Quote:
Originally Posted by Cherie
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
|
...(I'm getting confused Cherie in trying to understand the analogy, I had to think a bit...
..)...all I can say really..(my thought processes..)...is yes, I can understand that religious beliefs/faiths etc are involved with both cases...but with the airline (what appears to me from the information we have..)...it appears that it did try to accommodate but with doing that, that's exactly where the discrimination occurred but in another direction.../more just not thought out as it should have been and maybe as you say/busy day etc for the staff who made the decision...so a blunder which did cause discrimination on gender to happen...that still doesn't mean the airline aren't fully accountable though because they are...whereas with the cake, it wasn't a blunder of any kind but a very deliberate discrimination/refusal on sexuality...also it left with no option as to the cake being purchased there because it was no, you just won't get it here...whereas with the seat, there was always the option of still having the flight with that airline but not moving seats so not allowing the discrimination to take place at all...still though, the airline would have had fully accountability for making the request ...
...I guess for me there just isn't a 'one size fits all' with these things and I can only look individually at them with my thoughts or when I try to see analogies of similarity...but yes, they both involved religious faiths/beliefs/practises etc is what I can see ....