Alcohol? Not in My Cab!

[1prophet]

Originally posted by: techs
As a former cab driver I can tell you that passengers should NOT be allowed to drink in cabs.
However, people should have the right to cab service if they have been drinking.
UNLESS they are intoxicated. Then it should be up to the cab driver whether to take the person in their cab.
This is coming from someone who has had to clean up puke 5-6 times from passengers who were intoxicated.

Open container laws and disorderly conduct/public intoxication laws would back you up on this, but this is about refusing to transport alcohol in sealed containers because of the cab drivers religious beliefs even though the customer is sober.


Imagine the uproar if it was a christian cab driver and he refused to take a person to their destination because they are gay, and it happened to them 5 times in a row like the woman in the article because the majority of cab drivers were christian and it was against their religious beliefs to transport a gay person.

You would see the same liberal, secular, apologists that are tip toeing around this or trying to ignore it come out like sharks after a bleeding fish in the sea, and crucify the cab driver and or company to the full extent of the law and they would win.

 

[1EZduzit]

Since the cab companies are regulated and licensed (around my parts they cabs are even subsidized by the taxpayers), and as long as the person is not breaking any laws, the cab driver has no right to refuse transportation. If he/she can't live with that then they need to find another occuapation.

 

[GoPackGo]

So then these same drivers shouldn't give drunk people a ride home from the bars then right?

Because what difference does it make if the alcohol is in the fares stomach or a bottle?

 

[judasmachine]

I don't see the problem. He doesn't want alcohol in his cab, he shouldn't have to let it, as long as the boss doesn't care.

 

[daniel49]

I don't see how it is any different then walking into a diner that says no shirt no shoes no service.

It's thier taxi and it doesn't hurt this country to have a few less alcoholics.

 

[imported_dna]

You people are funny -- saying that it's their cab and they should be able to do what they want.

Well, tax money pays for the offices that regulate taxis, and taxis are a form of public transportation; what if bus drivers would not allow people carrying a bottle of wine on the bus?

Lastly, I doubt you can label someone who got a bottle of wine at the duty free shop as an alcoholic.

 

[Gigantopithecus]

Originally posted by: daniel49
I don't see how it is any different then walking into a diner that says no shirt no shoes no service.

No shirt, no shoes, no service is a sanitation/public health law. No comparison here.

I guess in everyone's furor, no one thought to bring up the obvious - how often do you travel in a cab with alcohol that's not concealed in some sort of bag? How will the cabbies even know you've got Devil Juice on you?

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: dahunan
Can I refuse to let anyone in my cab who is wearing clothing that offends me.. and that clothing happens to be religious attire?

Well, it is your cab and you do have the right to refuse service to anyone. But I would suggest that any company that made strict moral judgements about every customer and based their decision to engage in commerce with those customers on those judgements isn't going to be in business very long.

I've read your other questions. In a bizarro, alternate universe where muslims controlled every cab in the world we'd have a lot more people killed by drunk drivers. But thank God we don't live in a static economy and your scenario isn't even remotely possible.

Exactly,

I'm surprised after so many post nobody until now mentions this. Technically if it is his Taxi Cab and he owns the taxi you are in his personal property. Therefore he can she wheather he wants you in or not. And it would be PERFECLTY LEGAL. It's the same as if I don't want you smoking in my house or not. As far as musilms controlling cabs so what. Nobody complains when another large majority of another ethnicity dominates another business. But since it's Musilms I guess and after 9/11 everybody wants to point out the ovbious. Also you have the right to refuse business if you feel so. However, your refusuals cant of course be based on race/religion/sex/ etc.... The people who bought alcohol into the taxi cab had a choice. If they want to ride a taxi they must dump the alcohol. If they don't get out. It's the same thing like in some convient stores they say you can't bring in bookbags. Well most studetns wear bookbags so your dening most students from entered your store. I think this is more negative then the taxi cab thing.

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: dna
You people are funny -- saying that it's their cab and they should be able to do what they want.

Well, tax money pays for the offices that regulate taxis, and taxis are a form of public transportation; what if bus drivers would not allow people carrying a bottle of wine on the bus?

Lastly, I doubt you can label someone who got a bottle of wine at the duty free shop as an alcoholic.

BUSES ARE NOT NECESSRILY OWNED BY THAT INDIVIDUAL HE HAS NO RIGHT TO SAY ANYTHING UNLESS ITS COMPANY POLICY IN WHICH CASE THE COMPANY WHO OWNS THE BUS CAN MAKE RULES. MEANING HE IS A PROXY ENFORCING THOSE RULES... Also if I"m a bus company I don't see why I would want people carying alcohol on my bus. One thing no one talked about was the difference between capped and uncapped alcohol. In most states you can't carry a opened alchoholic beverage in a vehicle.

