Over a year ago I wrote this piece by way of mocking the states that were passing laws permitting pharmacists to refuse service to customers based on the pharmacists' religious beliefs. To point out the absurdity of allowing people to refuse to do their jobs based on their own personal reading of some holy text, I thought I'd use the example of bus drivers and cabbies refusing to transport people whom they suspected of being sinners. Because, hey, anybody can see how ridiculous that would be, right? People have an odd reverence for anybody in a white lab coat, but surely nobody would stand for that sort of behavior from a cabbie, right?
Update: The Gift Of Prophecy, I tells ya.
I refuse to do my job all the time, as I find it conflicts with the teachings of my Church of Lazy.
Posted by: Ryan at October 18, 2006 11:45 AMi mean... i'm just.... what?
i definitely SUPPORT people refusing service to whoever the f*kc they want, but i just can't believe they ARE.
and - i feel like this article is totally exaggerating. i got a cab from MSP very recently, and it did not appear to me that any cabbie was refusing any service to anyone - there was a very long line of people waiting for cabs and they were picked up very orderly, one by one, and i did not note any conversations at all between cabbies and people about their luggage contents.
and as for the "chapter 2" - yes, when does that become just downright discrimination? the cabbies all have to have a certain license to even GO to the airport - i would think that instead of allowing this to continue, that license should only be available to cabbies who agree they aren't going to discrimiate based on religious beliefs. it seems like the airport must suffer a lot from this behaviour of having cabbies sit and wait until a pure enough person exits.
Posted by: amy.leblanc at October 19, 2006 12:45 PMHey! Thanks for the fun facts about the Air force and cyberspace. I have some info on this. Which is that the Muslim religion does indeed have a rule against being engaged in transactions involving forbidden substances. But I don't get these cabbies refusing to take someone home who's carrying something that they already bought. And I have never seen a story about a Muslim who works at a local convenience store refusing to sell booze to someone. So I think they are just being silly. I hope that some Muslim leader explains this to them using very simple words so that they can get back to the business of doing their jobs properly. I am an American Muslim.
Posted by: Anna in Portland (was Cairo) at October 26, 2006 03:36 PMAh,
But the pharmacist is also mystical, like the magician. A gaurdian of delights and cures we could say. The cabbie only offers transportation that a person can get anywhere. But where else can I get my drugs? Down the street I suppose...
Posted by: ap at October 30, 2006 05:09 PMFirst time here at your blog, came over from Joshua's.
I am not very political or much of a debater, but I will simply say: I wonder where the boundaries of the right to worship will ever be drawn. Here in Canada, as you might have read, I can cite two examples that pissed people off:
- The Mountie who demanded to be able to wear a turban on the job; (eventually, the army 'got him' by demanding that he wear regulation headgear in combat training, and when he refused, they fired him. Ha!).
- The teenager who demanded his right to wear a ceremonial knife (with religious connotations) at school. A large, serrated knife, in a high school. Actually, I don't know how this story ended; I suppose I should look it up.
I honestly don't know how or when countries who encourage immigration (as Canada does) can grow a spine and set down some common-sense rules. If a cabbie were to refuse me a ride because I had wine in my luggage (AND SINCE WHEN DO CABBIES LOOK INTO PEOPLES' LUGGAGE?!) I would christen his vehicle with that very bottle of wine and walk away.
Posted by: terry at November 4, 2006 03:56 PM