American Airlines' Preaching Pilot

(Miguel Cruz) wrote in message ...
me wrote:
(Miguel Cruz) wrote:
[snip]
If my plumber asks me whether I'm a Christian, can I sue?

Is there a federal law that says you must follow and obey
all instructions from your plumbing crew? If not, it might be
a different situation altogether.

Best point I've seen in a while.


The various threads are all out of control so it's kinda tough
to make this point. But I've mentioned this before with
respect to aircrew behavior. They've got alot of clout and
when discussing the expectations of their behavior, I tend
to lean towards thinking of them as cops, not butlers.
There are similarities in the restrictions on their behavior too.


If you've ever been on the wrong end of a shotgun and a badge,
it might be easier to understand how ANY question can take on
very threatening tones. Think of a cop, fingering his
gun, while saying to you "Hey boy, you a christian?".

On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 21:49:50 GMT, "Casey" , Message
ID: .net wrote in
alt.atheism;

And just what is that we call you, the guy was not harming a sole

They were serving fish? Funny how a Christian would misspell such
an important word.

Would you approve if the captain was a Satanist preaching the
history of the Devil? How about if the captain was a Muslim
and started to talk about how everyone should face Mecca and
pray? Or is it only your religion that is sacrosanct?

BINGO!



Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"

When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert

alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}

On Sat, 7 Feb 2004 15:27:03 -0600, "E.E.Bud Keith"
, Message ID:
wrote in alt.atheism;


wrote in message
news
On Sat, 07 Feb 2004 19:56:45 +0000, rom wrote:

American Airlines pilot suggests passengers discuss Christianity
Associated Press

NEW YORK - An American Airlines pilot flying passengers to New York asked
Christians on board to identify themselves and suggested the
non-Christians
discuss the faith with them, a spokesman for the Fort Worth, Texas-based
airline
said Saturday.

Flight 34 was headed from Los Angeles to John F. Kennedy Airport on
Friday
afternoon, said spokesman Tim Wagner. The pilot, whose identity was not
released, had been making flight announcements and then asked that the
Christians on board raise their hands, Wagner said.

The pilot told the airline that he then suggested the other passengers
use the
flight time to talk to the identified Christians about their faith,
Wagner said.

The pilot later told passengers he would be available at the end of the
flight
to talk about his first announcement.

Wagner said the airline was investigating the incident, and that the
company had
guidelines about appropriate behavior. He said the pilot had just
returned to
work from a weeklong mission trip to Costa Rica.

"It falls along the lines of a personal level of sharing that may not be
appropriate for one of our employees to do while on the job," Wagner
said.

http://www.dfw.com/mld/startelegram/...te/7900122.htm


Darn, I was going to post this with the header "Jebus makes pilot lose
job...claims he'll live on the love of the Lard."

And he will lose his job...can't have the mentally unstable in such a
position. I wouldn't fly on his plane, and I will send an email to AA
to that effect.

zamboni

And just what is that we call you, the guy was not harming a sole but you
compassionate liberals go for the jugular
just because you disagree with him. So he made and announcement but no one
was forced to do as he suggested. You jack ass libs are always spouting
about peace and dialogs, perhaps all he was attempting to do was create and
atmosphere in which people might talk to and learn from each other. But of
course biased people like you would not even consider that, off with his
head, right?


You assholes have nothing to teach.



Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"

When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert

alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:17:17 +0000 (UTC), Wayne Aiken
, Message ID:
wrote in alt.atheism;

In alt.atheism None wrote:
: Oh really? Are they free to discuss hijacking the plane and flying it into
: a building?

I bet quite a few of the passengers were wondering whether they
should storm the cockpit like the ones on 9/11 did.

Its hard to imagine how it would feel to be sitting there wondering
how much longer you had to live before this fanatic crashes the plane.

But of course, this incident of terrorism gets a pass because
its good Christian terrorism.

Of course. :\



Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"

When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert

alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}

On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 01:32:26 GMT, , Message ID:
wrote in alt.atheism;


"Leon Bronstein" wrote i
This is not an issue of injury or retribution. It's an issue of
professionalism. What if the pilot started talking about Allah and Islam?