 

[GoPackGo]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: dahunan
Can I refuse to let anyone in my cab who is wearing clothing that offends me.. and that clothing happens to be religious attire?

Well, it is your cab and you do have the right to refuse service to anyone. But I would suggest that any company that made strict moral judgements about every customer and based their decision to engage in commerce with those customers on those judgements isn't going to be in business very long.

I've read your other questions. In a bizarro, alternate universe where muslims controlled every cab in the world we'd have a lot more people killed by drunk drivers. But thank God we don't live in a static economy and your scenario isn't even remotely possible.

Exactly,

I'm surprised after so many post nobody until now mentions this. Technically if it is his Taxi Cab and he owns the taxi you are in his personal property. Therefore he can she wheather he wants you in or not. And it would be PERFECLTY LEGAL. It's the same as if I don't want you smoking in my house or not. As far as musilms controlling cabs so what. Nobody complains when another large majority of another ethnicity dominates another business. But since it's Musilms I guess and after 9/11 everybody wants to point out the ovbious. Also you have the right to refuse business if you feel so. However, your refusuals cant of course be based on race/religion/sex/ etc.... The people who bought alcohol into the taxi cab had a choice. If they want to ride a taxi they must dump the alcohol. If they don't get out. It's the same thing like in some convient stores they say you can't bring in bookbags. Well most studetns wear bookbags so your dening most students from entered your store. I think this is more negative then the taxi cab thing.

What if your religion requires drinking? or at the very least is ok with it?

What is riduclous is that they like to "make up" rules as they go along...whats next pork? pr0n? Women not wearing burkas? These people are the very definition of the slippery slope.

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Since the cab companies are regulated and licensed (around my parts they cabs are even subsidized by the taxpayers), and as long as the person is not breaking any laws, the cab driver has no right to refuse transportation. If he/she can't live with that then they need to find another occuapation.

YOU DON'T KNOW THIS FOR SURE. Some taxi cabs are owned by the individual and a company name is put on the side of it. When I call for a taxi over the phone that company contacts me and I drive there. Since they are offering me service thought their name I give them a cut. And if that was the rule..... I guess If i lived in a Section 8 House of course sponsered by the govt. I can't refuse someone bring alcohol and smokes into my house. Since the governement sponsers my dwelling. Hmmm.......

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: dahunan
Can I refuse to let anyone in my cab who is wearing clothing that offends me.. and that clothing happens to be religious attire?

Well, it is your cab and you do have the right to refuse service to anyone. But I would suggest that any company that made strict moral judgements about every customer and based their decision to engage in commerce with those customers on those judgements isn't going to be in business very long.

I've read your other questions. In a bizarro, alternate universe where muslims controlled every cab in the world we'd have a lot more people killed by drunk drivers. But thank God we don't live in a static economy and your scenario isn't even remotely possible.

Exactly,

I'm surprised after so many post nobody until now mentions this. Technically if it is his Taxi Cab and he owns the taxi you are in his personal property. Therefore he can she wheather he wants you in or not. And it would be PERFECLTY LEGAL. It's the same as if I don't want you smoking in my house or not. As far as musilms controlling cabs so what. Nobody complains when another large majority of another ethnicity dominates another business. But since it's Musilms I guess and after 9/11 everybody wants to point out the ovbious. Also you have the right to refuse business if you feel so. However, your refusuals cant of course be based on race/religion/sex/ etc.... The people who bought alcohol into the taxi cab had a choice. If they want to ride a taxi they must dump the alcohol. If they don't get out. It's the same thing like in some convient stores they say you can't bring in bookbags. Well most studetns wear bookbags so your dening most students from entered your store. I think this is more negative then the taxi cab thing.

What if your religion requires drinking? or at the very least is ok with it?

What is riduclous is that they like to "make up" rules as they go along...whats next pork? pr0n? Women not wearing burkas? These people are the very definition of the slippery slope.

This situation has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with what you can and can't do legally. The Musilms have done very very little to put their religion on a non-believer. You don't hear much about that. You never see musilm missionaries stroll through your street/neigborhood like you see mormans do.

 

[1prophet]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Since the cab companies are regulated and licensed (around my parts they cabs are even subsidized by the taxpayers), and as long as the person is not breaking any laws, the cab driver has no right to refuse transportation. If he/she can't live with that then they need to find another occuapation.

