Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
NW Refuses Gay Couple's Award Tickets  
User currently offlineChiGB1973 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 1613 posts, RR: 1
Posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 14190 times:

NW is being hammered by the ACLU now.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/po/20060212/...hwestrefusesgaycouplesawardtickets

M

165 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLuv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12090 posts, RR: 49
Reply 1, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 14175 times:

From the article.

Rob Anders, a longtime airline industry employee, won the tickets at a holiday party in December. When he tried to redeem the tickets for a trip with his registered domestic partner, the airline refused, saying it would only recognize a spouse, another airline employee or a dependent child as a suitable "companion" for the award ticket.

It looks like NW gave away the tickets at a function, so they are in there rights to set the rules, though being a Gay man I do not agree per say.



You can cut the irony with a knife
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 2, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 14158 times:

It's a stupid policy, but NW have the right to be stupid.

User currently offlineHeisan67 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 14138 times:

What? This sounds very strange.

Aren't registrered partner, regardless of sex, considered equal as spouse in USA?
Well I guess I know the answer now.

Wouldn't even thought of this happening in Norway/Sweden/Denmark.


User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 4, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 14116 times:

Quoting Heisan67 (Reply 3):
Aren't registrered partner, regardless of sex, considered equal as spouse in USA?

It varies by state according to state law. The federal constitution just requires that every state recognize the marriages of every other state.


User currently offlineSWISSER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 14081 times:

I' am not gay, but that is unacceptable!
This is pure discrimination.


User currently offlineGQfluffy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 14023 times:

Interesting. I almost find this funny, as my uncle (who is a purser on NW flights to Japan out of DTW) and his partner n/r on NW all the time...

[Edited 2006-02-13 00:26:53]

User currently offlineBNinMSY From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 332 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 13939 times:

Truly disgusting, this day in age, where does Northwest have it's head buried?

User currently offlineGVWOW From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 168 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 13900 times:

Quoting SWISSER (Reply 5):
I' am not gay, but that is unacceptable!
This is pure discrimination.

Exactly. The utmost and purest discrimination. There is absolutely no reason he shouldn't have got the ticket, besides that he somehow didn't fall into their obviously flawed policy. Even though he technically wasn't recognized by the policy, the policy itself violated the law.


User currently offlineB752OS From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 1322 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 13900 times:

Quoting GQfluffy (Reply 6):
Interesting. I almost find this funny, as my uncle (who is a purser on NW flights to Japan out of DTW) and his partner n/r on NW all the time...

I don't mean to sound dumb, but what is a purser?


I think NW are idiots for this.


User currently offlineTymnBalewne From Bermuda, joined Mar 2005, 944 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 13841 times:

Quoting B752OS (Reply 9):
I don't mean to sound dumb, but what is a purser?

Depending on the airline, a purser can either be the lead or head flight attendant for the entire aircraft, or the head flight attendant for a particular cabin or class of service.

C.



Dewmanair...begins with Dew
User currently offlineEatmybologna From France, joined Apr 2005, 412 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 13841 times:

They're flaming, er, burning their bridges.

e-m-b



Isn't knowledge more than just the acquisition of information? Shouldn't the acquired information be correct?
User currently offlineSATX From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 2840 posts, RR: 7
Reply 12, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 13795 times:

Quoting GQfluffy (Reply 6):
Interesting. I almost find this funny, as my uncle (who is a purser on NW flights to Japan out of DTW) and his partner n/r on NW all the time...

What exactly is interesting, surprising, or funny about an employee being able to bend the rules that a potential customer cannot. Unless I'm missing something here?



Open Season on Consumer Protections is Just Around the Corner...
User currently offlineN501US From United States of America, joined May 2005, 220 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 13773 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Sonething isn't right with this story. I am guessing NW healthcare etc for employees has provisions for domestic partners etc. I'd like to know the rest of the story.


Fools and thieves are well disguised in the temple and the marketplace.....
User currently offlineNwab787techops From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 219 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 13681 times:

I don't know this program of the award ticket MR. Anders got, but it's Tax free travel laws that doesn't let a registered domestic partner fly the same as a spouse. It's not NWA agent gay rights. This is true for NWA employees who aren't guys and do not have a spouse. But, let look at it guys Mr. Anders domestic partner can fly just the same, he/she just pays $10 plus tax. So it's the TAX Laws you need to fighting be not NWA or any other airlines.

