1
   

Seperation of Muslims & State

 
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Jan, 2007 12:53 pm
MizunoMan wrote:
In the case of the cab drivers it is fair, because they're given choices.

They can find another job where their religious sensibilities aren't offended.

They can relocate to live under the religious laws of their choice.


So can Doctors and pharmacist.
0 Replies
 
MizunoMan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Jan, 2007 01:07 pm
revel wrote:
MizunoMan wrote:
In the case of the cab drivers it is fair, because they're given choices.

They can find another job where their religious sensibilities aren't offended.

They can relocate to live under the religious laws of their choice.


So can Doctors and pharmacist.


True, and that's what makes it fair in the case of the cab drivers.

You seem to have trouble understanding that the cab drivers in this case have agreed to certain stipulations in their licensing process.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Jan, 2007 01:29 pm
MizunoMan wrote:
revel wrote:
MizunoMan wrote:
In the case of the cab drivers it is fair, because they're given choices.

They can find another job where their religious sensibilities aren't offended.

They can relocate to live under the religious laws of their choice.


So can Doctors and pharmacist.


True, and that's what makes it fair in the case of the cab drivers.

You seem to have trouble understanding that the cab drivers in this case have agreed to certain stipulations in their licensing process.


I did have trouble understanding it, however, it finally sunk in, I just thought it unfair. Roe v. Wade made abortion legal inside the United States, however, there is a clause inside it that says if a person's religious or moral principles are offended they don't have to perform those services. I merely wondered why doctors get a choice and other professional do not (such as pharmacist and cab drivers) don't get a clause to protect their religious beliefs.

In any event I am tired of this discussion, it's just too complicated the more you get into it.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Mon 8 Jan, 2007 01:40 pm
joefromchicago wrote:

As I stated in an earlier post:
    As part of their licensing, cabbies agree to pick up any passenger, without exception. The only fares that they can refuse are those that pose a danger to the driver or those who are, in some way or other, disruptive or causing problems. A driver cannot, however, decide that he won't pick up a passenger because the passenger's status conflicts with his religious views.

I didn't want to continue to include this caveat because I had stated it before and I wanted to emphasize the general rule rather than the exceptions. I thought I had made myself clear already, but apparently I needed to repeat that.


Nope, I missed it. I didn't know that was the case.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 01/29/2022 at 03:43:07