Minnesota MAC votes to discipline booze-shy Muslim cabbies

[Valteron]

On an 11-0 vote Monday, April 16, Minnesota’s Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) members voted to crack down on drivers refusing service, making Minnesota the first place in the country to decide how to treat Muslim cabbies who decline to transport alcohol- toting riders on religious grounds.

See the full article here .

In another thread on this board, I was accused of bigotry and even racism for saying that the west has to learn to react to Islam’s hostility to our secular state and on the separation of Church and State. It was even suggested by Tomndeb that I wanted to go after Muslims with pitchforks and torches, and other posters suggested I wanted to put Muslims in concentration camps.

As the smell of burning straw men slowly fades from the landscape, please note that the kind of firmness shown by the MAC in protecting the rights of its travelling public is exactly the sort of firmness I am calling for. With malice towards none an equal treatment for all.

You will note that the Muslims interviewed about this have already become very good at using our society’s own laws in promoting their agenda. Apparently, their right to refuse a passenger who does not conform to THEIR religious bugaboo about alcohol is a matter of freedom of religion – THEIR freedom of religion.

How many of these people would REALLY blieve in freedom of religion if I were to go to Somalia, for example, and start an Atheist Society that distributes tracts and preaches to the Somali public?

The freedom of passengers not to have Islamic values imposed on them at an **American ** airport is apparently a matter of no concern to them.

So, if their right to refuse to carry a passenger with alcohol is a right that cabbies possses, what about the Muslim man who believes that women should not speak to strange men in public? Can he refuse all female fares?

What if a Muslim (or conservative Christian, or whatever) cabbie refuses to carry “immodestly” dressed women in his cab (e.g., women in shorts and tank tops in the heat of summer)?

Or what about a Christian cabbie who refuses to carry a passenger holding a Koran, a book that clearly denies that Jesus was the Son of God?

What about a cab company (belonging to born-again Christians) that has a virtual monopoly of the cabs in a city, and that refuses to send cabs to take people to and from a local gay bar? (In case you think I am making this up, it happened to ME in Lansing, Michigan in 2001. I had to walk about half a mile in freezing rain before I could hail a cab.)

Where does it all end?

This is WHY we have separation of church and state. It is a basic modus vivendi and A FUNDAMENTAL VALUE of our society. It is one of the reasons that we do not have religious wars here. It is one of the safety features of our society. And Muslims who come from countries whre separation of Church and State is a meaningless term MUST learn, by means such as those taken by the MAC, that it is a value we will not back down on.

[tomndebb]

It was even suggested by Tomndeb that I wanted to go after Muslims with pitchforks and torches

In a thread that you started but which you waited until there had been 113 further posts before you even considered laying out anything other than a postion that “Islam = evil,” I finally asked you sarcastically whether I was supposed to join people waving pitchforks and torches. Following that sarcastinc comment, you finally began to post some substance (erroneous as it continued to be) in your arguments. I have already pointed out, in that same thread, the purpose behind my comment. For you to repeatedly make the claim that you have here is simply dishonest–which seems par for the course for your style of “argumentation.” I strongly urge you to drop this particular distortion of what I have posted.

[tomndebb]

From the linked article:

Airport spokesman Patrick Hogan said that the issue apparently has not bubbled up elsewhere. Some say that’s because of Minneapolis’ high concentration of refugees from Somalia, many of whom interpret the Qur’an more conservatively.

Again we see a cultural situation presented by those who fear Islam as part of some vast shadowy conspiracy of “Islam.”

The Muslim cabbies of New York have been hauling people with alcohol for years with no problem at all. While it is true that the Somalis are relying on their localized interpretation of Islam for their issue, it is simply not true that the issue is one of Islam.

[Captain_Amazing]

@tomndebb

The Muslim cabbies of New York have been hauling people with alcohol for years with no problem at all. While it is true that the Somalis are relying on their localized interpretation of Islam for their issue, it is simply not true that the issue is one of Islam.

Well, it’s an issue of Somali Islam. Islam is hardly monolithic in terms of practice or belief.

[Miller]

@Captain Amazing

Well, it’s an issue of Somali Islam. Islam is hardly monolithic in terms of practice or belief.

I believe that’s precisely the point tom was trying to make.

[DanBlather]

@tomndebb

From the linked article:Again we see a cultural situation presented by those who fear Islam as part of some vast shadowy conspiracy of “Islam.”

