What level of prejudice should be tolerated/accepted?
dude a fat person has a choice whether to eat or notRockyroad said:That made me laugh. Good point. I guess an overweight person needs a seat - period. And a smoker could (thereotically) wait until they got off to have a cigarettte.
Small seats stops overweight guy from flying full stop. But the smoker has a choice.
I think there's a difference there in that your bad knees are largely due to circumstances beyond your control (unless it's a consequence of being overweight) whereas the majority of overweight people are so because of the lifestyle choices they have made, therefore I understand that passengers are required to vacate their seats for elderly/disabled passengers (besides it being common courtesy).Dooga said:dude a fat person has a choice whether to eat or not
whether they can do exercise or not
whether there fuckwits or not
what the hell is up with you
are you fat????
cause if you are its your own fault
fat people dont deserve more rights.
i got bad knees
does that mean i should get an extra seat free of charge to rest them on cause i cant keep them bent for long periods of time???
NO IT DOESNT
FAT PEOPLE PAY FOR YOUR OWN SEAT YOU TARDS
no one said they shouldn't get an extra seat? lol idiot.hpdanemma said:Gawd our countries so damn obese!
Yeh they probably should get an extra seat, the point of air travel is to accomodate for people in society. A lot of people in soceity are obese! And it barely impacts on other passengers, except that an extra person could be in that seat. That being said, I think that other person as well as the individual who is overweight would rather not be in that situation lol.
If you're so overweight that you need an extra seat, you should probably get one.
But for Gods sake, people in that situation [and who aren't affected be a disability which means they put on more weight than others] should have to go on a mandatory lifestyle program. If they were taught ways of being healthy and had it shoved down their throat then it'd be better for everyone in the long run. Meaning less health problems, therefore less time in hospital [thats good for individual, community and government], longer life span, more time in the workforce, healthier raising of kids etc etc.
By saying "they probably should get an extra seat" I meant should be GIVEN an extra seat; as in FOR FREE. Jesus sorry for apparently not making it clear enough for you.Pace_T said:no one said they shouldn't get an extra seat? lol idiot.
"barely impacts on other passengers except that an extra person could be in that seat?"
again, lol idiot.
no one said they cant have an extra seat. the question is should the airline be forced to give it for free
learn to be less stupid please.
i wouldve accepted this, but the second quote in my last post still doesnt make sense. regardless, at least you understand now.hpdanemma said:By saying "they probably should get an extra seat" I meant should be GIVEN an extra seat; as in FOR FREE. Jesus sorry for apparently not making it clear enough for you.
what about all of those obese people who simply cant fit into one seat?hpdanemma said:I'm sure that unless the seat was free, many overweight individuals wouldn't bother paying for an extra.
im going to assume you mean the extra seat is for free:hpdanemma said:To all the people complainging saying it is unfair and "they should pay for their on seat", I was merely pointing out that there is little negative effect on other airline passengers except for the fact that for every extra seat used, one less person can travel on the plane.
it depends on their size. some simply need 2 seats and its not a matter of comfort.hpdanemma said:I then went on to indicate that it is unlikely the person who could have been in that seat would enjoy being squished up next to someone who doesn't quite fit, it would be an incredibly unpleasent flight. Neither would this be a pleasent experience for the overweight individual.
and you're trying to make me sound like the idiot? LOLhpdanemma said:All cleared up, or do I need to explain it to you further?
i think i made a similar agument before. so everybody defending the court's ruling should try to make sense out of this scenario. i bet no one canyoungminii said:Analogy: One meal of Maccas doesn't fill me up, so I should get another for free
Given my second bolded statement, why the first bolded statement? Why SHOULD they get the second seat for free? Airline travel is a luxury service. That you pay for. It is not a right like you seem to think it is (and if it was, by god I'd demand to travel first class), and if a paying passenger is so fat that they need an extra seat to accomodate them, then they should goddamn pay for that extra seat.hpdanemma said:By saying "they probably should get an extra seat" I meant should be GIVEN an extra seat; as in FOR FREE. Jesus sorry for apparently not making it clear enough for you.
And there has been much mention of wether it is better for the overweight individual to either a) have one seat and annoy the people who are next to them or b) have the extra seat and therefore extra room.
I'm sure that unless the seat was free, many overweight individuals wouldn't bother paying for an extra. To all the people complainging saying it is unfair and "they should pay for their on seat", I was merely pointing out that there is little negative effect on other airline passengers except for the fact that for every extra seat used, one less person can travel on the plane. I then went on to indicate that it is unlikely the person who could have been in that seat would enjoy being squished up next to someone who doesn't quite fit, it would be an incredibly unpleasent flight. Neither would this be a pleasent experience for the overweight individual.
All cleared up, or do I need to explain it to you further?