YOU DON'T KNOW THIS FOR SURE. Some taxi cabs are owned by the individual and a company name is put on the side of it. When I call for a taxi over the phone that company contacts me and I drive there. Since they are offering me service thought their name I give them a cut. And if that was the rule..... I guess If i lived in a Section 8 House of course sponsered by the govt. I can't refuse someone bring alcohol and smokes into my house. Since the governement sponsers my dwelling. Hmmm.......

341.170. Duty to accept passengers.No driver shall refuse or neglect to convey any orderly person or persons upon request anywhere in the city unless previously engaged, provided that such person agrees to pay the legal rate of fare. No taxicab driver shall refuse or fail to provide services to any person protected under the Minneapolis Code of Ordinances section 139.10. No taxicab driver shall carry any other passenger than the person first employing the taxicab, except as provided in section 341.730, and then only with the consent of the first passenger or passengers. (88-Or-004, § 5, 1-15-88)



Airport Check-in: Fare refusals in Minnesota

Updated 9/18/2006 11:04 AM ET E-mail | Save | Print |

By Roger Yu, USA TODAY
MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL
Changes in taxis, Metro Transit

Minneapolis-St. Paul is concerned that its taxi service is deteriorating. Citing their religious beliefs, some Muslim taxi drivers from Somalia are refusing to transport customers carrying or suspected of carrying alcohol. It started with one driver a few years ago, but the average number of fare refusals has grown to about three a day, says airport spokesman Patrick Hogan. "Travelers often feel surprised and insulted," he says. "Sometimes, several drivers in a row refuse carriage."

Taxi drivers and officials from the airport, taxi companies and the Muslim American Society are discussing how to address the issue. Partly out of concern that taxi drivers might be citing religion to avoid short-distance fares, the airport is now forcing drivers who refuse a fare to go to the end of the line for waiting taxis. It is not a popular decision among drivers, Hogan says.

 

[1prophet]

Gay Men Claim Driver Ousted Them From Cab

(WCCO) Three gay men say they were kicked out of a Twin Cities taxi by a cabbie who said a couple's kiss violated his religious beliefs.

The three men took a cab home after partying at The Saloon in downtown Minneapolis last Friday.

Brent Opall said his friends exchanged a kiss in the cab. "It wasn't anything very intimate, just a peck on the cheek," he said.

Opall said the driver started yelling, "making statements like he can't be surrounded by people like us -- it was against his religion, (making statements such as) 'Burn in hell,' 'Go to hell.'"

The men said the driver ordered them out. The men did not get the cab's number, but said it was a Blue & White taxi.

The general manager of Blue & White said the incident is under investigation and that he is trying to determine who the cabbie might have been.

The manager said that kind of behavior by a cab driver is unacceptable and has never happened in the company before.

Many local cabbies are Muslim, and many Muslims believe homosexuality violates Islamic law.

State Rep. Keith Ellison, a Muslim and an attorney, told WCCO-TV the cab incident probably violates state law.

"It was really hurtful," Opall said.

Opall's friends declined an on-camera interview because of privacy concerns.

 

[imported_dna]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
One thing no one talked about was the difference between capped and uncapped alcohol. In most states you can't carry a opened alchoholic beverage in a vehicle.

We're talking about capped alcohol -- people are carrying wine bottles they bought at the duty free shop.

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: 1prophet

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Since the cab companies are regulated and licensed (around my parts they cabs are even subsidized by the taxpayers), and as long as the person is not breaking any laws, the cab driver has no right to refuse transportation. If he/she can't live with that then they need to find another occuapation.

YOU DON'T KNOW THIS FOR SURE. Some taxi cabs are owned by the individual and a company name is put on the side of it. When I call for a taxi over the phone that company contacts me and I drive there. Since they are offering me service thought their name I give them a cut. And if that was the rule..... I guess If i lived in a Section 8 House of course sponsered by the govt. I can't refuse someone bring alcohol and smokes into my house. Since the governement sponsers my dwelling. Hmmm.......

341.170. Duty to accept passengers.No driver shall refuse or neglect to convey any orderly person or persons upon request anywhere in the city unless previously engaged, provided that such person agrees to pay the legal rate of fare. No taxicab driver shall refuse or fail to provide services to any person protected under the Minneapolis Code of Ordinances section 139.10. No taxicab driver shall carry any other passenger than the person first employing the taxicab, except as provided in section 341.730, and then only with the consent of the first passenger or passengers. (88-Or-004, § 5, 1-15-88)



Airport Check-in: Fare refusals in Minnesota

Updated 9/18/2006 11:04 AM ET E-mail | Save | Print |

By Roger Yu, USA TODAY
MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL
Changes in taxis, Metro Transit

Minneapolis-St. Paul is concerned that its taxi service is deteriorating. Citing their religious beliefs, some Muslim taxi drivers from Somalia are refusing to transport customers carrying or suspected of carrying alcohol. It started with one driver a few years ago, but the average number of fare refusals has grown to about three a day, says airport spokesman Patrick Hogan. "Travelers often feel surprised and insulted," he says. "Sometimes, several drivers in a row refuse carriage."

