"Muslim cabbies Want to Discriminate Against Customers"

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Red Mile Style

Unbelievable how you can get this out of what I have been saying. Really.

Go back and read my posts.....I SAID racist in the religious sense.....you are the one bringing race into this arguement.

Who cares if it is in their best interest???? That is not the point...It doesn't make it right because it is not in their best interest. Good lord man.

You're right...and it is still wrong. That is my point....they shouldn't do it to anyone. Did I EVER say that they shouldn't do this only to WHITE people or CHRISTIANS....NOOOO. You are the one blurring this into a racial thing when it isn't....it is a religious issue......regardless if it is against a Christian, Buddist, Muslim, or and Atheist.

This has nothing to do with the terrorist attacks.....you simple don't know....so go find out.

You want to ignore me>>>go ahead....I have not personally attacked you...but it seems like that if someone doesn't agree with you then they are a racist and should be ignord....so go ahead.

The "white Christian" comment is simply an example. There would be more outrage if a "white Christian" did this rather than a black Buddist. RIGHT??? Yes. Thats what I am saying....

And yes...they are being racist....as I said....racist in the religious sense....or did you not read that part???

What qualifies as ones beliefs? You keep saying that this is their belief....

Well...what the hell stops anyone one from practicing their own personal beliefs? Uh???? What????

If they can refuse people because they had been drinking...because it was against their belief.....why can't a white supremises refuse any service to black people??? Why not??? It is their belief.....

No one is telling them they have to drink alcohol....no one is telling them they have to change their beliefs....

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

And yes...they are being racist....as I said....racist in the religious sense....or did you not read that part???

No they are not being racist they are being discriminatory(sp?).

If they can refuse people because they had been drinking...because it was against their belief.....why can't a white supremises refuse any service to black people??? Why not??? It is their belief.....

Because the laws in this country prevent discrimination based on race, sex (except for country clubs apparently), sexual orientation, but not based on sobriety. I am allowed to kick a drunk patron out of my bar why can't he refuse to let one in his cab?

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Sowa

No they are not being racist they are being discriminatory(sp?).


Because the laws in this country prevent discrimination based on race, sex (except for country clubs apparently), sexual orientation, but not based on sobriety. I am allowed to kick a drunk patron out of my bar why can't he refuse to let one in his cab?

You know what I mean....

Drunk is different than having had a drink OR not even having a drink but having alcohol in ones possession. If the person is totally blasted and may be a threat....then fine....that is different than what they are suggesting.

It is against the law to discriminate against ones disability...yet some do not allow people with seeing eye dogs into their cab.....DISCRIMINATORY plain and simple.

[Flashpoint]

One of the prices of pluralism and freedom is that people don't act in the way your religion dictates. In such a society, though, you have to treat those people just like you treat your co-religionists, at least when it comes to public activity.

If you can't, then you need to sequester yourself from such interactions.

This is from the article. I tend to agree.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

And yes...they are being racist....as I said....racist in the religious sense....or did you not read that part???

If a muslim cabbie refused service to a drunk muslim, would you consider that racist?

If they can refuse people because they had been drinking...because it was against their belief.....why can't a white supremises refuse any service to black people??? Why not??? It is their belief.....

There's a difference in that one is discriminating based on a persons action(drinking) and one is descriminating based on an uncontrollable factor (race).
Society descriminates based on action all the time. Descriminating based on someones uncontrollable factors is different for ouvious reasons.
[/QUOTE]
And for clarification, I think the story is stupid too. Just don't think it's the same as racism because it's based on actions and applies to all races

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

If a muslim cabbie refused service to a drunk muslim, would you consider that racist?


There's a difference in that one is discriminating based on a persons action(drinking) and one is descriminating based on an uncontrollable factor (race).
Society descriminates based on action all the time. Descriminating based on someones uncontrollable factors is different for ouvious reasons.

And for clarification, I think the story is stupid too. Just don't think it's the same as racism because it's based on actions and applies to all races

One can still be a racist even if they belong to the same group that they are being racist toward.

Lets not confuse the situation here.....if all we are talking about is refusing drunk people....then fine....I really don't have a problem. but what I am getting from the article is they want to refuse service to anyone who had been drinking. 1.....2.....3......how many is acceptable? People get drunk sooner than others. Hell...they want to refuse people for just being in possession of alcohol.

As for your arguement about uncontrolable factors....yes...race is uncontrolable.....but by the same arguement...religion isn't. Discrimination can be done on many levels....and this is one of them.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by Red Mile Style

Really?!?!?! Muslims don't eat pork?!?!?!