The Muslim cabbies of New York have been hauling people with alcohol for years with no problem at all. While it is true that the Somalis are relying on their localized interpretation of Islam for their issue, it is simply not true that the issue is one of Islam.

Will you now chastise any Muslims who say that “Islam stands for X” or “Muslims believe Y” because they lump all of Islam together, or is your ire just restricted to those who take issue with Islam?

[tomndebb]

@DanBlather

Will you now chastise any Muslims who say that “Islam stands for X” or “Muslims believe Y” because they lump all of Islam together, or is your ire just restricted to those who take issue with Islam?

Can you point to any poster on this board who has made the claim that “Islam is the religion of peace”?
And, if you found one, would you see no difference between someone promoting a belief based on broad generalizations and someone condemning a billion people based on broad generalizations?

[DanBlather]

@tomndebb

Can you point to any poster on this board who has made the claim that “Islam is the religion of peace”?

??? Did I say a poster said it? For that matter, did I refer to SDMB posters at all? In this particular case you CAN see this quote:

Last year, the airports commission received a fatwa, or religious edict, from the Minnesota chapter of the Muslim American Society saying “Islamic jurisprudence” prohibits taxi drivers from carrying passengers with alcohol, “because it involves cooperating in sin according to Islam.”

here.

And, if you found one, would you see no difference between someone promoting a belief based on broad generalizations and someone condemning a billion people based on broad generalizations?

Yes, I would expect the person promoting their belief to be even more aware of the differences between various sects, and therefore more to blame for making sweeping statements.

[tomndebb]

Last year, the airports commission received a fatwa, or religious edict, from the Minnesota chapter of the Muslim American Society saying “Islamic jurisprudence” prohibits taxi drivers from carrying passengers with alcohol, “because it involves cooperating in sin according to Islam.”

Of course, the Minnesota chapter of the Muslim American Society is not Islam, it is a chapter of Islam that is overwhelmingly dominated by recent Somali immigrants, so their opinion remains one of a cultural view, not, strictly, a religious view.

Inasmuch as they are not posting on this board, I feel no compulsion to post condemnations of their views every time the topic arises. As it happens, when this and similar topics have arisen in the past, I have not sided with those who have attempted to raise a shield of “Islam says” for their anti-social behavior. I am already on record as having said that I supported the MAC imposing sanctions on the Somali cabbies who refuse to carry patrons with alcohol, just as I am on record as supporting similar sanctions for the odd group down in Texas who wanted to refuse to carry dogs and I have condemned the idiot prisoners in Ohio jails who have claimed a right to refuse vaccinations citing some obscure interpretation held by one imam or another that condemned those medical procedures. (I have also ridiculed the Amish mentioned in the OP’s link on the grounds that they were well out of step with every major collection of Amish in the country for refusing to use the international orange “slow vehicle” sign on their buggies (although they and the state were able to work out a compromise where the triangle was done in a shiny-in-headlights-but-muted-gray-in-daylight).

Now, if every single time any news story is run in which some Muslim, somewhere in the world, behaves badly and blames it on his religion, I find Valteron running to post one more sweeping condemnation of all Islam along with his alarmist cries that they are going to destroy us, I really don’t have any trouble pointing out that he is factually and logically in error.

If someone, somewhere, wants to pretend that Islam or Christianity or Capitalism or Socialism or any other large philosophical movement is “good,” I figure that that is their problem, but if they bring their claims to this board, you will find that I have also challenged many of those claims. (Note my exchange with a poster that began in this post and extended over the next several, or so, with my posts here, here, and here .)

[Tastes_of_Chocolate]

Living in Minnesota, I really wish that this ruling had not been made. Up until now, it has been handled this way. Any cabbie who feels the need to deny a fare is welcome to, but they must move to the end of the line of cabs. Given that it can be a several hour wait, to get to the front again, a cabbie making this decision was drastically reducing their pay. The fare moves down the line until they find someone that will carry them.

Unfortunately, this new ruling will only result in people screaming that the MAC is anti-Muslim. It will cost big money for the MAC, as I’m sure they will get dragging into courtroom after courtroom. It will increase hostilities between the mostly caucasian population of Minnesota and the fairly newly growing immigrant population.

Everyone in this story are using US laws and customs to support their own agenda, Valteron. But just as people over and over, even here on this board, have to be reminded that freedom of speech only applies to the US goverment, so people have a lot misconceptions of what freedom of religion means. But that is no different then what group after group coming into the US has already done.