Anyways there is no law saying airlines have to give free flight to anyone....


User currently offlineRedngold From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 6907 posts, RR: 45
Reply 15, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 13660 times:

This just seems wrong. I know of friends who use companion tickets. They aren't dating each other, they aren't related in any way. Then again, they may not have flown on Northwest.


Up, up and away!
User currently offlineAirlinelover From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 5580 posts, RR: 23
Reply 16, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 13615 times:

Quoting Heisan67 (Reply 3):
Aren't registrered partner, regardless of sex, considered equal as spouse in USA?

No

Quoting SWISSER (Reply 5):
This is pure discrimination.

It's not, they are following their policy. It's outdated, and will probably be changed eventually, but right now it's policy.

Quoting GQfluffy (Reply 6):
Interesting. I almost find this funny, as my uncle (who is a purser on NW flights to Japan out of DTW) and his partner n/r on NW all the time...

Policy for a NW Employee is a bit different. They are allowed to choose anyone for their main travel partner on their benefits.

Chris



Lets do some sexy math. We add you, subtract your clothes, divide your legs and multiply
User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 13537 times:

Quoting Airlinelover (Reply 19):
Quoting SWISSER (Reply 5):
This is pure discrimination.

It's not, they are following their policy. It's outdated, and will probably be changed eventually, but right now it's policy.

Whether it's policy or not, it's clear discrimination.


User currently offlineWe're Nuts From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5722 posts, RR: 20
Reply 18, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 13439 times:

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 21):
Whether it's policy or not, it's clear discrimination.

America: Where discrimination is as clear as mud.



Dear moderators: No.
User currently offlineBNinMSY From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 332 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 13414 times:

America ain't the country we thought it was ... it's changed. Land of the free. . . ?

User currently offlineSchipholjfk From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 579 posts, RR: 6
Reply 20, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 13357 times:

Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 1):
It looks like NW gave away the tickets at a function, so they are in there rights to set the rules, though being a Gay man I do not agree per say.

NWA gave away two tickets right? So why do they care who the guy takes. Looks like a bankrupt ariline is simply trying to squirm their way out of giving the two tickets away for free! If you have so many hang ups, then simply don't give tickets away.



The fun of flying... love it !!!
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11208 posts, RR: 52
Reply 21, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 13357 times:

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 21):
Whether it's policy or not, it's clear discrimination.

So is saying "you can't take your girfriend" or "you can't take your roommate." Neither is illegal.

(That's not saying I agree with it - I don't. But legally, I doubt there is anything that can be done. However, involving the ACLU is a pretty good negotiation tactic.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 22, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 13340 times:

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 4):
It varies by state according to state law.

Where NW is headwquarted in Minnesota, you don't get much further to the left of political stature than where they are now, but without nescessarily condoning the sexual preference of the individual it is still nevertheless incredibly stupid with all the stuff on NW's plate to even begin to allow this to transpire. This should have been handled at the immediate lowest level and never raised an eyebrow - some people while they may be book-smart are just morons when it comes to common sense.


User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 13244 times:

NW is a trashy airline. Rubbish service, ugly and rude FAs, and the only first world carrier still flying decrepit DC-10s on international routes. And discriminatory to boot. I actually gave away all my NW frequent flyer miles to a friend. I wouldn't even fly them for free.

User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5722 posts, RR: 11
Reply 24, posted (8 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 13089 times:

Well look who's prejudiced after all.

You guys are taking his side BECAUSE he is gay.

as a follow up to D L X, I have to ask...

No, I have to TELL you. None of you guys would be this upset if it were his fraternity buddy from college. You'd say, "Well, the law says they're not married... (hey, frat buddies are close, but not THAT close) so too bad."

Well, in this instance, the guy isn't eligible for travel.

It has nothing to do with Northwest Airlines. They clearly don't have anything against gay people, just look at the guy who said his uncle is gay and a purser on int'l flights.

It has nothing to do with the law, either. Call it outdated, call it unfair, call it Yolanda, IT'S THE LAW. If you don't like it, well, try to change it!

