as many others by assuming that the woman's referring to them as monks MAKES them monks.

That was simply her word to describe them and we have no way of knowing if she knows enough about Islam to know what to call them.

You are making the same mistake as many other posters have by not actually reading the article.

The woman didn't identify them as "monks".

I read not only the article but similar accounts from other news agencies. The very title of the article QUOTES her as saying she was forced to move for men she described as Monks..

There has been absolutely no confirmation that they are Buddhist.
.

If you read the article, you'd know that she did not actually meet the men in question, and was informed that they were monks by the airline representative at the gate.

Who know that how? There is still nothing definitive about their identity.

Of course there isn't "definitive proof" of anything. No proof is definitive enough, when it comes to challenging a well-loved and deeply-held opinion as your hatred of Muslims.

Why am I reminded of the recent Mall shooter who the desperate press wanted to be Hispanic?

Because you are infatuated with your own hatred, to the point that it defines you.

 

[StLucieBengal]

Yeah I saw you carefully placed the Orthodox Jews in the same boat. Nice attempt to cover up for the Muslims.

We all can deal with little issues from Orthodox Jews from time to time because they don't bother anyone. Nor do they oppress, kill, or rape women and children. And yell from the roof tops about their blood lust for anyone not in their religion.

Hmmmm....so...a couple of Muslims (that aren't bothering anyone) must be treated differently than a couple of Buddhists (who aren't bothering anyone) or a couple of Orthodox Jews (that aren't bothering anyone)...

Yes.

But I would tell each of them to piss off because we don't forcibly move women anywhere at the whimes of any man.

The people with the weird issue need to adjust to the rest of us. Not the other way around.

I agree in general - I don't have a problem with being asked, nicely if I would - being forced though - BAD MANAGEMENT on the airline's part.

That's the obvious answer.

But I posed this before and I didn't see anyone address this ....

how do we know these paki's were monks?

Is this story just from the woman who was moved and is she just basing it off what the gate agent told her?

I worked at an airline during summers in college. Gate agent is no joke. And I know what happens when Arab or African men get frustrated at the gate. They yell and bully until their needs are met.

So how are we basing this Paki monk idea? Did anyone talk to these paki's? I imagine it's pretty easy to move a woman's seat to stop two men from yelling at you while you are trying to ensure everyone is boarded and the flight leaves the gate on time.

I think the more important question is - why are you working so hard to disprove it?

I am not here to prove or disprove anything. I am merely bringing up another possible angle, but if you want to just rehash the same old stuff then just say so....

After watching the video interview/story I just felt like it was appropriate to question.

 

[MikeK]

You've made it clear that you're going assume whatever fills your hatred resovoir. "Reason" has nothing to do with it.

Your reflexive use of the word "hatred" in response to any rejection, dismissal, intolerance or dislike of some group, sect or ethnicity is typical of the race-pimp orientation. But I will ask that you not flatter the object of your protective spirit by assuming I harbor such passionate feelings as hatred, which is the emperor of human emotion, either for Muslims or for any other fanatical cultists. I simply dislike them because I see them for what they are and I have the good sense to fear them because I am aware of their ultimate objective.

The America I was raised in espoused freedom of religion as well as freedom from religion, meaning anyone is free to worship any imaginary entity one chooses -- provided the elements of such worship do not in any way impose upon the ordinary functions of other citizens or in any way affect the normal social order.

I am a confirmed Catholic but I've been an atheist since age fourteen. There is nothing about the most deeply committed practice of Catholicism that imposes on or interferes in any way with the routine habits and movements of others. I also know that Orthodox Jews are affected by certain proscriptions in the practice of their faith but I have never heard of these proscriptions imposing in any way on non-Jews. I believe this is because these Orthodox Jews carefully avoid social situations wherein their special needs or practices could in any way offend or inconvenience non-Jews.

However, many (most?) Muslims are obnoxiously aggressive about their so-called Sharia laws, the most prominent manifestation of which isolates them from the American social mainstream by requiring their women to conceal themselves from head to toe.

I gave little thought to Muslims until the morning of September 11, 2001. Since then I have learned that I, along with all other "infidels," are the object of murderous loathing by a sufficient percentage of fanatical Muslims to cause me to fear them and to regard them all with suspicion. More recently, having seen how they've behaved in Germany and in France, and having heard about their rapacious, assaultive conduct in Sweden and Denmark, I am convinced that Americans should be prepared to deal with the same kind of behavior in our Country if these barbarians are allowed to gain a substantial foothold.

I am convinced the way to offset this potential is to tolerate absolutely none of their distinguishing habits and characteristics. Nip them in the bud. Let them know the U.S. will not tolerate any of their exclusive and aggressive nonsense.

 

[StLucieBengal]

Yeah I saw you carefully placed the Orthodox Jews in the same boat. Nice attempt to cover up for the Muslims.