Why does the US define marriage as one man, one woman. Why are so many businesses and government services closed down on Sundays. Why is alcohol sales illegal in many places, on Sundays? Why is Christmas a national holiday, with government offices closed? It’s because the dominant waves of immigration have been from Christian countries and those are Christian limitations. So why aren’t you protesting the overwhelming influence of European based Christianity on the US? What if I want a beer on Sunday?

[sqweels]

@tomndebb

Now, if every single time any news story is run in which some Muslim, somewhere in the world, behaves badly and blames it on his religion…

You lost me at this characterization. The issues in question involve muslims imposing rules and restrictions which can be seen as the opposite of “behaving badly”. And they’re not “blaming” their religion, they’re using it as justification.

I’m sure you agree that we need to get past baiting the issue of prejudice and start addressing the extent to which the Islamic community as a whole is responsible for the “bad behavior” that is done in their name.

[Valteron]

@tomndebb

From the linked article:Again we see a cultural situation presented by those who fear Islam as part of some vast shadowy conspiracy of “Islam.”

The Muslim cabbies of New York have been hauling people with alcohol for years with no problem at all. While it is true that the Somalis are relying on their localized interpretation of Islam for their issue, it is simply not true that the issue is one of Islam.

So a problem that arises based on how a group of Muslims interpret Islam is not an issue of Islam? Makes lotsa sense to me. . . . . :dubious:

[Valteron]

@tomndebb

In a thread that you started but which you waited until there had been 113 further posts before you even considered laying out anything other than a postion that “Islam = evil,” I finally asked you sarcastically whether I was supposed to join people waving pitchforks and torches. Following that sarcastinc comment, you finally began to post some substance (erroneous as it continued to be) in your arguments. I have already pointed out, in that same thread, the purpose behind my comment. For you to repeatedly make the claim that you have here is simply dishonest–which seems par for the course for your style of “argumentation.” I strongly urge you to drop this particular distortion of what I have posted.

Oh, so now you are explaining the “torches and pitchforks” comment? Now if I did that, you would be on me like white on rice about how I was “squirming out.”

But when you do it, it is just explaining the context!

[Valteron]

@tomndebb

Can you point to any poster on this board who has made the claim that “Islam is the religion of peace”?
And, if you found one, would you see no difference between someone promoting a belief based on broad generalizations and someone condemning a billion people based on broad generalizations?

Please Tom, I urge you to tell me who this person is who has condmned all one billion Muslim individuals in one fell swoop, so I can join you in refuting what he says.

By the way, does the claim that “Islam is the religion of peace” have to be made by someone on this board? I have seen this generalization made by scores of Muslims elsewhere.

[Valteron]

@tomndebb

Now, if every single time any news story is run in which some Muslim, somewhere in the world, behaves badly and blames it on his religion, I find Valteron running to post one more sweeping condemnation of all Islam along with his alarmist cries that they are going to destroy us, I really don’t have any trouble pointing out that he is factually and logically in error.

(emphasis added)

Please help me out, Tom. As I get older, my eyesight worsens. Where exactly in my OP did I make alarmist cries that “they are going to destroy us”?

[BrightNShiny]

@Valteron

This is WHY we have separation of church and state. It is a basic modus vivendi and A FUNDAMENTAL VALUE of our society. It is one of the reasons that we do not have religious wars here. It is one of the safety features of our society. And Muslims who come from countries whre separation of Church and State is a meaningless term MUST learn, by means such as those taken by the MAC, that it is a value we will not back down on.

In the US we have several fundamental values. The state must protect everyone’s right to worship freely. The state must prevent people from coercing their religion on other people. The state must protect private property rights.

Here, there is a conflict between those values. Cab owners have a private property right in their cab, which the state must protect. Cab owners have the right to practice their religion, which the state must protect. The state also has an interest in orderly flow through the airport. The state also has an interest in regulating cabs. Individuals have an interest in being able to use a cab.

All of these rights are in conflict. The cab owners asserted their private property rights and freedom of religion rights. Big deal. That’s what people do. MAC then weighed all the issues and came up with a balancing of the various rights and interests.

So what is your complaint exactly? That people who own a private vehicle wanted to assert their private property rights? So what? This is the way our system works. People assert their rights, we weigh them in conjunction with other rights and interests, and come up with a way to balance them. Here, MAC chose one way to balance it. They could have come up with any number of ways to do so. I don’t have a problem with the solution they chose, just like I don’t have a problem with cab drivers asserting their property rights.

And let’s be serious here. We’re talking about transporting alcohol. That’s hardly on the level of discriminating against someone because they’re carrying a Bible, or because they’re gay, or because they’re a woman.

