Comments on: How To Get Across Downtown For Free

By: msparber

msparber — Fri, 14 Jul 2006 21:14:44 +0000

There’s a difference between making out and kissing. But, sine you seemingly get to decide when conversations begin and end, I guess we’re done. I’ll just remind you that the law actually gets to decide, not you, and if you violate people’s right to be free of discrimination, the conversation might just end with a lawsuit.

By: mikeyedge

mikeyedge — Fri, 14 Jul 2006 21:07:35 +0000

i really miss suckling my mommy’s boob

By: mikeyedge

mikeyedge — Fri, 14 Jul 2006 21:03:59 +0000

Nobody wants to see a gay couple making out in their workplace and have the full rights to kick them out. End of discussion.

By: msparber

msparber — Fri, 14 Jul 2006 05:16:14 +0000

I see. Joking or not, you’ve demonstrated that you’ve got an overdeveloped sense of people being disrespectful toward you, but an underdeveloped sense of when you might be disrespectful to others. Funny how that always seems to go hand-in-hand.

By: mikeyedge

mikeyedge — Fri, 14 Jul 2006 04:22:14 +0000

No if it were a boy or girl I’d sit down and grab a bag of popcorn. Give me a break.

By: msparber

msparber — Fri, 14 Jul 2006 04:14:33 +0000

Would you throw them out if they were a boy and a girl?

By: Mikeyedge

Mikeyedge — Fri, 14 Jul 2006 02:45:08 +0000

What a despicable act, and I mean the kiss in the cab. I own a shop, if someone were to do that in my shop I’d kick them out. It’s complete disrespect towards me. You really should be ashamed of yourself, get some class.

By: USTLaw

USTLaw — Wed, 12 Jul 2006 13:52:59 +0000

Lowkeyd: the city and county recently changed the language in all their codes from “affectional preference,” which has been seen as a euphemistic way of saying sexual orientation, to “sexual orientation.” That change actually occurred somewhat recently. Since the “affectional preference” term was created, it has always just been another term for the same thing: sexual orientations. Also, the code specifically says that manifestations of such a “preference” may not be the basis for discrimination. One would assume that kissing would be among the only otherwise legal public manifestations of “affectional preference.”

Kwatt: it seems that any argument that Blue & White rules ban kissing across the board would be simply pretextual. Ask almost any 20-something straight person in this city: this rule has simply never been enforced against straight couples. So even if the rule is not discriminatory on its face, it is being discriminatorally applied.

By: kwatt

kwatt — Tue, 11 Jul 2006 23:18:56 +0000

I believe gay and lesbian are listed in state statute as protective classes so if it’s not in city ordinance wouldn’t that apply?

I guess what I said earlier was more of a question, is the case that they kicked you out because you were kissing or because you were two gay men kissing? Wouldn’t protected statutes only apply if the company’s ban or whatever was only on gay kissing? If they prohibit all kissing, then what does it matter that you are gay, unless they ignore the prohibition for straights and lesbians?

By: lowkeyd

lowkeyd — Tue, 11 Jul 2006 22:49:57 +0000

ok, so i agree, it's ridiculous. my boyfriend and i rarely have to take cabs, and he's not too big on PA, but i'd be pissed as hell if i got kicked out for a gay kiss..even making out! it's my boyfriend for christ's sake.
anway

and Mpls Simpleton, the Mpls Public Codes are nice to see, but it doesn't list anywhere that this protects sexual orientation. which leads to the question; do the cabbies have the legal right to kick out any members glbt community since we aren't protected under those codes?