Taxi drivers and officials from the airport, taxi companies and the Muslim American Society are discussing how to address the issue. Partly out of concern that taxi drivers might be citing religion to avoid short-distance fares, the airport is now forcing drivers who refuse a fare to go to the end of the line for waiting taxis. It is not a popular decision among drivers, Hogan says.

Before you site any law you need to do further reasearh on the subject. Unfortunatley the Airport Commission officials of Minneapolis are allowing the taxicab drivers to refuse drives who violate their Islamic laws of carrying alcoholic beverages. They have allowed it to the point where they are working with representatives of the Muslim American Socieity to work around this.

<i>
Now the airports commission has a solution: color-coding the lights on the taxi roofs to indicate whether a driver will accept a booze-toting fare. The actual colors haven't been decided on yet, but commission officials met Thursday with representatives of the taxi drivers and the Minnesota chapter of the Muslim American Society to continue working on the plan.
</i>

from: http://www.jewishblogging.com/blog.php?bid=80306

The point is this regardless of whatever laws you create. If the vast majority of your people won't follow them. In this case almost all. How the hell are you going to get people from the airport to their hotel or whatever. You have to work around it. The same with employee related strikes. So as far as that law goes I'm sure it's in the works of getting revamped or a clause will be placed inside of it addressing this issue.

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: dna

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
One thing no one talked about was the difference between capped and uncapped alcohol. In most states you can't carry a opened alchoholic beverage in a vehicle.

We're talking about capped alcohol -- people are carrying wine bottles they bought at the duty free shop.

Well i'm just curious how close is that capped bottle going to go from capped to uncapped. It is very possible and the taxicab driver technically can't control this. So would it be safer to not bring it at all.

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: 1prophet
Gay Men Claim Driver Ousted Them From Cab

(WCCO) Three gay men say they were kicked out of a Twin Cities taxi by a cabbie who said a couple's kiss violated his religious beliefs.

The three men took a cab home after partying at The Saloon in downtown Minneapolis last Friday.

Brent Opall said his friends exchanged a kiss in the cab. "It wasn't anything very intimate, just a peck on the cheek," he said.

Opall said the driver started yelling, "making statements like he can't be surrounded by people like us -- it was against his religion, (making statements such as) 'Burn in hell,' 'Go to hell.'"

The men said the driver ordered them out. The men did not get the cab's number, but said it was a Blue & White taxi.

The general manager of Blue & White said the incident is under investigation and that he is trying to determine who the cabbie might have been.

The manager said that kind of behavior by a cab driver is unacceptable and has never happened in the company before.

Many local cabbies are Muslim, and many Muslims believe homosexuality violates Islamic law.

State Rep. Keith Ellison, a Muslim and an attorney, told WCCO-TV the cab incident probably violates state law.

"It was really hurtful," Opall said.

Opall's friends declined an on-camera interview because of privacy concerns.

Ok this happens once and a big deal is made out of it. How many times have another ethncity been treated like this. Many, (Rosa Parks)..... And regarding gays. They are one group of people in society that multiple ethnicities (almost across the board) tend to dislike. It will take society a couple of decades before they may even be fully accepted. Until then they are being treated like blacks were being treated many years ago.

 

[1prophet]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: 1prophet

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Since the cab companies are regulated and licensed (around my parts they cabs are even subsidized by the taxpayers), and as long as the person is not breaking any laws, the cab driver has no right to refuse transportation. If he/she can't live with that then they need to find another occuapation.

YOU DON'T KNOW THIS FOR SURE. Some taxi cabs are owned by the individual and a company name is put on the side of it. When I call for a taxi over the phone that company contacts me and I drive there. Since they are offering me service thought their name I give them a cut. And if that was the rule..... I guess If i lived in a Section 8 House of course sponsered by the govt. I can't refuse someone bring alcohol and smokes into my house. Since the governement sponsers my dwelling. Hmmm.......

