Stay Strong ALTA! The country (the world?) is with you on this. The below is
just stuipd opinion stuff, but in the end snowboarding equipment and users can
and must behave differently on the slope. Alta's rules do not eliminate
people from the slope, but equipment. Just like an ATV, Ski-do, or a Sled!Snowboarders can and should be eliminated from certain slopes: 1) they
do not have the control of a skiier, just ask any snowboarder to go slowly down
a steep slope: flop! 2) they carve the mountain differently, infringing upon
the rights of skiiers (they slop over mouguls destroying them, spray tons of
snow to the side of the slope, in ways much more aggressive than even the most
beginner of skiiers). 3) they often side-slip down the middle of a slope,
epecially on steep-slopes, taking inordinate amount of space. while this is
true with beginner skiiers on tough slopes too.
This is hilarious!See......?! This is just another one of the
"slippery slopes" (pun intended) that is brought about by such fervid
advocates of SSM! (sarcasm intended)Actually, it is a sad state of
affairs that this really is so much like the SSM debate. Snowboarders and
skiiers are not the same and never will be. Yes, there are bi-snow-skiiers,
I'm sure. Stop your whining and be what you want without trying to force
change on the way things are and have always been. Ski slopes are for skiers.
Marriage is for heterosexual couples. Snow boarders are free to snow board on
snowboard slopes. You're not missing anything that happens on the ski
slopes. Snowboard away, and be happy!!
The Forest Service has made Trails just for hiking. It also has trails
specifically for mountain biking. They have lakes where no motors on boats are
allowed, thereby being a trails for motorless watercraft. There are jeep
trails, snowmobile trails, XC skiing trails and ATV Trails. So what's
wrong with a trail just for downhill skiing? Absolutely nothing. Conversely, if
snowboards want a place on forest land where they can snowboard without skiers,
that's fine, too
In the old days, we could fix areas where the Constitution was broken and
resulted in absurd outcomes under the rule of law we all lived by, even judges
and the President.Now, the executive and judicial branches have
become laws unto themselves and no longer abide by rule of law, and We the
People are so politically divided as to be helpless to restore sanity.So you get absurd lawsuits like this, where private businesses are no longer
free to pursue their own best interests without having a lawyer nearby. Our
"free enterprise" system needs to be renamed...
As was stated previously concerning photographers and bakers, "If you open a
business for the Public you cannot refuse to do business with them". This is
very similar to those situations. The ski slope is open to the Public so it
doesn't matter that I have only one wide ski and no poles; you must allow
me on the slopes.
Since we sre now legally protecting other behaviors (homosexuality), it will
only be a matter of time before our friends on the left pick up the cause of
this latest oppressed group and march forth into "full equality" with
those bigoted skiers.Don't worry, boarders, society just
hasn't "evolved" on the issue yet. Give us time....
But if the 14th Amendment must require equal protection for -everyone- than this
should be perfectly okay, right? Oh, is it not right if it's on private
property? So are you saying that a gay married couple can be not married on
private property too.What about forcing Utah to accept marijuana to
be legal here? Equal Protection, right?You see, using the 14th
Amendment like this is a huge slippery slope. Stay tuned to see these kind of
lawsuits all over the place. If Gay Marriage must be legal under the 14th, so
can everything else.
I'm gonna sue that vegetarian restaurant that won't serve me a steak!
This is lawsuit abuse.It's absurd and should be dismissed, in fact it
should never have been filed.
By rule, a catcher in baseball (boy or girl) has to wear a protective cup.
Should those that don't want to wear such a piece of equipment be allowed
to sue because they feel discriminated against? Why not? These
guys should just give it up. One of the many reasons that I really dislike
I think that the boarders may have a point if they can make the case that they
are intellectually impaired to the point that they are unable to master the
rudiments of skiing.This from a guy who has never skied or boarded,
but wished he'd tried boarding when his knees were more flexible.Give it up dudes, life is full of disappointment.
This is just another symptom of what a ridiculous world we live in. If someone
or some business does not give me exactly what I want then they are being
discriminatory or even worse, bigoted. Everyone should have the right to choose
who they do business with and if someone disagrees with them then feel free to
boycott them. You cannot force people to do business with me, why should
consumers expect the force businesses to do business with them if it's not
the best interest of their customer base. The self-centered perspective of
things like this are the downfall of our society.
I love everyone's opinions! Especially "if my grandma can learn to
snowboard..." True but funny! I think law suits are out of hand. Everyone
sue's for everything and anything. There is actually a law that prohibits
"Frivolous" lawsuits, but these judges keep letting the lawyors get away
with them. Such as the older woman who sued Mcdonalds because the coffee was
hot... ummm am I the only one that doesn't know coffee is hot? My favorite
is the man who put his winnebago on cruise control and went in the back to fix
something to eat. And when he crashed he sued the manufacturer because it did
not say you couldn't do that. I think we need to re examine our judicial
system and stop the madness!
But we are entitled -- that's what our society teaches us now!
The snow boarders should go and find another slippery slope somewhere else.
There are plenty in Utah. If Alta was forced to allow it, then the price should
be set at $850 a day. If it is such a big issue these people should be willing
to pay plus it will offset the frivolous law suit expenses that Alta has
incurred. As some wise person once said, "In the last days, spoiled brats
will attempt to appear at Alta on snow boards." or something like that.
And I should be constitutionally protected if I want to take my shovel to my
This will go into the law school curriculum as a the prime example of a
frivolous law suit -- if they are really serious about this. On the other hand,
it could be a spoof. It is difficult to tell.
If these people get to bring their snowboards, I want to be allowed my sledding
disk on the hills. How about an ATV! Downhill ATVing is really fun and I feel
heavily put out that Alta is so bigoted that they refuse admission to my disks
and tractor.Such a waste of tax dollars.
If my grandmother can learn how to snowboard, these guys can learn how to ski.
On the other hand, she was born pre victim mentality.
This is an open-and-shut case. First, snowboarders are not a protected class
(like race, religion, gender, etc.). Second, there is a long precedent of
access being restricted on certain modes of travel on public lands (Forest
Service trails with restrictions on horse travel, mountain bikes, ATV's,
etc. are common). Third, Alta's lease effectively means the public land
becomes private during ski season - that's why they're allowed to
charge "admission" and police the area with a private police force (ski
Be strong, O Albion! Stay true, noble Alta! Ski only, now and forevermore!!!