Heck, imagine if the pilot had been Madelyn O'Hair and she did the same
thing . . . geez, I'd pay full price for a ticket on that plane just for the
entertainment . . .
--Tock

Hehehehe. The christians would have went ape-****.



Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"

When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert

alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}

On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 00:19:01 GMT, "None" , Message ID:
k.net wrote in
alt.atheism;

"BTR1701" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Miguel Cruz) wrote:

None wrote:
"BTR1701" wrote:
You could file a lawsuit but you'd have no grounds for it. American
Airlines is a private company. They can plaster the inside of their
airplane cabins with bible verses if that's what they want to do.

Sorry, they are a PUBLIC company, publicly traded on the stock
exchange,
and HEAVILY regulated by the FAA and the DOT.

I don't think either the FAA or DOT has any regulations about
prosletyzing
by airline staff.

And even if they did, the regulations would likely be struck down as a
constitutional violation.

None of that was my point, which was that even as a privately held company .
. . they have limits and AA has one of the stiffest employee manuals I've
ever seen. This pilot is in deep ****.

I hope so, but I have a tendency to doubt it.



Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"

When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert

alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}

On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 17:09:42 GMT, "None" , Message ID:
.net wrote in

(snip)

Great job on your website. The photography is fantastic.




Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"

When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert

alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}

(jwk) wrote in message . com...
(Wai Doan Hsu) wrote in message . com...
(jwk) wrote in message . com...

Atheists at least wouldn't pull such a stunt. It is only pushy
Christians who do this sort of crap. Maybe Muslums do it too, but who
else? Atheists are content to live and let live. As long as xians
don't start preaching first that is.

Need I remind you that Google has a search feature? There's no
shortage of posts by atheists attacking people's belief in God. It's
not just done against Christians, and is OFTEN initiated by atheists.

Yes, some religions proselytize, but others don't. Some religions
believe that everybody else is going to hell, and others don't. But
that does not stop atheists from launching into diatribes and vitriol
REGARDLESS of the religious beliefs of the person being attacked.

When somebody cross-posts a message to many groups, and an atheist
attacks not only the beliefs of the original poster, but also the
beliefs of the people in all the other groups, then it's the atheist
who is doing exactly what you are denying. When a member of of one of

the other groups defends himself against attacks he did not start,
members of alt.atheism have no qualms about further attacks. Posters
from alt.atheism do not differentiate between somebody who tells you
what to believe and somebody who merely says that he believes in God
and is defending himself against attacks by others.

Next time you see an atheistic diatribe, take a look at what groups it
gets posted to. For each group, ask yourself why the post is there.
If it's a religious group, find out some basic information about its
beliefs. Does it proselytize, or do its leaders actively discourage
conversion to assure that only the sincere convert? Do they preach to
you or not? Do they believe that you must be one of them or do they
believe that God is just fine with the righteous people of any nation
as long as they live a moral (not in the strictly sexual sense) life?
Or does it bother you so much that a religion's basic moral code has a
deity involved that you must attack its members even if they are
perfectly fine with your beliefs? I can't speak for you on this one,
but other atheists have spoken for themselves, and it was loud and
clear.

When it comes to uglyness, I've seen enough of it from all sides, and
there's no shortage at all coming from atheists. If you visit any of
the websites for atheism, you would learn that it's NOT a religion and
its members do NOT NECESSARILY hold the same views. So don't tell me
or anybody else how atheists behave. Perhaps most behave just fine,
but you would not know that from Usenet. This hypocracy is not lost by
anybody who reads alt.atheism and sees the total lack of restraint and
notices that it goes entirely unchecked by the other group members. I
never see an atheist in alt.atheism who stands up to another atheist
for attacking somebody who did not impose his views on anybody in the
first place.

When I said "pull such a stunt" I meant proselytizing people trapped
in a plane, like that pilot did. Usnet is a special case. If you can
provide one instance where an atheist stood up in a moving bus and
tried to "save" everyone, or went to someone's doorstep uninvited, or
announced over an airplanes intercomm that any non-Christians were
crazy, I'll eat my hat.


Point taken.


