"Muslim cabbies Want to Discriminate Against Customers"

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Red Mile Style

Actually I was thinking about this comment on the way home, and I think it does play a role in this situation.

For example, Conservatives, Liberals and Socialists all view equal rights different ways. Conservatives believe that no one should get an advantage over anyone else. Everyone should be subjected to the same treatment. So a Conservative viewpoint in this situation would be to not allow the Muslim cab drivers back into the line. Liberals believe that some exceptions should be made to equal the opportunities available for everyone. So a Liberal viewpoint in this situation would be to allow the Muslim cab driver back into the line so he/she can have the same opportunity to get a fare as non-Muslims. Socialists believe that since minorities, such as Muslims, have a more difficult time getting fares that extra help should be granted to help them achieve more fares. This is where things like affirmative action etc. come into play. So, maybe a socialist solution would be to start an all-Muslims cab company or something like that...

They have the same opportunity as the rest of the cabbies....they are the ones placing road blocks in their way.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by Red Mile Style

Here is my take on having a seperate section in the Saddledome, and all the other hypothetical situations that really are irrelevant since we are discussing this specific situation. Muslims can choose to go to hockey games, or on the c-train fully knowing that there will probably be alcohol consumption there. If they do not want to be around it, simply they do not attend the event or take a c-train. Sounds pretty simple to me. Applying this simple rationale to cab drivers is the same scenerio. If it goes against their religion, they can choose not to do it.

You're making it sound like Muslims are trying to infiltrate our culture and change it. They are simply trying to co-exist without contradicting their religious beliefs. What is the problem?

I am not the defender of the Muslim faith, I am a defender of basic human rights. Quit trying to make this personal.

Of corse all Muslims aren't going to be for or against this, maybe even most of them won't be for it, but some will. Just like all Christians aren't for or against same-sex marriage. Some denominations of Muslims do have a problem with it, just like some denominations of Christians have a problem with homosexuals getting married.

So they can choose not to go to the hockey game, and choose not to take the c-train home, yet they absolutely have no choice in what they do for a living? Wow.

[Bleeding Red]

I do not see how the "precident setting' or 'slippery slope' argument is invalid.
Muslim cabbies refuse those with unopen liquor bottles, then blind people with seeing-eye dogs (the complaints are mentioned in the article). Cabbies are being accomodated, now bus drivers are being accomodated - in the second article a bus driver does not have to drive a bus with offending advertising.

It is not hard to hook up the train.

The extremeism in this case is the extreme interpretation of the Quran's verses on alcohol - As I posted before, chapter 5 line 90 - could also be interpreted as 'just do not drink before prayer time, otherwise, have fun' in a very leinient sense. Do Sunnis interpret the alcohol rule differently than Sh'ias? Arab Muslims differently than Indonesian Muslims? I do not know. But not being alowed in an enclosed space with an unopened bottle of wine seems like an extreme interpretation to me, but it is not my religion.

I have posted Quran links, which just makes me wonder how many ignore lists I am on?


I am trying to understand your side RMS. EG: I am a waiter whose religeon forbids my working on Friday & Saturday, to make up for lost income I would like more weekday shifts in choice sections - should the manager have to give them to me? Should there be one set of rules for those who work weekends and another for those who do not? I just do not think so.

The onus is not on the industry to make accomodations for you. As the religious practitioner you should know what you are or are not permitted to do and what the job you choose entails.

Personal Example - I was hired to plan confrences which I would have to attend for an association. When I was hired the confrences were during the week, however over time they shifted to the weekends - which I religiously cannot work. Should the office be forced to accomodate me? Or should I think about my career choice? Both happened and the office decided that I did not have to be present, but I am also no longer involved in planning that confrence.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by Bleeding Red

I have posted Quran links, which just makes me wonder how many ignore lists I am on?

You're not on ignore lists, you're just making good points. Its easier to ignore (the many) good points in this thread and focus on a very few arguments when your case is as indefensible as RMS's is here.

[Red Mile Style]

Originally Posted by Bleeding Red

I do not see how the "precident setting' or 'slippery slope' argument is invalid.
Muslim cabbies refuse those with unopen liquor bottles, then blind people with seeing-eye dogs (the complaints are mentioned in the article). Cabbies are being accomodated, now bus drivers are being accomodated - in the second article a bus driver does not have to drive a bus with offending advertising.

It is not hard to hook up the train.

The extremeism in this case is the extreme interpretation of the Quran's verses on alcohol - As I posted before, chapter 5 line 90 - could also be interpreted as 'just do not drink before prayer time, otherwise, have fun' in a very leinient sense. Do Sunnis interpret the alcohol rule differently than Sh'ias? Arab Muslims differently than Indonesian Muslims? I do not know. But not being alowed in an enclosed space with an unopened bottle of wine seems like an extreme interpretation to me, but it is not my religion.

