Muslim taxi drivers in USA refuse to take passengers carrying wine bottle

[cerberus]

Selective enforcement of Shariah, I say. Are these teetotalling drivers going to also refuse to transport mixed-sex couples, unless the woman has the appropriate escort? What about unescorted females?

At least the drivers aren’t chargind a Dhimmi surcharge on non-Muslim passengers.

:rolleyes:

[Anduril]

I really have no idea about the nature of their charter other than what we’ve all read on this thread. Apparently, it’s more flexible than how I imagined it to be. In the Philippines where I am right now, a cab driver will lose his license for refusing passengers (or at least get a hefty fine). After having been refused service a number of times for various spurious reasons, I have no objections to this.

[tomndebb]

[QUOTE=Shodan]
For some reason, “Jesus was a cunt” is OK, but “Muhammed was a rapist” is trolling. Go figure.
[/QUOTE]
Your distortions are as boring as those of the authors of the two phrases you posted.

Anduril was not censored for his opinion about Mohammad. For that, I (as a poster) simply pointed out that he was wrong and expressed the opinion that he was being foolish in his claim. It was only after he continued to post both his off-topic opinion and his lie that Muslim scholars supported his view that I admonished him that he appeared to be trolling.

He is free to open a thread to discuss the personal life of Mohammad. He is not free to derail a separate thread with inflammatory rhetoric. I have admonished the author of the other remark for the same sort of behavior, so your implied claim of disparate treatment is simply false. (I suspect deliberately so).

[Monty]

I think I can safely say that not all interpretations of Islamic law prohibit the carrying of alcohol. Otherwise, there would not be such a booming business at the bars and clubs in the United Arab Emirates.

[Dubious_Weasle]

[QUOTE=Anduril]
The obligations do not include having the doctor prescribe medicine. There is an obligation to provide diagnostic information and treatment options, but does not extend to the actual prescribing of the medicine or treatment (if I’m not mistaken).
[/QUOTE]

Likewise, the charter granters have decided that the cabbies obligations do not include carrying all manner of cargo. There is an obligation to provide transport information (take the next cab please) and options (I’ll take you without the booze) but [that] does not extend to the actual transport of alchohol.

If if there is a sufficiently small enough number of drivers who wish, because of religious reasons, for their duties not to include transportation of alcohol that this doesn’t overly innconvenience the public then the light on the cab is a fairly elegant solution and thus, would fall under the umbrella of “reasonable accomodation.”

If the number of chartered cabs who refuse to transport alcohol is sufficiently largely to overly innconvenience the public then the charter holders are free to decide that this solution is not “reasonable accomodation” and if challenged legally on this point, would quite likely win.

I’m not seeing the problem here.

Likewise, I don’t have a problem with a doctor saying “I’m sorry I don’t provide that service but the next doctor in line does. Look for the ones without binky-hat with the blue light on top.”

[Anduril]

[QUOTE=tomndebb]
Your distortions are as boring as those of the authors of the two phrases you posted.

Anduril was not censored for his opinion about Mohammad. For that, I (as a poster) simply pointed out that he was wrong and expressed the opinion that he was being foolish in his claim. It was only after he continued to post both his off-topic opinion and his lie that Muslim scholars supported his view that I admonished him that he appeared to be trolling.

He is free to open a thread to discuss the personal life of Mohammad. He is not free to derail a separate thread with inflammatory rhetoric. I have admonished the author of the other remark for the same sort of behavior, so your implied claim of disparate treatment is simply false. (I suspect deliberately so).
[/QUOTE]

You’ve accused me of lying twice on this thread and I don’t appreciate it. I did not say that Muslim scholars supported my view. What I said was, the source of my appreciation of Muhammad are historical documents that muslim scholars themselves have judged as the most accurate. There’s a difference there.

I’ll create a separate thread on Muhammad when I’m ready.

[Cheesesteak]

[QUOTE=Dubious Weasle]
I’m not seeing the problem here.
[/QUOTE]
The problem is that the government did not decide that cabbies don’t need to carry all cargo, or take all passengers, they were too scared to actually enforce the rules as they were written. This has nothing to do with providing muslim drivers with a religious accomodation, and everything to do with avoiding conflict. I submit that if the number of cabbies wanting this was small, the government would have told them to piss off and do their jobs.

[Anduril]

[QUOTE=Dubious Weasle]
Likewise, the charter granters have decided that the cabbies obligations do not include carrying all manner of cargo. There is an obligation to provide transport information (take the next cab please) and options (I’ll take you without the booze) but [that] does not extend to the actual transport of alchohol.
[/QUOTE]

After the fact. After the drivers’ refusal to do their duty.

