[POLL] Southwest boots woman for refusing to change or remove offensive shirt

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,547
20,262
146
Some people need to learn that "freedom of speech" does not apply on private property.

http://money.cnn.com/2005/10/06/news/fortune500/southwest_shirt/?cnn=yes

Southwest boots woman for shirt
Lorrie Heasley to sue for being asked to leave a flight because of her politically charged T-shirt with the F-word on it.
October 6, 2005: 5:05 PM EDT

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Southwest Airlines kicked a woman off one of its flights over a political message on her T-shirt, the airline confirmed Thursday, and published reports say the passenger will sue.

Lorrie Heasley, of Woodland, Wash., was asked to leave her flight from Los Angeles to Portland, Ore., Tuesday for wearing a T-shirt with pictures of President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and a phrase similar to the popular film title "Meet the Fockers." (It said "Meet the f(u)ckers."

A spokesman for Southwest Airlines told CNN that the airline used the "common sense" approach when they decided to escort Heasley from the plane in Reno, Nevada, during a stopover between Los Angeles and Portland, Ore.

The airline felt that the T-shirt was offensive and that other passengers would be outraged by it, the spokeswoman said, adding that the incident is about "decency."

"I have cousins in Iraq and other relatives going to war," Heasley told the Reno Gazette-Journal. "Here we are trying to free another country and I have to get off an airplane in midflight over a T-shirt. That's not freedom."

According to the airline spokeswoman, Heasley was asked to leave after she refused to cover up her T-shirt, an account that conflicts with Heasley's version in the Gazette-Journal.

Heasley told the newspaper that she agreed to cover her shirt with a sweatshirt, but it slipped as she slept. After she was ordered to wear her T-shirt inside-out or leave, she and her husband chose to leave, the paper said.

The 32-year-old lumber saleswoman said in the report that no one from Southwest said anything about the shirt while she waited near the gate at Los Angeles International Airport, nor did anyone mention the shirt as she boarded the aircraft.

Southwest Airlines (up $0.20 to $15.21, Research) spokeswoman Marilee McInnis told the Gazette-Journal that the airline's contract with the Federal Aviation Administration contains rules that say the airline will deny boarding to any customer whose conduct is offensive, abusive, disorderly or violent or for clothing that is "lewd, obscene, or patently offensive."

FAA spokesman Donn Walker told the newspaper that no federal rules exist on the subject.

"It's up to the airlines who they want to take and by what rules," he was quoted as saying. "The government just doesn't get into the business of what people wear on an aircraft."

Heasley wants Southwest to reimburse her and her husband for the last leg of their trip and pay for her gasoline, a $68 rental car from Avis and a $70 hotel bill, according to reports.

 

Eli

Super Moderator | Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
50,419
8
81
Couldn't they have just asked her to turn it inside out?

I mean seriously... Making her stop her transit in the middle of bumfsck nowhere(at least, compared to her destination)?

Edit: Uh, well ok I read the article now.. :eek:

They chose to leave instead of turning it inside out... hmm.

Not sure where I stand on this one.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,547
20,262
146
Originally posted by: Eli
Couldn't they have just asked her to turn it inside out?

I mean seriously... Making her stop her transit in the middle of bumfsck nowhere(at least, compared to her destination)?

After she was ordered to wear her T-shirt inside-out or leave, she and her husband chose to leave, the paper said.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,547
20,262
146
Whoever is voting "no" please, explain how the fsck you can justify that answer...
 

So

Lifer
Jul 2, 2001
25,923
17
81
Originally posted by: KingofCamelot
Its their airline, they can do what ever the fvck they want.

/thread


I don't care about any other arguments, the airline can refuse service to anyone they want to. In turn, you're free to refuse them your business. Freedom is very efficient that way.
 
D

Deleted member 4644

While I think it was a dick move on SW's part, I ultimately support their right to do so.

I would disagree if it were Verizon or Comcast or another provider of that sort: I believe our nation needs new laws (or perhaps even an amendment) that protects our ability to have free speech on the internet even if it offends our ISP.

edit spelling
 

So

Lifer
Jul 2, 2001
25,923
17
81
Originally posted by: LordSegan
While I think it was a dick move on SW's part, I ultimately support their right to do so.

I would disagree if it were Verizon or Comcast or another provider of that sort: I believe our nation needs new laws (or perhaps even an amendment) that protects our ability to have free speech on the internet even if it offender our ISP.

edit spelling

We have those already and have had it for years.

It's called 'common carrier' status. The law says that if you as a telecom company polices anything that your users say, you have to police EVERYTHING, like the FCC. Therefore, if the telecom giants want to save money by not having to make sure that everyone is clean enough for the FCC, they can't pick one persone out. Simple economics then stops them from abusing individuals.
 