THAT IS WHAT MAKES THIS COUNTRY GREAT, FOLKS!! IF YOU DON'T LIKE THINGS THE WAY THEY ARE, YOU HAVE THE FREEDOM TO TRY TO CHANGE THEM!!!!!

And here you are talking about how stupid America is, just because some guy isn't getting to take his lover on a trip.
You guys are nuts.

You are free to try to change laws you don't like, and I am free to try and stop you, or support you. And the beautiful thing is that, when everything works properly, the majority get what they want.
Until you have some weirdo interest group step up and stick up for the people that have glass eyeballs and are discriminated against.
I swear, the ACLU will defend anybody on any side of any argument. But that's not my point.

My point is, if you don't like America, then CHANGE it for the better, or shut your freaking yaps.


25 Alitalia744 : We try to change it but then there are close minded folks like yourself telling us to shut up.
26 Post contains images ATAIndy : Well you're certainly not being sterotypical . Anyway, rules are rules, and I think NW is acting good on their part.
27 Post contains links SWISSER : I' am not sure in the US, but in Belgium ANY company will get there *sses screwed when they do such a thing based on our discrimination law. http://w
28 Blackhawk144 : Hahahaha, yeah right. (That's totally my opinion) Just because 2 out of 28 replies talked negatively about America doesn't mean all of us are. I mean
29 Post contains images GoCOgo : Exactly, it's not like he paid and denied boarding. That would be discrimination. Exactly. Political correctness is out of control. They likely would
30 TymnBalewne : I hate to tell you but I believe most airlines will not recognize a same-sex relationship of employees of other airlines. The few that do generally do
31 SFOMEX : If I got it right, any single person (gay or straight) couldn't be able to redeem the tickets. It's clearly an outdated policy.
32 SWISSER : In fact that is a completely different thing, if NW states you must be married to have rights to get companian tickets, then unfortunatly even a non
33 LTBEWR : Yes, it may have to do with Federal and some state Income or Gift tax laws, but in a number of states like California, Vermont, Massachusetts, New Yor
34 GoCOgo : That's my point. If you discriminate equally, than, by definition, not discriminatory. They were just as not married as a straight couple who live to
35 Post contains images United737522 : Not that I completely agree, but the rules state that only another employee, spouse or dependant child are eligible. He won it, it is not like it is a
36 Post contains images YOWza : In Canada many contests are not open to residents of Quebec, this is because the laws in that province are different and because many companies have a
37 Rolfen : Is "registered domestic partner" the gay equivalent of "spouse'? If not then I dont see this as discrimination, had the guy been heterosexual and had
38 SWISSER : agreed 100%, there is a huge differnce between stating you must be married or plain NO GAYS, even with a nice wordtalk!
39 Boeing727flyer : More typical Northwest crap. That airline really is a joke.
40 N1120A : No, unfortunately. Only in Massachusetts and Vermont. Actually, the Constitution requires that states recognize same sex marriages, but that is a dif
41 APFPilot1985 : Did you read what you quoted? He said CHANGE IT or shut up, he didn't say like it or shut up.
42 Db373 : Wait a minute here. In order to change something for the better, don't we have to open our yaps to begin with? Or do you want us all to master talkin
43 Sfoerik : NWA is so dumb here. It costs them nothing more and nothing less to send the second person - regardless of who it is! This is where big companies get
44 APFPilot1985 : hence why he said change OR shut your yaps.
45 Jpyvr : A couple of years ago, I had to fly from Vancouver to Michigan for my mother's funeral. I, naturally, wanted to bring my partner, as he also had a lon
46 Ilovenz : I must say, Northwest is once again pursuing a pig@ss policy here, but it has to do more with Northwest's cut-corners approach to laws. Generally in A
47 RiddlePilot215 : I really don't see what all the fuss is about. The rules say that you have to be married in order to reap the benefits of the tickets, and last time I
48 Blackhawk144 : But do you think that anyone, after reading what he said would really go out of their way to change it? I mean, I don't know of any post or reply on
49 APFPilot1985 : bull, there was a point to it, you took what he said and molded it into something that you could use to attack him, who cares is someone would change