[tagos]

[QUOTE=tomndebb]
You are lying and, at this point, I suspect that you are trolling. While you might be able to make the “murder” claim stick, only the most idiotic Islam bashers on the blogs of the uninformed actually consider his behavior to have been “rape” or “pedophilia” and the actions that are labeled “cowardly” would be examples of prudence to people who were not simply trying to libel a group they hated to begin with.

You have had your little fun, here, riling people up with your smear campaign. You will now stop it as it has nothing to do with this thread.

[ /Moderating ]
[/QUOTE]

That M married and had sex with a pre-teen girl is not a lie according to Hadiths the Sunni consider second only to the Koran.
Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234:

Narrated Aisha:

The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Allright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age. 

Narrated Hisham’s father:
Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed that marriage when she was nine years old. (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 236)

Plenty more quotes at:

Answering Islam
Sunni view of Bukhari

Sunni view this as their most trusted collections, calling it “The most authentic book after the Holy Qur’an”

Sunni Muslims believe that Bukhari spent sixteen years collecting and writing down those traditions he thought trustworthy. They recount that Bukhari collected over 300,000 hadith [3] and transmitted only 2,602 traditions that he believed to be Sahih [2]. It is said that before he placed a hadith in his collection, he would perform ghusl (full\greater ritual ablution) and prayed two Rakah (Islamic unit for form of prayer) Nafl (voluntary prayer) to ask God for guidance.[4]

Bukhari

Sahih Bukhari is a collection of sayings and deeds of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), also known as the sunnah. The reports of the Prophet’s sayings and deeds are called ahadith. Bukhari lived a couple of centuries after the Prophet’s death and worked extremely hard to collect his ahadith. Each report in his collection was checked for compatibility with the Qur’an, and the veracity of the chain of reporters had to be painstakingly established. Bukhari’s collection is recognized by the overwhelming majority of the Muslim world to be one of the most authentic collections of the Sunnah of the Prophet (pbuh).

Bukhari (full name Abu Abdullah Muhammad bin Ismail bin Ibrahim bin al-Mughira al-Ja’fai) was born in 194 A.H. and died in 256 A.H. His collection of hadith is considered second to none. He spent sixteen years compiling it, and ended up with 2,602 hadith (9,082 with repetition). His criteria for acceptance into the collection were amongst the most stringent of all the scholars of ahadith.

From here

Of course he wasn’t technically a pedeophile as screwing pre-teen girls was fine so you have a fig leaf for defence but if I were you I’d feel a need to apologise for the extremely intemperate tone of your rebuke.

That he was a murderer is also pretty defensible.

Narrated Anas bin Malik:
A group of eight men from the tribe of 'Ukil came to the Prophet and then they found the climate of Medina unsuitable for them. So, they said, “O Allah’s Apostle! Provide us with some milk.” Allah’s Apostle said, “I recommend that you should join the herd of camels.” So they went and drank the urine and the milk of the camels (as a medicine) till they became healthy and fat. Then they killed the shepherd and drove away the camels, and they became unbelievers after they were Muslims. When the Prophet was informed by a shouter for help, he sent some men in their pursuit, and before the sun rose high, they were brought, and he had their hands and feet cut off. Then he ordered for nails which were heated and passed over their eyes, and whey were left in the Harra (i.e. rocky land in Medina). They asked for water, and nobody provided them with water till they died (Abu Qilaba, a sub-narrator said, “They committed murder and theft and fought against Allah and His Apostle, and spread evil in the land.”) (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 261)

Reference

As is the ‘coward’ crack but I guess mileages may vary. But whatever way you slice it he was no saint. Here he is both a murderer and a coward for sending others to do his dirty work.

Volume 5, Book 59, Number 369:

Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah:

Allah's Apostle said, "Who is willing to kill Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?" Thereupon Muhammad bin Maslama got up saying, "O Allah's Apostle! Would you like that I kill him?" 

The Prophet said, “Yes,” Muhammad bin Maslama said, "Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Kab). "The Prophet said, “You may say it.” Then Muhammad bin Maslama went to Kab and said, “That man (i.e. Muhammad demands Sadaqa (i.e. Zakat) from us, and he has troubled us, and I have come to borrow something from you.”