We all can deal with little issues from Orthodox Jews from time to time because they don't bother anyone. Nor do they oppress, kill, or rape women and children. And yell from the roof tops about their blood lust for anyone not in their religion.

Hmmmm....so...a couple of Muslims (that aren't bothering anyone) must be treated differently than a couple of Buddhists (who aren't bothering anyone) or a couple of Orthodox Jews (that aren't bothering anyone)...

Yes.

But I would tell each of them to piss off because we don't forcibly move women anywhere at the whimes of any man.

The people with the weird issue need to adjust to the rest of us. Not the other way around.

I agree in general - I don't have a problem with being asked, nicely if I would - being forced though - BAD MANAGEMENT on the airline's part.

That's the obvious answer.

But I posed this before and I didn't see anyone address this ....

how do we know these paki's were monks?

Is this story just from the woman who was moved and is she just basing it off what the gate agent told her?

I worked at an airline during summers in college. Gate agent is no joke. And I know what happens when Arab or African men get frustrated at the gate. They yell and bully until their needs are met.

So how are we basing this Paki monk idea? Did anyone talk to these paki's? I imagine it's pretty easy to move a woman's seat to stop two men from yelling at you while you are trying to ensure everyone is boarded and the flight leaves the gate on time.

If you actually read the OP -- you would find that's how United Airlines explained the situation to the woman. She made up nothing. You have a hard time with this thread because facts in evidence don't fit your EXPECTED narrative. Muslim clerics do not LOOK like Buddhist clerics.

I really don't understand your reluctance to accept the narrative. And NO --- we'll never get the two orange-robed guys to give a statement. Just go with it.

According to the news report united airlines didn't respond to her or the station.

When you say united explained the situation to her.... according to the rest of the story it just sounds like the reason the united gate agent gave her.... Corporate United had no response to her and gave a canned nonsense to the station about how employees shouldn't discriminate.

 

[MikeK]

You are making making the same mistake here as many others by assuming that the woman's referring to them as monks MAKES them monks.

That was simply her word to describe them and we have no way of knowing if she knows enough about Islam to know what to call them.

Thank you for presenting a perfect clarification.

 

[StLucieBengal]

Men need to stop thinking with their penises. I mean come on. It's old. Everything is not about what sex you are.

Not sure why, but when I read this post I thought of this and had a laugh.

 

[StLucieBengal]

Men need to stop thinking with their penises. I mean come on. It's old. Everything is not about what sex you are.

Says Kat showing off hot sexy legs. LOL

I have legs. Men do too. But Touche'

But hey, would that mean I should lose my seat?

Trust me, you wouldn't want to be sitting next to Moslems.

Well, they weren't Muslims, but I will bite.......why wouldn't I??

They usually smell quite ripe. They also are very abrupt almost to the point of being rude at times. But that's not as bad as their smell. At least in my experience traveling abroad.

I don't have much patience for people who don't understand basic hygiene.

 

[StLucieBengal]

Why was the woman moved? The men could have just as easily been moved. This is wrong and part of the problem of lack of or refusal to assimilate

Because from the airline's POV, they can move the woman, presumably to an empty seat, or they can try to find 2 seats next to a man, and move the monks and the other 2 passengers. The first choice is a lot simpler.

You are making making the same mistake here as many others by assuming that the woman's referring to them as monks MAKES them monks.

That was simply her word to describe them and we have no way of knowing if she knows enough about Islam to know what to call them.

You are making the same mistake as many other posters have by not actually reading the article.

The woman didn't identify them as "monks".

I read not only the article but similar accounts from other news agencies. The very title of the article QUOTES her as saying she was forced to move for men she described as Monks..

There has been absolutely no confirmation that they are Buddhist.
.

If you read the article, you'd know that she did not actually meet the men in question, and was informed that they were monks by the airline representative at the gate.

Which means a $15/hr gate agent is who everyone is believing that in no way were these paki's Muslims?

It's reasonable to wonder if they are Muslims and really this whole story is a mess until someone puts a microphone In front of this gate agent.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

You've made it clear that you're going assume whatever fills your hatred resovoir. "Reason" has nothing to do with it.

Your reflexive use of the word "hatred" in response to any rejection, dismissal, intolerance or dislike of some group, sect or ethnicity is typical of the race-pimp orientation. But I will ask that you not flatter the object of your protective spirit by assuming I harbor such passionate feelings as hatred, which is the emperor of human emotion, either for Muslims or for any other fanatical cultists. I simply dislike them because I see them for what they are and I have the good sense to fear them because I am aware of their objective.

The America I was raised in espoused freedom of religion as well as freedom from religion, meaning anyone is free to worship any imaginary entity one chooses -- provided the elements of such worship does not in any way impose upon the ordinary functions of other citizens or in any way affect the normal social order.