50 Burnsie28 : This guy is a NW employee, the story that is on that website seems to be lacking several details, but a registered travel partner are allowed, however
51 D L X : 84 days away from being a lawyer... give or take a bar exam. You don't need to go to law school to know that some (many) marriages end in divorce. Ho
52 JpetekYXMD80 : Richter, who are you to judge? First of all, he was going to see his 89 year old mother, which i'm sure the partner wouldn't have a relationship with
53 APFPilot1985 : Within the terms and conditions of the ticket
54 Jamake1 : The deeper problem here is that the U.S. discriminates against same sex couples by not allowing them the legal right to marry (each other). Even so, i
55 Post contains images EA CO AS : It's not an award ticket. It's a non-revenue, space-available pass that only airline employees or their eligible dependents, parents or spouse may us
56 AR385 : As a lot of people have pointed it out, this case is not very well detailed and the article is lacking in important facts for a lucid discussion. I do
57 N1120A : Actually, one already did. (b) It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employment agency to fail or refuse to refer for employment, or oth
58 JpetekYXMD80 : No, actually, I do not sound ridiculous. The guy was picking apart the intent of the guys trip, something he is in absolutely no position to do or pa
59 EA CO AS : That involved a change to the law though - where ELECTED LAWMAKERS changed the law, not a random private group of attorneys with a pet issue, which i
60 N1120A : Well, a lot of people seem to miss that we don't live in France, Germany or another Civil Law country. The laws of the United States and 49 out of 50
61 JpetekYXMD80 : I was mostly referring to the destination, which was for some reason being critiqued by United737522.
62 Legend500 : From a PR/financial analysis, the fact that this has hit the press is inexcusable for any NWA stake- or share-holder. NWA will now spend thousands of
63 Elton : exactly!
64 Post contains images Bond007 : What the heck has this go to do with gays?? If I got the tickets and I lived with my girlfriend, we wouldn't be able to use it - If I had posted this
65 AMFAproud : It's a stupid policy, but NW have the right to be stupid And they do so well at being stupid!
66 Bond007 : I wonder how many people would have said it is stupid, if I mentioned my girlfriend being refused? You'd have told me I wasn't married and that was t
67 Blackhawk144 : What didn't he say that I supposedly attacked him on? As a matter of fact, I hardly call what I said attacking! How dare you say something like that
68 OzarkD9S : You're absolutely correct Jimbo. Domestic partner is domestic partner is domestic partner. As a gay man the domestic partner/civil union/gay marriage
69 Bobnwa : Did just about all of you miss the point that the winner of these tickets was an airline employee and the tickets were passes. When you fly on passes
70 D L X : Right. I get the impression that a lot of the people that are bashing the airline in this thread either 1) didn't read the article, 2) have an ax to
71 Goaliemn : Jez. NW has great domestic partner benefits, but you are taxed on them because of IRS rules. This is probably whats happening here. If someone brings
72 Bond007 : Yes, I can, but right now if I was gay and living with my boyfriend, I would have MORE rights as far as my company's health insurance. Fight to get g
73 GeorgiaAME : Very tacky, indeed. NW may have the legal right to discriminate, and as one who believe is the rule of law rather than the rule of the democratic mob,
74 Nyskymasters : Last time I looked, NW extends Domestic Partner travel benefits to employees of NW and other airlines.
75 Aerofan : Well, I've never agreed with that IRS tax rule. It is time that it went thru the door. What about all the other industries that provide fringe benefit
76 Aerofan : And this is plainly silly on NW. If as has already been established NW allows registered companions to travel, then they should have allowed this gent
77 PanAm747 : I think it's time this topic was shelved and archived. The last topic, on Gay Pride and airline sponsorship, was closed, locked, and deleted. It is ap
78 OzarkD9S : I support equal rights and status for every law abiding, tax paying citizen, yourself included. Don't presume to know who and what I stand and fight
79 CX777Fan : I understand his frustration. As a gay man I'd hate to think that if I won a *pair* of tickets, my life-partner wouldn't be able to fly with me if I w
80 Bond007 : Right, but the same would be true if it was your heterosexual life-partner ... nothing to do with being gay. Fight for right to gay marriage in your