On that, Kab said, “By Allah, you will get tired of him!” Muhammad bin Maslama said, “Now as we have followed him, we do not want to leave him unless and until we see how his end is going to be. Now we want you to lend us a camel load or two of food.” (Some difference between narrators about a camel load or two.)

Kab said, “Yes, (I will lend you), but you should mortgage something to me.” Muhammad bin Mas-lama and his companion said, “What do you want?” Ka’b replied, “Mortgage your women to me.” They said, “How can we mortgage our women to you and you are the most handsome of the 'Arabs?” Ka’b said, “Then mortgage your sons to me.” They said, “How can we mortgage our sons to you? Later they would be abused by the people’s saying that so-and-so has been mortgaged for a camel load of food. That would cause us great disgrace, but we will mortgage our arms to you.”

Muhammad bin Maslama and his companion promised Kab that Muhammad would return to him. He came to Kab at night along with Kab’s foster brother, Abu Na’ila. Kab invited them to come into his fort, and then he went down to them. His wife asked him, “Where are you going at this time?” Kab replied, “None but Muhammad bin Maslama and my (foster) brother Abu Na’ila have come.” His wife said, "I hear a voice as if dropping blood is from him, Ka’b said. "They are none but my brother Muhammad bin Maslama and my foster brother Abu Naila.

A generous man should respond to a call at night even if invited to be killed." Muhammad bin Maslama went with two men. (Some narrators mention the men as 'Abu bin Jabr. Al Harith bin Aus and Abbad bin Bishr). So Muhammad bin Maslama went in together with two men, and sail to them, “When Ka’b comes, I will touch his hair and smell it, and when you see that I have got hold of his head, strip him. I will let you smell his head.” Kab bin Al-Ashraf came down to them wrapped in his clothes, and diffusing perfume. Muhammad bin Maslama said. " have never smelt a better scent than this. Ka’b replied. “I have got the best 'Arab women who know how to use the high class of perfume.” Muhammad bin Maslama requested Ka’b “Will you allow me to smell your head?” Ka’b said, “Yes.” Muhammad smelt it and made his companions smell it as well. Then he requested Ka’b again, “Will you let me (smell your head)?” Ka’b said, “Yes.”

When Muhammad got a strong hold of him, he said (to his companions), “Get at him!” So they killed him and went to the Prophet and informed him. (Abu Rafi) was killed after Ka’b bin Al-Ashraf."

And please - don’t try and pull the ‘It’s not in the koran’ debating trick. The Koran is not the Bible. The Hadiths are also authoritative even if the mileage of different sects for different ones vary. The Sunni at least hold the source of these quotes in high regard.

Use

The overwhelming majority of Muslims consider hadith to be essential supplements to and clarifications of the Qur’an, Islam’s holy book.

* In the matter of what is called fiqh, or Islamic jurisprudence, the Qur'an contains many rules for the behavior expected of Muslims. However, there are many matters of concern, both religious and practical, on which there are no specific Quranic rules. Muslims believe that they can look at the way of life, or sunnah, of Muhammad and his companions to discover what to imitate and what to avoid.

* In the matter of what is called tafsir, or exposition of the meaning of the Qur'an, Muslim scholars believe that it is useful to know how Muhammad or his companions explained the revelations, or upon what occasion Muhammad received them. Sometimes this will clarify a passage that otherwise seems obscure.

* Hadith are a source for Islamic history and biography.

* For the vast majority of devout Muslims, authentic hadith are also a source of religious inspiration.

Some contemporary Muslims argue that the Qur’an alone is sufficient. Examples of such Muslims groups are Tolu-e-Islam (Resurgence of Islam), Free Minds, and United Submitters International. Muslims who take the “Qur’an alone” viewpoint are regarded as deviant by mainstream Muslim scholars, and by the vast majority of Muslims. Hadith-trusting Muslims argue that many Qur’anic instructions are impossible to fulfill without guidance from the ahadith. (The Qur’an does not, for example, specify how many prayer cycles constitute fulfillment of each of the daily prayers. See salat.) The origins of some verses and statements in the Hadith cannot be verified as regards their source of origin.

Hadiths on Wiki

Therefore if you wish to understand any particular form of Islam you must understand what their particular selection of Hadiths say and how these are being used to supplement the Koran.

I really feel your words here were extremely intemperate.

[tomndebb]

If you want to debate the morals of Mohammad, open a thread.
This is simply hijacking a thread for the purpose of hurling insults.

[Shodan]

[QUOTE=tomndebb]
Anduril was not censored for his opinion about Mohammad.
[/quote]
Yes, he was, which is why you put the [/Moderating] tag at the end of your assertion that his opinion was trolling.