I am a confirmed Catholic but I've been an atheist since age fourteen. There is nothing about the most deeply committed practice of Catholicism that imposes in any way with the routine habits and movements of others. I know that Orthodox Jews are affected by certain proscriptions in the practice of their faith but I have never heard of these proscriptions imposing in any way on non-Jews. I believe this is because these Orthodox Jews carefully avoid social situations wherein their special needs or practices could in any way offend or inconvenience non-Jews.

However, many (most?) Muslims are obnoxiously aggressive about their so-called Sharia laws, the most prominent manifestation of which isolates them from the American social mainstream by requiring their women to conceal themselves from head to toe.

I gave little thought to Muslims until the morning of September 11, 2001. Since then I have learned that I, along with all other "infidels," are the object of murderous loathing by a sufficient percentage of fanatical Muslims to cause me to fear them and to regard them all with suspicion. More recently, having seen how they've behaved in Germany and in France, and having heard about their rapacious, assaultive conduct in Sweden and Denmark, I am convinced that Americans should be prepared to deal with the same kind of behavior in our Country if these barbarians are allowed to gain a substantial foothold.

I am convinced the way to offset this potential is to tolerate absolutely none of their distinguishing habits and characteristics. Nip them in the bud. Let them know the U.S. will not tolerate any of their exclusive and aggressive nonsense.

The 9/11 card. I always love it when this gets played. But let's start at the beginning.

First of all, my use of the word "hatred" is perfectly applicable - hatred has a distinct meaning: Irrational, intense dislike - and you've demonstrated that clearly in this very post. To quote your post again:

I simply dislike them because I see them for what they are and I have the good sense to fear them because I am aware of their objective.

(for the sake of clarity, the part I highlighted in green shows the "intense dislike" part, and the blue shows the "irrational" part)

As for the "America you grew up in", this country was quite literally founded by religious fanatics. I've been an atheist since the day I was born, and I can say with certainty that in terms of the laws and customs of America, my life has been affected by Catholicism exponentially more than it has by Islam.

I have lived my entire life interacting with, knowing and being friends with Muslims. Not ever did any of them try to subject me to Sharia law, or persecute me, or in fact treat me with kindness. On the other hand, I was told by a Catholic classmate in first grade that we couldn't be friends because I had killed Christ.

As for what you've "learned" - you already confirmed that you don't actually know, or care to know, much about Islam and Muslims at all. You haven't learned anything about Muslims other than how to hate them.

I'm a survivor of 9/11. I was 5 blocks away when the towers fell. I was inside that dust cloud that you watched on TV, and you can't use it as an excuse.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Because from the airline's POV, they can move the woman, presumably to an empty seat, or they can try to find 2 seats next to a man, and move the monks and the other 2 passengers. The first choice is a lot simpler.

You are making making the same mistake here as many others by assuming that the woman's referring to them as monks MAKES them monks.

That was simply her word to describe them and we have no way of knowing if she knows enough about Islam to know what to call them.

You are making the same mistake as many other posters have by not actually reading the article.

The woman didn't identify them as "monks".

I read not only the article but similar accounts from other news agencies. The very title of the article QUOTES her as saying she was forced to move for men she described as Monks..

There has been absolutely no confirmation that they are Buddhist.
.

If you read the article, you'd know that she did not actually meet the men in question, and was informed that they were monks by the airline representative at the gate.

Which means a $15/hr gate agent is who everyone is believing that in no way were these paki's Muslims?

It's reasonable to wonder if they are Muslims and really this whole story is a mess until someone puts a microphone In front of this gate agent.

No, as I said before - reason has nothing to do with it.

 

[StLucieBengal]

You are making making the same mistake here as many others by assuming that the woman's referring to them as monks MAKES them monks.

That was simply her word to describe them and we have no way of knowing if she knows enough about Islam to know what to call them.

You are making the same mistake as many other posters have by not actually reading the article.

The woman didn't identify them as "monks".

I read not only the article but similar accounts from other news agencies. The very title of the article QUOTES her as saying she was forced to move for men she described as Monks..

There has been absolutely no confirmation that they are Buddhist.
.

If you read the article, you'd know that she did not actually meet the men in question, and was informed that they were monks by the airline representative at the gate.

Which means a $15/hr gate agent is who everyone is believing that in no way were these paki's Muslims?

It's reasonable to wonder if they are Muslims and really this whole story is a mess until someone puts a microphone In front of this gate agent.

No, as I said before - reason has nothing to do with it.

No reason to carry water for the Muslims.

Once they have a reformation to fit in with the western world then I will back off their nonsense. Until then I will call evil out as I see fit.

It's hard to believe all these "good" Muslims don't want the attention off them.

Besides it's not like anyone is saying treat Muslim Americans any differently. While we are fighting terrorism however we should use the NSA and target anyone who communicates or travels back to the Middle East.

And allow no potential refugee Islamic terrorists. We should just be paying for them to be in camps in their own region. Australia does this and this was recommended by Frauke Petry as well recently.