I have posted Quran links, which just makes me wonder how many ignore lists I am on?


I am trying to understand your side RMS. EG: I am a waiter whose religeon forbids my working on Friday & Saturday, to make up for lost income I would like more weekday shifts in choice sections - should the manager have to give them to me? Should there be one set of rules for those who work weekends and another for those who do not? I just do not think so.

The onus is not on the industry to make accomodations for you. As the religious practitioner you should know what you are or are not permitted to do and what the job you choose entails.

Personal Example - I was hired to plan confrences which I would have to attend for an association. When I was hired the confrences were during the week, however over time they shifted to the weekends - which I religiously cannot work. Should the office be forced to accomodate me? Or should I think about my career choice? Both happened and the office decided that I did not have to be present, but I am also no longer involved in planning that confrence.

Bleeding, thanks for doing the research, it's good to know there are people out there willing to at least do some background research before getting all in a tizzy.

I can't really respond to the Quran links, as one of the biggest issues with Muslims is the interpretation of the passages - that is why there are extremists who claim that their religion justifies their actions. That is basically why I felt as a non-Muslim, I personally could not represent or interpret them correctly.

I think one of the problems with this debate are the hypothetical situations that people are throwing out: homosexual pharmacies, seperate sections at the Saddledome etc. While you offer a unique perspective on how your Religion limits your working schedule, it still is different than this particular situation. These Muslims can be cab drivers (Oh my God, we almost scored... the horn even briefly went off!!!) and follow their religious beliefs. The issue that is up

Two man advantage!

I'll continue later... too distracting...

woot woot! 3-1 Flamers!

As I was saying, while all these hypothetical situations (or in your case real situations) add for interesting scenerios, in this particular situation, a cab drivers' job and religion CAN co-exist without any kind of repercussions. I understand your point, and I respect the viewpoint you provide. But although you believe that the industry should not have to accomodate you, this is where we differ. I personally feel that if something can be done, that doesn't affect others, to allow for employees to both continue their jobs and practice their religion, it should be done.

While I can still see your parallel to the situation at hand, I find it interesting that you will not work on Fridays and Saturdays because of your religion - regardless of what your career is. While Muslims can be cab drivers, there are certain aspects of the job that they can not do. So, do you think that because of these religious convictions, that you should or shouldn't be considered for certain careers, even if you are qualified and maybe even enjoy it? I personally do not - especially if something can be done to balance both career and religion.

[Winsor_Pilates]

LOL. I can't believe this "debate" is still going.
Even further more, I can't believe some of us are being called conservative.
That's rich

[Red Mile Style]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

LOL. I can't believe this "debate" is still going.
Even further more, I can't believe some of us are being called conservative.
That's rich

Well, I could be wrong... it could be my second-rate education recieved from the UofC...

I can understand how left-leaning individuals could have a problem with it, just because of the religious aspect, but in a human-right aspect, I stand by my statement.

[Red Mile Style]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

I did earlier, your replies are poorly thought out at best, but generally immature, derogatory and off topic.

Besides, it's against my religion to discuss things at depth with closed minded people who don't work in the real world ... I'm sure you'll understand.

Another insightful post by Flames in 07.

Is it also against your religion to add something to the debate rather than personal attacks?

[Red Mile Style]

Originally Posted by Igottago

RMS you take the cake, I've butted heads with plenty of people on these messageboards, on numerous occassions..but I have never seen someone argue as nonsensically as you. Its painfull to try to get through to you because you completely ignore any legitimate arguments that anyone has brought up, and then go off on some crazy tangent that somehow makes sense to you, and only you.

I think I might respond to your legitimate points... if you ever made any. I can't believe you take the time in these forums to actually personally attack posters without adding anything to the debate. This entire post was a crying session on how much you despise my posting. Why don't you give this much criticism to the points I give you rather than shrugging it off as being beat by a girl?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Red Mile Style

I personally feel that if something can be done, that doesn't affect others, to allow for employees to both continue their jobs and practice their religion, it should be done.

The problem with that though is that this kind of action does affect other people. It affects potential customers and the other cab drivers, all in the name of accomodating the religious fundamentalism that a few cabbies adhere to.

The hypothetical situations that have been suggested are not irrelevant. Many of the hypotheticals proposed are equivalents to the "rules" that you agree with.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by Red Mile Style

I think I might respond to your legitimate points... if you ever made any. I can't believe you take the time in these forums to actually personally attack posters without adding anything to the debate. This entire post was a crying session on how much you despise my posting. Why don't you give this much criticism to the points I give you rather than shrugging it off as being beat by a girl?

Once again you fail to make any sense whatsoever. I didn't debate you on any points? Have you even read any of the responses in the thread? As for the being beat by a girl comment..another wild tangent that just comes out of the blue..I had no idea you were a girl, and I never once said anything about your gender, nor do I care. In fact, judging by the way you debate, I would've guessed you were some sort of amoeba. For your sake, I hope you are really, really good looking, cause you obviously aren't getting by on your smarts.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by Red Mile Style

Well, I could be wrong... it could be my second-rate education recieved from the UofC...

