Posted on 02/12/2006 5:39:39 PM PST by Paleo Conservative
I agree. I wouldn't be eligible either--no dependents,no spouse,not an airline employee.
I wonder if somebody could argue that it's a disability? That would almost be acceptable - an example of using the left's "dialectic" against it. ;-)
It wasn't before the Wilsonegger gang took office and signed the legislation that empowers the ACLU.
AB205, also signed by Schwarzenegger, is the guiding principle in this case.
Doesn't AB1400 just build their case nicely, though? Since it was cited in the article, I assumed it was the center of their argument.
I believe AB205 became effective under AS, but was signed right before he took office:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/03-04/bill/asm/ab_0201-0250/ab_205_bill_20030922_chaptered.html
What happened to Mr. Anders and his partner violates California law and is clearly discriminatory,It wasn't before the Wilsonegger gang took office and signed the legislation that empowers the ACLU.
But according to the initiative passed by the voters of California, isn't marriage defined as only being between one man and one woman? Since under California law these two aren't allowed to marry, how is it discrimination to disallow them from using a ticket that is only avaiable to spouses, dependent children, or other airline employees? A non-married heterosexual couple would also be denied that ticket.
This makes me dizzy, I think I am being spun.
"I think there is more to this story than is being told."
There always is. Most of these "discrimination" cases are contrived and do not just come about. Meaning, the leftist group conspires with the ACLU in a way such that almost guarantees a situation that will require a lawsuit.
Unless you want to hear the details, suffice it to say that the Lawrence case that the SCOTUS decided in favor of the constitutionality to engage in homosexual relations was totally contrived by the pair of men caught in the, ahem, "act."
Prop 22 that defined marriage as between a man and a woman was statute and amended the family code; it wasn't a constitutional amendment (BIG mistake!)
I'd have to track back through the various bills to remember the ins and outs. But basically, between AB 205 and AB 1400, it pretty much hands all of the rights of married people to those registering as domestic partners. I believe AB 1400 equates "spouse" to "domestic partner" so that anything short of pure "equality" is discrimination. Don't quote me on that as the specifics are fuzzy. My general conclusion after seeing all of the Pro-GLBT legislation signed this year, combined with AB 205, was that the homosexual lobby was successful in achieving Homosexual Marriage in all but name.
Sorry, but tickets are tickets...
My husband and I once worked as doctors at the same institution...so we could not take vacations together (or we would leave the place short staffed, since we only had 6 docs working)...so I usually went with a girlfriend...
If he was given a reward, the friend he takes with him should not matter...
Especially considering the judiciary in California. In Texas the newly ratified amendment prohibits any local government from recognizing any non-marriage relationship as a marriage. This means Austin won't be allowed to give benefits to "domestic partners" of city employees or issue marriage certificates to any couple that does not meet the criterion of one man and one woman.
Kudos to Northwest for resisting the Marketing of Evil (David Kupellian's book title)
Dumb move.
And FReepers rejoice that gay people are refused service on an airline.
I think the airline prints those terms very very clearly.
Besides are not airlines regulated by FEDERAL LAW?
In 1996 Clinton signed the DOMA. These homosexuals fetishists were traveling between states and thus interstate commerce was involved.
What was the airline going to do, transport them to the CF bordern and pitch them out?
FL has no such recreational sex recognition. FL thanks NWA.
These were not "tickets as tickets" this were some form of promotion.
I have used frequent flyer miles to have tickets directly issued in the other person's name.
There is more to this story.
It is also important to remember that most all these airlines have been seriously curtailing freebie friends and families. At some point, as long as you just were friendly with an airline employee they could do something for you. (free upgrade if not a freebie)
Sorry but these homosexuals need to realize that one man playing iwth another man's penis does not make them special, it just makes them deviant.
NWA? What is Dr Dre the pilot or something?
Haha. Well, it certainly isn't Eazy-E.
So, who makes the chicken soup?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.