As for usent - if you are an xain and you come into alt.atheism
looking for trouble, you'll find it.

But what if I'm not?

I don't see why you would expect
otherwise. And there is a difference between cross-posting a flame
and responding to a cross-posted flame.

If the originator posts something, whether I agree with it or not, but
it's somebody in alt.atheism who replies in a way that not only
attacks the OP, but attacks ME and attacks people in other groups who
obviously (to anybody who understands the other religions) did not
start the attack, then I can't see the merit in what you are saying.
It's still the poster in alt.atheism who is starting the attack
against me.


If a fundy cross-posts to
alt.atheism and a bunch of other groups, you have to leave the other
groups in your reply to make sure it gets through. Blame the
originator, not us.

If you truly believe that the post was from a Christian fundamentalist
addressed to athiests, then direct the responses to groups that deal
with those subjects. If the OP somehow misses the response, the worst
you have done is avert a flame war. But you would have still managed
to reach the relevant audience. The argument that you have to leave
the other groups in is a poor one. Even if the OP is hanging out in
alt.basketweaving, it would be clear who his audience is. If you
leave alt.basketweaving out of the reply, you might have lost one
relevant person, but you would have also reached those who considered
the post relevant and left out the one who would prolong the flaming.


Not that I doubt that atheists ever start the
cross-posting, but I believe it is rare. Besides, no one forces you
to read a usenet post.

That's irrelevant. Nobody forces you to open the door when somebody
comes to your house to "save" you. That doesn't mean that I have to
like or condone the practice. Nobody forces atheists to come to a
group to attack people either. There are plenty of other groups such
as soc.atheism that discuss issues related to atheism without getting
into any of this. This has nothing to do with force. If a person sees
a post in a group that he frequents, and it appears to be about a
relevant subject, it's absurd to say that he or she should not have
read it and it's his fault for doing so. I don't expect to be
attacked in a group I read by somebody from another group when it has
nothing to do with what anybody in my group posted.

However, it would still seem better for an atheist to just ignore it
in the first place rather than attack every possible reader, even
though most of them had nothing to do with the OP. Do you honestly
think that anything an atheist ever posted in one of these flame
threads ever got a fundamentalist Christian to say, "Oh. I never
thought of that! I guess you are right! I'll go home now?" That
does not happen. Likewise, there's no more chance that they will get
you to accept their brand of religion.

So if the only thing that gets accomplished is to antagonize other
Christians who are not pushing this agenda, and members of other
religions who couldn't care less what your beliefs are, and might even
be atheists themselves, then what point is being served? Live and let
live?

Personally I ignore almost all threads with
more than 2 or 3 groups included.

Anecdotal experience tells me otherwise, but I'll take your word for
it.


How do you escape a deranged
Christian fundy pilot once the plane door is shut? That is a big
difference.


You make it clear to the airline that this issue is not going to die,
and that their actions were not enough. You don't use them until they
get the message. If you were a passenger, you take stronger action.
Airlines have given people vouchers for much smaller issues. There's
no reason to put up with this.

On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 11:16:42 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo" -amikchi,
Message ID: -amikchi wrote in
alt.atheism;

And so upon Sun, 08 Feb 2004 00:46:50 +0000 didst Ninure Saunders speak
thusly:

In article , "E.E.Bud Keith"
wrote:

(snip)

-And just what is that we call you, the guy was not harming a sole but you
-compassionate liberals go for the jugular
-just because you disagree with him. So he made and announcement but no one
-was forced to do as he suggested. You jack ass libs are always spouting
-about peace and dialogs, perhaps all he was attempting to do was create and
-atmosphere in which people might talk to and learn from each other. But of
-course biased people like you would not even consider that, off with his
-head, right?

WOW!!

That little tirade is a perfect example of "Cjristian love in action"..yes
sireeeee!!

Why do you aszume the people who have a problem with this are "liberals"?

And suppose that instead of being a Christian, the pilot was
aMoslem..would you be so supportive of him?

Somehow I doubt it.

And how about if the pilot was a Democrat and wanted people to share with
the Republicans on board just how bad a president Bush is?

RRRRRROOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLIIIIIIIIINNNNNGGGGGGGGGG GG. That would have
been grounds from ejection from the aircraft without a parachute.



Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"

When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert

alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 09:07:31 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo" -amikchi,
Message ID: -amikchi wrote in
alt.atheism;

And so upon Sat, 07 Feb 2004 15:27:03 -0600 didst E.E.Bud Keith speak
thusly:

And just what is that we call you, the guy was not harming a sole

He caused a panic. People were calling relatives, afraid they were about
to be involved in some 9/11 type of event. Airline officials had to be
contacted, the crew had to run around reassuring people the flight was
safe...

No harm eh?

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/TRAVEL/0....christianity/

Of course, had a *Muslim pilot pulled a similar stunt, the plane would
have been escorted back to the airport by military jets and he'd be in
jail right now...

and on his/her way to Gitmo.

/article
Pilot's proselytizing scares passengers
American Airlines apologizes for comments on religion

NEW YORK (CNN) --An American Airlines pilot made some passengers fearful
when he urged them to make wise use of their flight time by talking to
Christians, passengers said Monday.

Passengers were "shocked," said Karla Austin, who had flown on Friday's
Los Angeles to New York Flight 34. Some reached for their mobile phones
and others used the on-flight phones, she said.

"Just given the history of what's happened on planes in this country,
anything can happen at this point. So we weren't sure if something was
going to happen at takeoff, if he was going to wait until JFK (John F.
Kennedy) to do something," Austin said. "But there was definitely
implication there that we felt that something was going to happen."

Passengers complained to the flight attendants, who relayed their
concerns to the cockpit and who then reassured them they had nothing to
worry about, Austin said.

Attendants also told passengers they had contacted airline officials
about the matter, she said.

"We were just at the beginning of our flight. The pilot came on to greet
everyone and give his comments for the morning, and he said he'd
recently been on a mission trip, and he'd like all the Christians to
please raise their hands," said passenger Jen Dorsey.

He said, 'If you are a Christian, raise your hand.' He said, 'If you are
not, you're crazy,'" said Austin.

Dorsey nodded her head in agreement that the pilot had called
non-Christians "crazy."

Another passenger recounted a similar experience in an interview with
WCBS-TV in New York. Amanda Nelligan told the station the pilot said
those who did not raise their hands were "crazy."

Austin said no passengers raised their hands.

The pilot then asked passengers to look around at each other and use the
flight wisely or "just sit back and watch the movie," Dorsey said.

About 45 minutes into the flight, the pilot apologized -- but his
apology focused on the crew, not the passengers, Dorsey said.

"He came on and said, 'I want to apologize for my comments earlier. I
think I really threw the flight crew off a little bit, and they are
getting a lot of flack for the things I said. So I want to apologize to
my flight crew,' " she said.

Wagner said the pilot offered to speak after the flight with anyone who
wanted to discuss his comments.

On her way out, Austin said she told him that "he should be ashamed of
himself."

"He just nodded and looked to the ground, and that was it," she said.

The airline is investigating reports about Friday's Flight 34, a company
spokesman said.

American Airlines said that if the incident were true it "would be
against our policy."

In a statement, the airline said, "It falls along the lines of a
personal level of sharing that may not be appropriate for one of our
employees to do while on the job."

Airline spokesman Tim Wagner said the pilot denies using the word
"crazy." He told the airline he recently had returned from a mission
trip and was encouraging people to use the four and a half hour flight
to speak with passengers about their relationships with God, Wagner
said. The pilot's name has not been released.

"American Airlines apologizes if anyone was made to feel uncomfortable
by the comments of this pilot," Wagner said.

The airline spokesman declined to say whether the pilot has been
relieved of duty while an investigation is under way. The man, a senior
pilot with the airline, did not fly again over the weekend, Wagner said.

The spokesman also declined to say whether the pilot is scheduled to fly
this week.

The result of the airline's investigation will not be made public
because it is an internal matter, Wagner said, adding it will be
"handled internally according to American Airlines procedure."

CNN's Tracy Sabo contributed to this report.



Find this article at:
http://edition.cnn.com/2004/TRAVEL/0...e.christianity



Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"

When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert

alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}