81 Bobnwa : Does this airline employee get to take his domestic partner on his own airline on passes? If so, why his he so concerned about Northwest tickets. Agai
82 Slider : It took 82 responses for the voice of reason to come out. Thanks Bob. Personally, I think NW is being stupid, but hey, whatever.
83 ORDagent : It is inherently discriminatory as a gay couple has no chance to meet the rules for marriage. Again, you have the ability to marry her as a gay coupl
84 Flyboyaz : Boy they are just digging themselves deeper everyday....it's sad.
85 Post contains links FATFlyer : This discussion has focused on gay and hetersexual couples. But there are a number of benefits extended to couples and families not extended to unmarr
86 Braniff727 : Do any of you have any idea how many airlines do NOT extend flight benefits to same sex partners of other airlines? I no longer have the access to the
87 Luv2fly : This does not have to do with NW giving its gay employees partner benefits, what it is NW gave away free tickets and thus had the right, even if moral
88 Hardiwv : And dont forget that NW is KLM's partner...whoever took this decision at NW should spend some holidays in AMS. Rgs,
89 Post contains images Bond007 : Absolutely no different than saying that I can't drink until I'm 21, or that I pay more for health insurance because I live in Florida, etc. etc. The
90 SCEagle : It doesn't come down to discrimination so much as choices. Sort of the beauty of the capitalistic system... NW has made a choice with it's policy. Oth
91 N1120A : Constitutions and Democracy are 2 different things These people aren't looking for different rights, they are looking to have the same rights as ever
92 D L X : Exactly. This poor guy wasn't told no because he is gay, he was told no because his companion is not his spouse. People, you've done exactly what my
93 Bond007 : The fact you cannot get married has NOTHING to do with NW. Their policy is plain and simple, across the board, gays and heterosexuals. If you think th
94 NWBOS : There is really no need for me to chime in here, because the relevant points have been brought up. Although NW cannot be considered a 'leader' on the
95 FlyPIJets : What a load of B.S. At one time in this country, blacks couldn't vote because they weren't land owners. By your thinking, that wasn't discrimination
96 FATFlyer : We'll see what happens. I understand no suit has been filed yet, just a letter sent to NW. But I would also not be surprised to see wording similiar
97 Tarheel : If NW wants to continue doing business in CA they had better clean up their act. The law here forbids such discrimination. This couple is registered a
98 D L X : Well, I suppose that's one (distorted) way to look at it, except that when Blacks couldn't vote, it was because the governments made rules for the sp
99 D L X : Federal law trumps state law. If the state law frustrates the purpose of federal law, the state law will be voided insofar as it conflicts with feder
100 EA CO AS : NW does, yes - to their own employees as well as employees of airlines that have reciprocal domestic partner agreements with them. Re-reading the art
101 FATFlyer : I see the California wording as a safe way for Congress. Instead of debating marriage, it could be presented as a way to avoid discrimination against
102 G4resagent : I would have to register with G4
103 Abefroman329 : Straight marriages; the Defense of Marriage Act stipulates that, should one state allow gay marriages, other states don't have to recognize them.
104 D L X : Wow. Yeah, now that you mention this, it looks less and less like the guy has any claim at all. There are lots of important facts missing from this a
105 D L X : DOMA is unconstitutional. It just hasn't been litigated yet. No Act of Congress is above the Constitution. (See the Terry Schiavo case.)
106 EA CO AS : It will be. It clearly violates the full faith and credit clause, Article IV, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution which states: "Full faith and credit
107 Aerlingusa330 : Well, if there's so much controversy about all of this and everyone seems to have a big problem with it, why should NWA give away ANY free tickets in
108 D L X : You don't really think that, do you? Imagine if NWA said "we didn't grant your companion ticket not because you're gay, but rather because you're Bla
109 Aerofan : Well this is something I have always wondered about. With so many gays in the airline industry how is it that that such a restrictive policy exists fo
110 Post contains images Vs25 : I do love it when Americans start talking about politics, religion, and the rest. Now before I go, please, please, please, no Americans take offense t