I can understand how left-leaning individuals could have a problem with it, just because of the religious aspect, but in a human-right aspect, I stand by my statement.

You can stand by your statement all you want, but it will never hold any truth. I personally feel that your stance is actually quite conservative.
Allowing religion to dictate how a public service should be run is hardly left wing ideology.

[Red Mile Style]

Originally Posted by Igottago

Once again you fail to make any sense whatsoever. I didn't debate you on any points? Have you even read any of the responses in the thread? As for the being beat by a girl comment..another wild tangent that just comes out of the blue..I had no idea you were a girl, and I never once said anything about your gender, nor do I care. In fact, judging by the way you debate, I would've guessed you were some sort of amoeba. For your sake, I hope you are really, really good looking, cause you obviously aren't getting by on your smarts.

Man, I have a feeling that if you weren't such a ######bag, we could be friends.

Another post that has nothing to do with the topic, and everything to do with me...

Do you have a crush on Red Mile Style? I mean, why else would you talk about me so much... I hope I didn't bust your bubble when I told you I was a chick.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by Red Mile Style

Man, I have a feeling that if you weren't such a ######bag, we could be friends.

Another post that has nothing to do with the topic, and everything to do with me...

Do you have a crush on Red Mile Style? I mean, why else would you talk about me so much... I hope I didn't bust your bubble when I told you I was a chick.

No thanks..I prefer women who can handle an educated conversation. And for some reason when I picture you, I see Ann Coulter.

I've pretty much thoroughly destroyed you in this debate..as has everyone else in the thread. So now I just find it entertaining that you refuse to learn from anyone else's posts and keep coming back to get soundly humiliated, again, and again, and again.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by Igottago

No thanks..I prefer women who can handle an educated conversation. And for some reason when I picture you, I see Ann Coulter.

I can't belive you just said that. I was just reading the Ann Coulter thread and thinking that Red Mile Style reminds me of a left wing Ann Coulter.

must be some truth to it if we were both thinking the same thing

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Igottago

No thanks..I prefer women who can handle an educated conversation. And for some reason when I picture you, I see Ann Coulter.

Nothing against you RMS....but this was funny.

[Red Mile Style]

Awwww come on, Ann Coulter?!?!?!

WTF!?!?!

You guys need to get laid. But I can kind of see why you wouldn't when you talk to girls like this. It's too bad you can not leave the personal insults out of the equation, I enjoy debating with mature, intellectual people who are confident enough with their beliefs that they don't have to turn it personal.

Let me guess, you think all girls should just agree with you - hey what the hell, you don't need intelligence to bake a pie or do the laundry, right? And if they don't, they are automatically categorized as being Ann Coulter. I had to take on 95% of the posts in this thread plus your inability to add anything more than personal attacks. Just because you say you won... doesn't it make it true. It must have been pretty hard agreeing with the majority of posters and throwing out insults.

Hey, and why should we give religious freedoms to Muslims... after all, they are Muslim.

The issue being dealt with has nothing to do with a slippery slope, or inconvieniencing people. The heart of the problem is pure, old-fashioned discrimination. But what do I know, I'm just a left-wing Ann Coulter...

I rest my case.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Red Mile Style

The heart of the problem is pure, old-fashioned discrimination.

Yeah, I guess it is. You are defending discrimination and the other posters are saying discrimination is a bad thing.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Yeah, I guess it is. You are defending discrimination and the other posters are saying discrimination is a bad thing.

Oh geez. You know, private industry discriminates all the time for a wide range of reasons. I really don't see how this is any different. Yes, it's stupid. Yes, it's unreasonable. But companies are free to be as stupid and unreasonable as they want.

I'll give you an example. I want to get the space below the room over my garage spray foamed. I phone every place in town. They all told me to take a hike. Why? Because the job was too small for them. None of them will take a job below $1500. I got discriminated against.

How about the Calgary Petroleum Club? They didn't allow women to join for decades, and I didn't see anyone here outraged over it.

I invest in the Chou RRSP fund. They require a minimum investment of $15K. What about all those poor little investors that want to invest in it? They're discriminated against.

Yeah, you can throw the "but it's religion!" into the mix. Big deal. I see secular forms of discrimination all the time. Yes, it's stupid. Yes, it's unreasonable. And I'll say it again, companies are free to be as stupid and unreasonable as they want.

I'm going to ask a question here: If those cabbies weren't Muslim, and they wanted to refuse customers that had alcohol on them because of some other reason (pick one), would you still be saying the same things you are now?

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Shazam

I'm going to ask a question here: If those cabbies weren't Muslim, and they wanted to refuse customers that had alcohol on them because of some other reason (pick one), would you still be saying the same things you are now?

YES