Quote:
Originally Posted by Ammi
...I'm failing to see the cake analogy...(I'm not saying there isn't one...)...just that I can't see it and that could be entirely me...mainly because one case tried to accommodate and to not discriminate..but in doing that, they failed to see another discrimination.../so tried to do right but completely failed in doing wrong if you like...whereas the cake situation was just saying no, we wont accommodate at all and clear discrimination, not trying to do right in any way...(it makes sense in my head ..  ..)...also I think just too many 'presumptions' reported with it for me because I don't think we know how full the flight was/..there were certainly some seats available as she was moved to another or asked if she would move so not a full flight anyway...the obvious would have been...(assuming they were rows of 3 seats or even 4 as some have..)...yes, we can do that but you have to purchase 3(4) seats on the flight to assure your needs are met... |
In both cases the discrimation was caused by religious beliefs, with regard to buying the seats even then they would still have to accept being served by female staff