111 474218 : I have a problem with the title of the post: "NW Refuses Gay Couple's Award Ticket". A gay couple was not awarded the tickets. One person, Rob Anders
112 FlyPIJets : A claimant wouldn't need to demonstrate the reason for a rule, only its effect. Likewise you could come up with all sorts of reasons only landowners
113 Abefroman329 : What a horrible attitude.
114 D L X : That is actually the opposite of American law. See Washington v. Davis, which says that it is intent that matters. (In Canada, they have the opposite
115 Poitin : Plain and simple, NW broke Califonia law. The article spells that out. NW would be wise to settle real fast.
116 Post contains images Airlinelover : It's not clear discrimination, THE LAW does not recognize the guy's "partner" as a spouse, and NW is not required to either. Yes, OR GET THE HELL OUT
117 Poitin : Chris, and all others -- Feceral law has no play in this. The couple were refused boarding on the ground in California . NW broke California law and
118 1MillionFlyer : The Federal government also does not recognize marriage per se. The States define marriage laws and the federal goverment just enforces the equal pro
119 Bobnwa : I can't believe that Northwest is taking heat from some of for offering two free passes to another airline employee as long as he followed the rules o
120 D L X : This is not correct. 1) Federal law applies everywhere the Constitution grants Congress power. Even in California. Since this is interestate commerce
121 Post contains links Airlinelover : True, but kick NW out and that will be a red flag for other airlines too. See the thread about AA and that Paraguay.... http://www.airliners.net/disc
122 Poitin : Yes, this is exactly correct. In California, we have a Domestic Partners act which cover all of this. It has nothing to do about marriage, and many o
123 D L X : Please cite one case that says that sexual orientation is protected by the 14th Amendment. Hell, GENDER isn't even fully protected by the 14th Amendm
124 Airlinelover : If they brought it before Cali courts and won, NW would appeal and it would be overturned in a heartbeat.. Chris
125 MDorBust : So when they reach the first state that doesn't recognize same sex marriages do they land the plane and kick the spouse off since the ticket is no lo
126 Poitin : On what grounds? It is California law, part of the California consititution. It would be bounced out of Federal court because it in no way conflicts
127 Poitin : As noted, California doe not recognize same sex marriages. So what's your point?
128 Poitin : As I said, California law. The Domestic Partners act. Look at the orginal posting for the reference.
129 1MillionFlyer : Actually they have not. Only Mass has gay marriage and it is not being discusssed in front to the supreme court. George Bush himself has stated gay m
130 D L X : You're not a lawyer, are you? By diversity of citizenship (Plaintiff being from California while Defendant airline is from Minnesota), a federal cour
131 Poitin : I think your understanding of the law, the consititution and the issues here are clouded. You are wrong across the board.
132 APFPilot1985 : Of course it is true, Congress would have the upper hand as it involves ICC, regardless of state laws, they would have to be changed to agree with Co
133 Junction : Something doesn’t make sense with this. NW already grants domestic partner travel benefits on NW flights, or on any other carrier with reciprocal D.
134 D L X : The existence of the Domestic Partners Act does not mean that the airline cannot define companion for purposes of an award ticket. It doesn't even me
135 1MillionFlyer : Congress does not have 100% authority in state matters, please provide some shred of proof against this statement. Your comment is fallacious.
136 Poitin : How about LAWRENCE V. TEXAS (02-102) 539 US 558 (2003) That was actually a substantive due process case, but the 14 admendment was part of it to. Ble
137 D L X : My! That could mean a real problem considering I'm taking the bar in just a couple months! I sure hope not. Would you care to point out the spots tha
138 Poitin : Yes it can. They were doing business in California when they broke the law. There is no interstate commerce issue here. A domestic partner couple wer
139 Poitin : I would agree that you have a problem.
140 Post contains links 1MillionFlyer : Sure, you might want to reference any rulings on state's authority of foriegn corporations business operations and their implications. In the case of