Zanix

Diamond Member
Feb 11, 2003
5,568
12
81
Originally posted by: Amused
Whoever is voting "no" please, explain how the fsck you can justify that answer...

I don't think it should be illegal to look like an idiot.

We can spot them easier that way.
 

KingofCamelot

Golden Member
Aug 20, 2004
1,074
0
0
Originally posted by: Zanix
Originally posted by: Amused
Whoever is voting "no" please, explain how the fsck you can justify that answer...

I don't think it should be illegal to look like an idiot.

We can spot them easier that way.

Where did anyone say it was illegal for the woman to wear the shirt? When you enter someone else's private property, specifically a business, they have a right to dictate what you do there.

SouthWest had every right to kick her off the flight, because its their property, their business, and their rules. If someone came into a shop you owned, wearing a shirt that offended you, I'm sure you'd kick them out too.
 

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
63,657
20,117
136
Yep. I imagine they reserve the right to boot anyone for pretty much any reason, or no reason. If there hadn't been an expletive on it, then they might not have been quite as justified, though.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,547
20,262
146
Originally posted by: Zanix
Originally posted by: Amused
Whoever is voting "no" please, explain how the fsck you can justify that answer...

I don't think it should be illegal to look like an idiot.

We can spot them easier that way.

It's not illegal. Southwest is a private company and the woman was on private property.

If you deny Southwest the right to ask people to conform to their standards or leave their property, you deny your own right to ask a rude person to leave your house.

How about I come over for dinner and spend the entire time telling your mother/sister/girlfriend/wife what a nasty fscking whore she is... and then laugh at you because you're not within your rights to ask me to leave.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,547
20,262
146
Originally posted by: Zim Hosein
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: Zim Hosein
Was Southwest within their rights to ask her to change the shirt or leave??

No.

Why not?

She was already on the plane, she got that far, leave her be.

She probably had a the sweatshirt on until she got on the plane. She did cover it with a sweat shirt when asked, but then took it off.

At any rate, what does it matter WHEN they decided they didn't like it?
 

KingofCamelot

Golden Member
Aug 20, 2004
1,074
0
0
Whoa, anyone else amazed at the results? So far its been staying at 2/3 yes, 1/3 no, everytime i refresh it keeps that pattern. Fvcking weird.

EDIT: And of course the second I mention it it changes....I swear it was doing it.
 

moshquerade

No Lifer
Nov 1, 2001
61,504
12
56
Originally posted by: Zim Hosein
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: Zim Hosein
Was Southwest within their rights to ask her to change the shirt or leave??

No.

Why not?

She was already on the plane, she got that far, leave her be.
she chose to leave. if she wanted to stay she just had to wear the shirt inside out.
the ACLU will persue a settlement for her "troubles" though.

 

vi edit

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Oct 28, 1999
62,484
8,345
126
I think some of the details got lost in the shuffle.

They asked her to take it off or cover it. She put a sweatshirt over it. If it truely did "become uncovered as she slept" and southwest threw a fit, that's aweful petty of Southwest IMHO.

But then again, she could have just gone to the bathroom and turned it inside out and everything would have been over with.

But she's nothing more than an attention whore (shirt in case) and is just looking to further capitalize on that issue.

She left on her own will instead of turning it inside out. I hope a the Judge that hears this tells her to GTF out his/her courtroom and grow the fsck up.

 

DAGTA

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
8,172
1
0
Private property. It's Southwest's plane and they can say whether or not some clothing is permitted to be worn on their planes. Now, I do feel they should refund her for the tickets.
 

Toonces

Golden Member
Feb 5, 2000
1,690
0
76
well, there are some rules which must be abided by - even on private property ;)

now if she were arab, asian, or african american and got kicked for nothing that's a violation of human rights (discrimination)

In this case, however, the person's rights were not violated due to the option given to have the shirt reversed and the message removed (pointing to the motive not being race/sexuality) wherein she freely chose to leave the plane.
 

Zanix

Diamond Member
Feb 11, 2003
5,568
12
81
Originally posted by: KingofCamelot
Originally posted by: Zanix
Originally posted by: Amused
Whoever is voting "no" please, explain how the fsck you can justify that answer...

I don't think it should be illegal to look like an idiot.

We can spot them easier that way.

Where did anyone say it was illegal for the woman to wear the shirt? When you enter someone else's private property, specifically a business, they have a right to dictate what you do there.

SouthWest had every right to kick her off the flight, because its their property, their business, and their rules. If someone came into a shop you owned, wearing a shirt that offended you, I'm sure you'd kick them out too.

Nah I wouldn't, and I hope to own a shop someday.

We gotta get over the idea that we have the right to never be offended.

I don't think the lady was screaming profainities. Just a fvcking word on a shirt. No pun.

If some kids tagged the building next to me with something offensive, do I have the right to sue the owners of the building? I can't imagine I'd collect if I could.