“The longtime flight attendant, who had clashed with the union for years, believed dues were going to fund an anti-abortion protest.”
Wasn’t it a pro-abort protest?
Yes but the brits and their funny English
> “The longtime flight attendant, who had clashed with the union for years, believed dues were going to fund an anti-abortion protest.”
Perhaps the writer intended “... fund an anti-abortion DECISION protest”(?!?!?)
It can be confusing. Protesting anti-abortion involves two negative connotations. Easier to describe as protesting pro-life.
Protesting anti-abortion translates to acting against those who are against abortion.
President Trump was and is pro-life and had campaigned as such before he was elected.
The union organized women’s march was funded for the purpose of protesting against the newly inaugurated President’s goal to overturn Roe vs. Wade.
This union member had every right to complain that her union dues were being used to kill life in the womb. She thought what they were doing was despicable and she let them know it. They fired her and the jury decided they violated her rights. Now they are punished more than $4 million.
It’s safe to say that SW Airlines and their transport union are going to terminate the persons who violated Carter’s rights, that SW Air will then sue the transport union after the lawyers lose the appeal of the jury verdict.
Bottom line is transport union members will take a hit and likely refrain in the future from following union leaders that organize against pro-life groups and persons.