141 APFPilot1985 : This isn't a state matter though a)it involved multiple entities who are in different states b)one of those entities in engaged in interstate commerc
142 D L X : That's correct that it was about substantive due process (in this case, the right to get action from whomever you please). Good case! I was very happ
143 APFPilot1985 : You must have your JD and be a lawyer already then right?
144 Bobnwa : Did you miss basics of this situation? 1. The person who got the passes works for another airline, NOT NWA. 2. NWA has rules for its promotional pass
145 1MillionFlyer : Try to keep up. 1. NW is correct in this issue, the restriction was not just for this situation. 2. The thread turned into a discussion about state v
146 Bofredrik : I am tired of homosexual and their "rights..." Read the Bible and you can see what is right or wrong. I hope airlines follow that to.
147 D L X : Where was the plane going? (It wasn't going to Miami, California.) 1) it is unclear from the article who even issued the ticket, so I don't know how
148 APFPilot1985 : no one said it did, however in this case it does.
149 Junction : Wow, sorry I guess I did miss the basics (too much to read into all this). All we need then is the answer to your number 4, and also know whether NW
150 1MillionFlyer : The bible has 640 admonitions to "striaght" people and 4 to "gay" people better go read your bible, and do't throw any stones!!! No one said otherwis
151 APFPilot1985 : Maybe it is you who should be in the GRAMMAR class of·fend (-fnd) v. of·fend·ed, of·fend·ing, of·fends v.tr. 1. To cause displeasure, anger, re
152 1MillionFlyer : This is not related to the context of your post. you have used the term incorrectly. IN any event...good times on A.NET![Edited 2006-02-13 23:56:04]
153 APFPilot1985 : what the heck are you talking about? My post? I used it incorrectly? The only grammatical error that has occurred in this exchange is your misspellin
154 Rdwelch : There is an informed and educated debate going one which is very informative, and quite a bit entertaining. However, I would ask that you keep your p
155 Poitin : The plane was not going. It was parked on the ground. They were refused entry onto the plane while is was still parked on the ground in California, a
156 Poitin : OH, what about the case I cited. In fact, it goes far beyond that, it says it's none of the government's GODDAMN business. Whether or not you agree w
157 Post contains images Poitin : Time to go. See you all in about 18 hours! I can hardly wait to hear what D L X has to say next.
158 APFPilot1985 : The ICC of the constitution would be the only law that would matter in this case. Regardless of if it is parked or not. Their could be mail on that f
159 Post contains images Luv2fly : Quote of the Month The bible contains six admonishments to homosexuals and 362 to Heterosexuals. That doesn't mean that God doesn't love Heterosexual
160 Poitin : For those of you wondering about our next legal beagle D L X, I looked up his two US Supreme court cases. I am still laughing. I stopped what I was go
161 Wjcandee : I'm intrigued that the PlanetOut Network article (which -- along with identical wording at 365gay.com, The Advocate, and Gay Wired -- is the only thin
162 PlanesNTrains : Sounds reasonable. Sounds reasonable. Sigh..... Thank you for adding useless details. Are you proud? He said if you don't like the process, shut up.
163 Bond007 : Correct! I'm no Republican by any means, but I never can grasp why in my business, that I started from scratch, from my money, paying huge taxes, emp
164 MDorBust : I'll ask you again... we're they supposed to tump them off the plane once it left California. The answer is no, because it is clearly an interstate c
165 Garnetpalmetto : This thread has veered way off topic, so I'd just like to remind all of you that Civil Aviation is for discussing aviation-related topic, not broader
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Award Tickets With Flying Blue posted Mon Jul 3 2006 11:11:18 by Levent
Award Tickets Confirmed, But Miles Not Taken! posted Sun Jul 2 2006 15:14:28 by FFlyer
Award Tickets...who's Paying Who? posted Thu May 19 2005 02:58:15 by Seamefly
United Mileage Plus Award Tickets Confusion posted Wed Mar 30 2005 19:18:10 by RoseFlyer
Upgrades On Award Tickets posted Fri Sep 24 2004 07:06:36 by Nwcoflyer
FFP Award Tickets posted Wed Aug 4 2004 17:04:04 by L410Turbolet
Award Tickets posted Thu Jul 18 2002 03:45:35 by Omegous
Cheap Tickets On NW: Buy? posted Mon Aug 21 2006 06:30:00 by ETStar
Problem Booking NW Award Travel posted Mon Oct 10 2005 07:03:06 by Checkraiser
Booking Award Oneworld Tickets posted Fri Jan 23 2004 01:46:52 by Graham697