I would very much like to know what the position of the Religious Right might be on this current controversy in Minneapolis-St. Paul. It appears that most of the taxi drivers in the Twin Cities are Somali Muslims, who do not approve of alchohol. They have taken to refusing to accept passengers who show visible signs of possessing alcohol, e.g., a bottle purchased at the duty free shop. Apparently feeling that taxi driving Muslims should receive the same “accommodations” as Bible Thumping pharmacists the Metropolitan Airport Commission tried to fashion a “compromise” position:
After some wrangling, the airport agreed to designate certain cabs “alcohol free,” similar to “nonsmoking.” The public went nuts, saying the airport was accommodating the drivers too much and the passengers too little. In response to the outcry, the airport commission reversed itself: two weeks ago it voted unanimously on the sanctions.
The sanctions being the quite reasonable order that taxi drivers will lose their license if they insist on imposing their religious beliefs on others. (Some of the drivers simply dropped passengers in the middle of nowhere when they discovered, in transit, that the passengers were carrying alcohol) The drivers simply can’t understand the fuss. Says their unofficial spokesman:
“We are just regular people trying to live by our faith and do our jobs,” says Abdinoor Dolal, who is the cabbies’ unofficial spokesman. “Something so small as this, why can’t it be resolved? We don’t understand.”
Yes, it sure is hard to understand why a person would get upset at being stranded at an airport because a taxi driver, a common carrier, doesn’t approve of their entirely legal conduct.
If the deservedly short lived attempt to have “alcohol free” taxis had survived, why couldn’t a bigot of a different stripe demand the right to have a Jew-free taxi, or a black-free taxi, or, for that matter, an alcohol only taxi, thereby excluding Muslims. Somehow the concept of religious accomodation has become twisted. Religious zealots now believe that, because they themselves have religious beliefs, they have the right to discriminate against those who do not share those beliefs. Next we’ll be hearing about clerks at Borders who refuse to let people buy books by Richard Dawkins.
When the Christian pharmacists do it, they get a more or less respectful hearing. Christians are allowed to do all sorts of crazy things so long as they allege that Christ makes them do it. It will be interesting to see if the Christian wackos will rally round their equally irrational Muslim brothers. Short answer: they won’t. There are after all, a number of differences. First of all, the drivers are Muslims and their religion is not worthy of respect. Second, they are inconveniencing both men and women, and that just won’t do. They might improve their chances of getting right wing support if they laid off the alcohol and just required their women passengers to wear veils.
Post a Comment