For that, I (as a poster) simply pointed out that he was wrong and expressed the opinion that he was being foolish in his claim. It was only after he continued to post both his off-topic opinion and his lie that Muslim scholars supported his view that I admonished him that he appeared to be trolling.

In other words, since he disregarded your opinion as a poster, you donned your moderator hat and warned him for trolling.

And, as has been demonstrated, his claim that certain of the historical documents about Islam supported him is not a lie. So apparently you were unable to refute his argument, and therefore decided to abuse your position as moderator to shut off a debate point that you didn’t care for.

So far we have one violation of the rules of GD, and one abuse of your moderator position. I wonder what comes next.

Regards,
Shodan

Regards,
Shodan

[Shodan]

That was supposed to be the preview button.

Since it was not, here is the rest of my post -

on preview -

@tomndebb

This is simply hijacking a thread for the purpose of hurling insults.

The only one hurling insults in this thread is you.

[tomndebb]

[QUOTE=Shodan]
In other words, since he disregarded your opinion as a poster, you donned your moderator hat and warned him for trolling.
[/QUOTE]
No. Since he continued to post the irrelevant and inflammatory comments, I admonished him for trolling.

You and Anduril and Tagos and anyone else is welcome to open a new thread on the topic without fear of any Moderator action.
It would help if you would stop lying about disparate treatment when none has occurred, of course.

[tagos]

[QUOTE=tomndebb]
If you want to debate the morals of Mohammad, open a thread.
This is simply hijacking a thread for the purpose of hurling insults.
[/QUOTE]

I take that point but that does not permit you to call a member a liar on the basis of your own demonstrable lack of knowledge of a subject.

[Shodan]

[QUOTE=tomndebb]
Since he continued to post the irrelevant and inflammatory comments, I admonished him for trolling.

[/quote]
In other words, things developed exactly as I described. A poster (you) comes into the thread throwing insults. He disagreed with your post (perhaps because, among other things, you were clearly wrong). Then, having failed as a poster, you put on your mod hat and tried to win the argument that way.

Since then, it seems to be a series of accusations and insults - all from you - that anyone who disagrees with you is a liar.

A moderator who begins his involvement in a thread with a violation of the rules, and continues to accusations of lying and trolling against those who disregard his demonstrably false claims, might be well advised to leave the moderation of this thread to someone less emotionally involved in it.

[tomndebb]

[QUOTE=Shodan]
A moderator who begins his involvement in a thread with a violation of the rules, and continues to accusations of lying and trolling against those who disregard his demonstrably false claims, might be well advised to leave the moderation of this thread to someone less emotionally involved in it.
[/QUOTE]
Alternatively, a poster who enters a thread for no other reason than to pick a fight with a Moderator is in violation of the rules and might better take his efforts to the Pit where they belong.

[tomndebb]

[QUOTE=tagos]
I take that point but that does not permit you to call a member a liar on the basis of your own demonstrable lack of knowledge of a subject.
[/QUOTE]
My “lack of knowledge” has not been demonstrated, only my disagreement. For the initial insult, I have already apologized.

[tagos]

[QUOTE=tomndebb]
My “lack of knowledge” has not been demonstrated, only my disagreement. For the initial insult, I have already apologized.
[/QUOTE]

Your lack of knowledge has been firmly demonstrated by my well-cited post concerning both murder and having sex with a pre-teen. ‘Disagreement’ in GD involves a lot more than ‘oh no it isn’t’ or ‘I don’t like that’.

I have shown that for the Sunni there are extremely highly regarded documents that show M was a murdering torturer who had sex with a pre-teen. On what cited basis does your disagreement rest?

[tomndebb]

[QUOTE=tagos]
Your lack of knowledge has been firmly demonstrated by my well-cited post concerning both murder and having sex with a pre-teen. ‘Disagreement’ in GD involves a lot more than ‘oh no it isn’t’ or ‘I don’t like that’.

I have shown that for the Sunni there are extremely highly regarded documents that show M was a murdering torturer who had sex with a pre-teen. On what cited basis does your disagreement rest?
[/QUOTE]
Open a new thread.

[tagos]

[QUOTE=tomndebb]
My “lack of knowledge” has not been demonstrated, only my disagreement. For the initial insult, I have already apologized.
[/QUOTE]

And perhaps you could point me at the apology. I may be missing it but I can see no such thing. Certainly nothing that matches the prominence and vitriolic length of the offence.