You need to comply with *my* sacred religious oath! Don't even talk to me, you women!

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by Explorer, Feb 28, 2015.

  1. tedtan

    tedtan SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    3,905
    Likes Received:
    488
    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2009
    Location:
    Never Neverland
    I'm not sure how visually verifying that a passenger's seatbelt is buckled requires the flight attendant, regardless of gender, to either 1) sit adjacent to that passenger or 2) speak directly to that passenger. Perhaps, in the case of #2, if the seatbelt were covered over by clothing, but the letter did explicitly state that the monks are well versed in flight protocol, so this would be an unlikely occurrence.


    Absolutely!

    But if you want respect from others, it helps to show them respect, too, even if you disagree with their beliefs, no?


    I can't speak for anyone else, but when I mentioned that you had been "on an anti-Christian crusade lately" a year or so back, acknowledged one of your threads against a particular Islamic issue, and asked why you don't criticize other religions more frequently*, your own response was to link to threads about 8-string guitars, Gahndi and other non-religious topics.

    I have noticed that you've posted more threads criticizing religions other than Christianity in the past few months. I'm not sure if this is standard operating procedure for you and my observations were based on a non-characteristic period or if you've started posting more threads against other religions as a result of several people mentioning your focus on Christianity lately, but it doesn't matter as neither invalidates my observations at the time I made them.


    * Note that my comments were related to advising you to present yourself and your argument as objectively as possible, rather than as biased against a particular idea, as this greatly influences how you and your argument are perceived, not as me caring about the specific number of threads you've created on any given topic. You're welcome to post about whatever you want.
     
  2. Grand Moff Tim

    Grand Moff Tim Some call me... Tim

    Messages:
    7,220
    Likes Received:
    1,138
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Location:
    Cheongju, SK
    Yes, that's why I brought up other options they could have used in my original post. I didn't list "buy empty seats next to theirs" as an option because that could still leave them in a position of having to communicate with flight attendants of the opposite gender, rather than having a middle man in the aisle seat to do that for them.

    I don't know why you would make that assumption. I think I have a higher opinion of humanity than most around these parts, but it's not so high that I would expect that sort of forethought and consideration of others from anyone, religious devotee or not.

    Obviously if they didn't have a choice in where they were seated when they bought the tickets, a great deal of what I said is negated. That would be why I prefaced my post with that. However, if, like you said, you think they'd "do everything they can to address the issue themselves before asking for preferential treatment if they had the ability to do so," wouldn't the act of choosing an airline that doesn't give them the option of choosing their seats itself be inconsiderate of other passengers, knowing what it will lead to?

    I think making a request that's inconsiderate of everyone around you when putting yourself into a situation that you could have avoided in the first place is pretty stupid, but we can't all agree on everything, I suppose.
     
  3. asher

    asher So Did We

    Messages:
    9,033
    Likes Received:
    686
    Joined:
    May 24, 2010
    Location:
    Oakland, CA
    I'm kind of confused about how you (ted) agree that their view unfairly victimizes/objectifies/others all women, but then also say it's harmless? It's not.
     
  4. bostjan

    bostjan MicroMetal Contributor

    Messages:
    12,972
    Likes Received:
    1,142
    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Location:
    St. Johnsbury, VT USA
    I did. As I've stated over and over, they kept the door wide open for the airline service company to say "no."

    Hmm. I don't know if you are purposely being obtuse, or it just comes off that way to me. Obviously, the letter covers this instance, in general, in that the female flight attendant speaks to the passenger through another passenger or directly in the case of an emergency.

    What are you getting at with this? :scratch:

    This letter was sent prior to the purchase of the tickets, no? So I think this entire argument is moot.

    If you don't feel like it, that's your perogative. In this case, these people are asking a corporation to make special accommodations. The corporation can say "no," with or without reasoning. The corporation could also simply choose not to respond. And that's my main point - how is asking the question offensive?!

    If I was a Satanist, and I asked a restaurant to bring the chicken out to my table, make an encirled pentangle of salt on the table, slaughter the chicken in the middle of the table, then take it back into the kitchen and cook it, what did I just do? Did I offend a whole bunch of customers with my religious practice? No, I asked a question. If I get the answer "yes, we'll accommodate that request" from the restaurant and then follow through, then we have a conversation that could get interesting, but, since all I did was ask, and then nothing happened, it's a rather silly thing by which to become offended.

    If I asked the airline to give me a seat not next to any "smelly Jews," then that's also different. I am asking, in that case, because I have chosen to be intolerant. These monks are making a special request due to a ridiculous religious oath that they took. That oath is one of celibacy, not an oath of intolerance. If a nun took the same sort of oath, I would respect that, and not be offended that she not talk to me. On the other hand, if the nun will not talk to me for a reason stated that I'm a "stinky, ignorant Slovenian," then I'd be cranky.

    So what I'm ultimately missing is why request = actually doing and why celebacy = sexist. Without those to equations, I don't see how this is offensive, by your arguments.
     
  5. Grand Moff Tim

    Grand Moff Tim Some call me... Tim

    Messages:
    7,220
    Likes Received:
    1,138
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Location:
    Cheongju, SK
    I'm not sure that's the case. While it doesn't explicitly say anywhere in the letter whether or not the tickets have already been purchased, it does open with the line "This is a request to facilitate special requirements for Hindu monks from India who will be flying today." (Emphasis mine). It's possible of course that I'm just reading too much in to it, but it seems to be suggesting that the tickets have already been purchased.

    You're right, though, it is just a request, and in and of itself there's nothing really outrageous about making a request. If they make the request and then make a stink about it if and when the request is denied, that'd be another kettle of fish, but we don't know how this whole situation ended.

    Anyone have any follow-up info on this story?
     
  6. flint757

    flint757 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    6,400
    Likes Received:
    197
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Location:
    Houston, TX
    The only two things I could pull up that even mentioned this request is this page and an atheist blog. I couldn't find anything else on the request, much less what happened afterwards.
     
  7. UnderTheSign

    UnderTheSign SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    2,998
    Likes Received:
    205
    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2010
    Location:
    West Coast, The Netherlands
    Same, google reverse image search on the letter gives me a couple atheist blogs, a link on Richard Dawkins website (which is funny because there's a good amount of sexism in those circles as well :lol:)
     

Share This Page