<insert DUH emoticon here>

I am pretty sure there are different rules about pork and alcohol. Whereas Muslims are against mind-altering substances, pork is not eaten for different reasons.

I would personally prefer if cabs didn't pick up people who ate pork... serves you right for eating something that lives in it's own feces... gross.

But they are against both. You are completely ignoring the question. Would it be okay for them to refuse women who are not dressed up to their standards? Or better yet, a drunk, scantily clad woman, who just had a porkchop?

I think we are essentially in agreement here...yes, they should be able to refuse a fare to anyone, for any reason. I agree with that. But, they are also asking for an exemption from getting back in the taxi lines and waiting their turn again. They shouldn't be able to have it both ways.

These guys need to learn that they will be dealing with people who don't live life the way they do. Its a fact of life. You talk so much about respecting their religion, well how about them respecting other people's lifestyles? It goes both ways.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

One can still be a racist even if they belong to the same group that they are being racist toward.

Yes, but racism is discrimination based on race. This is discrimination based on drinking.

Lets not confuse the situation here.....if all we are talking about is refusing drunk people....then fine....I really don't have a problem. but what I am getting from the article is they want to refuse service to anyone who had been drinking. 1.....2.....3......how many is acceptable? People get drunk sooner than others. Hell...they want to refuse people for just being in possession of alcohol.

As for your arguement about uncontrolable factors....yes...race is uncontrolable.....but by the same arguement...religion isn't. Discrimination can be done on many levels....and this is one of them.

I agree they are discriminating. And I personally think it's stupid.
I'm only disagreeing with you defining it as racist.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

Yes, but racism is discrimination based on race. This is discrimination based on drinking.


I agree they are discriminating. And I personally think it's stupid.
I'm only disagreeing with you defining it as racist.

Well....sorry about that....but I did say it was racisim based on religion....I guess I should have just called it discrimination.

[Red Mile Style]

Originally Posted by Igottago

But they are against both. You are completely ignoring the question. Would it be okay for them to refuse women who are not dressed up to their standards? Or better yet, a drunk, scantily clad woman, who just had a porkchop?

I think we are essentially in agreement here...yes, they should be able to refuse a fare to anyone, for any reason. I agree with that. But, they are also asking for an exemption from getting back in the taxi lines and waiting their turn again. They shouldn't be able to have it both ways.

These guys need to learn that they will be dealing with people who don't live life the way they do. Its a fact of life. You talk so much about respecting their religion, well how about them respecting other people's lifestyles? It goes both ways.

I have no idea if it is against their religion to refuse scantily clad women or someone who just ate a porkchop. But if it was against their religion, I don't think it would be appropriate for society to force them to do it.

Why should a particular cab driver be repremanded for following his/her religious beliefs? I see this as forcing these drivers to compromise their belief systems to make ends meet. If they are waiting hours to get a fare that is morally incomprehensible, can not take the fare, goes back in line and it happens again, and again... would you prefer if these people just quit their jobs and collected welfare? I do not see a problem with making the lives of these drivers easier and more fair and just allowing them to provide a decent earning. It's not an issue of giving these drivers an upper hand, it's about levelling out the playing field. What is the difference if these drivers had the oppurtunity to get back into line because they couldn't take a particular customer? Who gives a ****, really?

As far as I'm concerned, these cab drivers are respecting the lifestyles of other individuals - they are not forcing them not to consume alcohol, or trying to make them change their ways - they are simply following what they believe is right. However the reverse is not true, people who drink are trying to make Muslims change their religious practices - where's this "respect" that you speak of, because it seems like it's a one-way equation.

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by Igottago

Or better yet, a drunk, scantily clad woman, who just had a porkchop?

I think I've seen this porno...

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Red Mile Style

I have no idea if it is against their religion to refuse scantily clad women or someone who just ate a porkchop. But if it was against their religion, I don't think it would be appropriate for society to force them to do it.

Why should a particular cab driver be repremanded for following his/her religious beliefs? I see this as forcing these drivers to compromise their belief systems to make ends meet. If they are waiting hours to get a fare that is morally incomprehensible, can not take the fare, goes back in line and it happens again, and again... would you prefer if these people just quit their jobs and collected welfare? I do not see a problem with making the lives of these drivers easier and more fair and just allowing them to provide a decent earning. It's not an issue of giving these drivers an upper hand, it's about levelling out the playing field. What is the difference if these drivers had the oppurtunity to get back into line because they couldn't take a particular customer? Who gives a ****, really?