[jjimm]

@Valteron

The freedom of passengers not to have Islamic values imposed on them at an **American ** airport is apparently a matter of no concern to them.

Surely there are bona fide American Muslim cizitens? In which case, your bolding of the word “American” seems a trifle unnecessary, since Islam is thus one of the many religions that your constitution prevents the government “prohibiting the free exercise thereof”.

[Valteron]

@Tastes of Chocolate

Why does the US define marriage as one man, one woman. Why are so many businesses and government services closed down on Sundays. Why is alcohol sales illegal in many places, on Sundays? Why is Christmas a national holiday, with government offices closed? It’s because the dominant waves of immigration have been from Christian countries and those are Christian limitations. So why aren’t you protesting the overwhelming influence of European based Christianity on the US? What if I want a beer on Sunday?

If you will look at my OP, you will see that I mention Christian impositions of their viewpoint. In fact, you will see that in Lansing, Michigan in 2001, I like to froze to death walking in freezing rain trying to get back to my hotel because the Christian fundies who own the local near-monopoly taxi company refuse to pick up and deliver passengers at local gay bars, one of which I had tried to call a cab from.

The fact is, when you get a taxi licence (and in most places the supply of taxi licences is limited) then you are agreeing to serve the public. While you MAY refuse a fare for security reasons, you cannot, for example, say that you belong to the Church of Aryan nations and therefore will not carry black passengers.

Concerning holidays, since even atheists like me want a solstice break, the December break is as much cultural as religious (perhaps more). For that matter, Government Offices are closed New Year’s day as well, as far as I know, and that is not religious.

If your employer is private, it is his business (no pun intended) if he wishes to close his business on say, Yom Kippur. I do not have to work for him.

But I would not even be opposed to letting government employees of other religions (Jewish, Muslim) come in and work on December 25, or Good Friday, or whatever, in exchange for being allowed an individual holiday on their own “religious” days.

I am not against reasonable accomodation. It is the pushy imposition of another person’s religion on me that I fight against.

If you want to start a thread about Christian impositions, or just the injutice of having “In God We Trust” printed on the money in violation of the freedom of religion of atheists, go ahead. I will be happy to contribute.

[Valteron]

@BrightNShiny

And let’s be serious here. We’re talking about transporting alcohol. That’s hardly on the level of discriminating against someone because they’re carrying a Bible, or because they’re gay, or because they’re a woman.

That all depends on your values. If I drank, I would consider a good bottle of scotch that I got for a good price at duty free to be worth a damn sight more than a Bible.

How about a woman being told that she cannot get into the taxi because she is dressed “immodestly” in a tank top and shorts? Is the right to wear a tank top more or less trivial than the carrying of alcohol?

What if a devout Christian fundie told you that he will not let a Koran into his cab, because that is a book that denies the “fundamental truth” that Jesus was the son of God. The Koran does indeed deny this. Where do carrying a Koran versus carrying alcohol land in your value system, Bright?

[Bridget_Burke]

@Valteron

If you will look at my OP, you will see that I mention Christian impositions of their viewpoint. In fact, you will see that in Lansing, Michigan in 2001, I like to froze to death walking in freezing rain trying to get back to my hotel because the Christian fundies who own the local near-monopoly taxi company refuse to pick up and deliver passengers at local gay bars, one of which I had tried to call a cab from.

The fact is, when you get a taxi licence (and in most places the supply of taxi licences is limited) then you are agreeing to serve the public. While you MAY refuse a fare for security reasons, you cannot, for example, say that you belong to the Church of Aryan nations and therefore will not carry black passengers.

Concerning holidays, since even atheists like me want a solstice break, the December break is as much cultural as religious (perhaps more). For that matter, Government Offices are closed New Year’s day as well, as far as I know, and that is not religious.

If your employer is private, it is his business (no pun intended) if he wishes to close his business on say, Yom Kippur. I do not have to work for him.

But I would not even be opposed to letting government employees of other religions (Jewish, Muslim) come in and work on December 25, or Good Friday, or whatever, in exchange for being allowed an individual holiday on their own “religious” days.

I am not against reasonable accomodation. It is the pushy imposition of another person’s religion on me that I fight against.

If you want to start a thread about Christian impositions, or just the injutice of having “In God We Trust” printed on the money in violation of the freedom of religion of atheists, go ahead. I will be happy to contribute.

When was the last time someone imposed their religion on you? How did you fight that imposition?