As far as I'm concerned, these cab drivers are respecting the lifestyles of other individuals - they are not forcing them not to consume alcohol, or trying to make them change their ways - they are simply following what they believe is right. However the reverse is not true, people who drink are trying to make Muslims change their religious practices - where's this "respect" that you speak of, because it seems like it's a one-way equation.

WHAT??? How???

Giving someone a cab ride who has been drinking is trying to make Muslims change their religious practices????

Holy ****.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by Red Mile Style

I have no idea if it is against their religion to refuse scantily clad women or someone who just ate a porkchop. But if it was against their religion, I don't think it would be appropriate for society to force them to do it.

Why should a particular cab driver be repremanded for following his/her religious beliefs? I see this as forcing these drivers to compromise their belief systems to make ends meet. If they are waiting hours to get a fare that is morally incomprehensible, can not take the fare, goes back in line and it happens again, and again... would you prefer if these people just quit their jobs and collected welfare? I do not see a problem with making the lives of these drivers easier and more fair and just allowing them to provide a decent earning. It's not an issue of giving these drivers an upper hand, it's about levelling out the playing field. What is the difference if these drivers had the oppurtunity to get back into line because they couldn't take a particular customer? Who gives a ****, really?

As far as I'm concerned, these cab drivers are respecting the lifestyles of other individuals - they are not forcing them not to consume alcohol, or trying to make them change their ways - they are simply following what they believe is right. However the reverse is not true, people who drink are trying to make Muslims change their religious practices - where's this "respect" that you speak of, because it seems like it's a one-way equation.

So how is a drunk person getting a ride home, forcing a muslim to start drinking alcohol? How does giving a ride home make the driver less of a muslim? Are they paying him with shots of Tequila? Like I said..we have to co-exist in this society. I've already stated that they should be allowed to refuse a fare. Fine. But then, why should we go the extra length to ensure they get to make a good living at it? How about a cabbie downtown on a Friday night? How many people taking cabs at that time are going to be sober?? 2%? So how long should the cabbie get to keep his place in line to find some sober fare? Its makes no sense whatsoever. I already said, if this is such a huge issue to the driver, they are in the wrong line of work. Its like a vegetarian working at a butcher's, wondering why he should have to cut the meat. Its stupid.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Red Mile Style

I have no idea if it is against their religion to refuse scantily clad women or someone who just ate a porkchop. But if it was against their religion, I don't think it would be appropriate for society to force them to do it.

I don't know that anyone is advocating "force". It's not like they pressing a gun to someone's head and saying "this is Dave, he has a bottle of whisky in his carry-on, give him a ride to the Hyatt or else".

They volunteered for the job. If a rather large component of the job offends their religious sensibilities then they should get a different gig.

[Bleeding Red]

Originally Posted by Red Mile Style

I have no idea if it is against their religion to refuse scantily clad women or someone who just ate a porkchop. But if it was against their religion, I don't think it would be appropriate for society to force them to do it.

Then society should not force the Aryan Church member to drive blacks or Jews or Muslims as it is against their religion. That is how I see that logic working out. BUT - rather than harp on it, we should find out what the actual religious law is. According to an Imam is a Muslim not allowed to be in the company with non-believer's who carry alcahol? OR, are they just prohibited from taking part in drinking alcahol? I think that they are prohibited from being alone in an enclosed space with a scantily clad woman. But someone should confirm these things with a Muslim religious leader.

Why should a particular cab driver be repremanded for following his/her religious beliefs? I see this as forcing these drivers to compromise their belief systems to make ends meet. If they are waiting hours to get a fare that is morally incomprehensible, can not take the fare, goes back in line and it happens again, and again... would you prefer if these people just quit their jobs and collected welfare? I do not see a problem with making the lives of these drivers easier and more fair and just allowing them to provide a decent earning. It's not an issue of giving these drivers an upper hand, it's about levelling out the playing field. What is the difference if these drivers had the oppurtunity to get back into line because they couldn't take a particular customer? Who gives a ****, really?

I would think that the Woman standing in the rain with an unopened bottle of wine that she is taking to a dinner party who has been left at the curb by a Muslim cabdriver would give a *****.

The point here is not "if Muslim cab drivers don't like it, then quit". The point is should there be one rule of law for Muslims and another rule of law for everybody else? Ask yourself - if a white cab driver refuses to pick up a Muslim passanger out of fear to his personal safety should that driver be allowed to just skip that fare and take the next fare without having to go to the back of the line?

As far as I'm concerned, these cab drivers are respecting the lifestyles of other individuals - they are not forcing them not to consume alcohol, or trying to make them change their ways - they are simply following what they believe is right. However the reverse is not true, people who drink are trying to make Muslims change their religious practices

Only if the Muslim law calls for that individual to not be in an enclosed space with a non-believer who is carrying alcahol, which I do not think is the case, therefore that person does have to take a serious look at their chosen job. This person probably would not apply for a job in a liqour store.

No one is forcing them to drink alcahol. No one is forcing them to miss their allotted prayer time. No one is forcing them to work on religious holidays.
The people who are carrying unopened bottles of liquor probably just want to get to where they are going - not bring about fundamental religous change to a whole segment of the population.

[Red Mile Style]

Originally Posted by Igottago

So how is a drunk person getting a ride home, forcing a muslim to start drinking alcohol? How does giving a ride home make the driver less of a muslim? Are they paying him with shots of Tequila? Like I said..we have to co-exist in this society. I've already stated that they should be allowed to refuse a fare. Fine. But then, why should we go the extra length to ensure they get to make a good living at it? How about a cabbie downtown on a Friday night? How many people taking cabs at that time are going to be sober?? 2%? So how long should the cabbie get to keep his place in line to find some sober fare? Its makes no sense whatsoever. I already said, if this is such a huge issue to the driver, they are in the wrong line of work. Its like a vegetarian working at a butcher's, wondering why he should have to cut the meat. Its stupid.

Now you're just putting words in my mouth.

I never said anyone is forcing the cab drivers to drink, they are, however, forcing them to compromise their religion. The Muslims are not making anyone not comsume alcohol, they just will not do anything that goes against their beliefs. What seems injust: Forcing these drivers to go against their religion, or making alcohol consumers take a different cab?

Of corse we have to co-exist, so why are you so vehemently against allowing these Muslims an equal oppurtunity to do their jobs without facing moral dillemas? Forcing Muslim drivers to take passengers that are in direct contradiction to their religion is not "co-existing". Fine, 2% of people taking cabs are sober on a Friday night, but I am willing to bet that the percentage is much, much higher at the airport. Even so, if the percentage is this high, this still gives non-Muslim drivers an advantage as they clearly have a bigger customer base. Again, this isn't giving Muslim drivers an advantage, it is more or less rearranging the fares so that when a non-alcohol consumer is available, the Muslim driver can get it. Again, what is the problem with this?!?!? You might have to dumb down your response to this question as I do not understand why anyone would be upset about this.

This isn't anything at all like a vegetarian that is wondering why he/she should have to cut the meat - vegetarianism clearly is not a religion, and there are probably no alternative ways to make the vegetarian still be a butcher without crossing any moral lines. Here, there is a simple way to both appease the practising Muslims, that really doesn't affect anyone.

[Red Mile Style]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I don't know that anyone is advocating "force". It's not like they pressing a gun to someone's head and saying "this is Dave, he has a bottle of whisky in his carry-on, give him a ride to the Hyatt or else".

They volunteered for the job. If a rather large component of the job offends their religious sensibilities then they should get a different gig.

So rather than having a system that rearranges passengers at the airport so that Muslim drivers can have a fair chance and allow them to follow their beliefs, it's better if all Muslims just aren't cab drivers...

I don't think this is what North America is supposed to be about - it reminds me of some kind of dictatorship...

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Red Mile Style

Of corse we have to co-exist, so why are you so vehemently against allowing these Muslims an equal oppurtunity to do their jobs without facing moral dillemas? Forcing Muslim drivers to take passengers that are in direct contradiction to their religion is not "co-existing". Fine, 2% of people taking cabs are sober on a Friday night, but I am willing to bet that the percentage is much, much higher at the airport. Even so, if the percentage is this high, this still gives non-Muslim drivers an advantage as they clearly have a bigger customer base. Again, this isn't giving Muslim drivers an advantage, it is more or less rearranging the fares so that when a non-alcohol consumer is available, the Muslim driver can get it. Again, what is the problem with this?!?!? You might have to dumb down your response to this question as I do not understand why anyone would be upset about this.
.

So by your logic.....it should be ok to refuse to take a gay couple in a cab if the driver is a devote catholic (or Muslim for that matter)?

Right.....

If you think it's ok for those cabbies to refuse services for alcohol...then you must be in support of this.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by Red Mile Style

So rather than having a system that rearranges passengers at the airport so that Muslim drivers can have a fair chance and allow them to follow their beliefs, it's better if all Muslims just aren't cab drivers...

I don't think this is what North America is supposed to be about - it reminds me of some kind of dictatorship...

Separate ques at the airport based on your religious beliefs? Sounds like a real free and fair society you've got there...

[Red Mile Style]

Ah crap, I stayed at work for an extra 15 minutes because of this.

Thanks, thanks a lot...