341.170. Duty to accept passengers.No driver shall refuse or neglect to convey any orderly person or persons upon request anywhere in the city unless previously engaged, provided that such person agrees to pay the legal rate of fare. No taxicab driver shall refuse or fail to provide services to any person protected under the Minneapolis Code of Ordinances section 139.10. No taxicab driver shall carry any other passenger than the person first employing the taxicab, except as provided in section 341.730, and then only with the consent of the first passenger or passengers. (88-Or-004, § 5, 1-15-88)



Airport Check-in: Fare refusals in Minnesota

Updated 9/18/2006 11:04 AM ET E-mail | Save | Print |

By Roger Yu, USA TODAY
MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL
Changes in taxis, Metro Transit

Minneapolis-St. Paul is concerned that its taxi service is deteriorating. Citing their religious beliefs, some Muslim taxi drivers from Somalia are refusing to transport customers carrying or suspected of carrying alcohol. It started with one driver a few years ago, but the average number of fare refusals has grown to about three a day, says airport spokesman Patrick Hogan. "Travelers often feel surprised and insulted," he says. "Sometimes, several drivers in a row refuse carriage."

Taxi drivers and officials from the airport, taxi companies and the Muslim American Society are discussing how to address the issue. Partly out of concern that taxi drivers might be citing religion to avoid short-distance fares, the airport is now forcing drivers who refuse a fare to go to the end of the line for waiting taxis. It is not a popular decision among drivers, Hogan says.

Before you site any law you need to do further reasearh on the subject. Unfortunatley the Airport Commission officials of Minneapolis are allowing the taxicab drivers to refuse drives who violate their Islamic laws of carrying alcoholic beverages. They have allowed it to the point where they are working with representatives of the Muslim American Socieity to work around this.

<i>
Now the airports commission has a solution: color-coding the lights on the taxi roofs to indicate whether a driver will accept a booze-toting fare. The actual colors haven't been decided on yet, but commission officials met Thursday with representatives of the taxi drivers and the Minnesota chapter of the Muslim American Society to continue working on the plan.
</i>

from: http://www.jewishblogging.com/blog.php?bid=80306

The point is this regardless of whatever laws you create. If the vast majority of your people won't follow them.

In this case almost all. How the hell are you going to get people from the airport to their hotel or whatever. You have to work around it. The same with employee related strikes. So as far as that law goes I'm sure it's in the works of getting revamped or a clause will be placed inside of it addressing this issue.[/quote]



Do you read the links you post?

When people lack the will to stand up for their rights and for their Constitution, they will find it replaced by an Islamic will and an Islamic law.

Regardless of what laws one create? So should we throw out the first ammendment too if that community doesn't want to follow it.

And you are the one who questioned the existance of a law and now you are questioning the law saying it is of none effect, and about employee strikes new york city stopped it using the law.

 

[1prophet]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: 1prophet
Gay Men Claim Driver Ousted Them From Cab

(WCCO) Three gay men say they were kicked out of a Twin Cities taxi by a cabbie who said a couple's kiss violated his religious beliefs.

The three men took a cab home after partying at The Saloon in downtown Minneapolis last Friday.

Brent Opall said his friends exchanged a kiss in the cab. "It wasn't anything very intimate, just a peck on the cheek," he said.

Opall said the driver started yelling, "making statements like he can't be surrounded by people like us -- it was against his religion, (making statements such as) 'Burn in hell,' 'Go to hell.'"

The men said the driver ordered them out. The men did not get the cab's number, but said it was a Blue & White taxi.

The general manager of Blue & White said the incident is under investigation and that he is trying to determine who the cabbie might have been.

The manager said that kind of behavior by a cab driver is unacceptable and has never happened in the company before.

Many local cabbies are Muslim, and many Muslims believe homosexuality violates Islamic law.

State Rep. Keith Ellison, a Muslim and an attorney, told WCCO-TV the cab incident probably violates state law.

"It was really hurtful," Opall said.

Opall's friends declined an on-camera interview because of privacy concerns.

Ok this happens once and a big deal is made out of it. How many times have another ethncity been treated like this. Many, (Rosa Parks)..... And regarding gays. They are one group of people in society that multiple ethnicities (almost across the board) tend to dislike. It will take society a couple of decades before they may even be fully accepted. Until then they are being treated like blacks were being treated many years ago.

And because of one incident like Rosa Parks society is changed.

 

[imported_dna]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
Well i'm just curious how close is that capped bottle going to go from capped to uncapped. It is very possible and the taxicab driver technically can't control this. So would it be safer to not bring it at all.

Are you grasping at straws? We're talking about the transport of capped bottles. Period.

Perhaps it would be safer if the alcohol wouldn't be manufactured at all. Am I getting closer to your real opinion?

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: 1prophet

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: 1prophet

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
Since the cab companies are regulated and licensed (around my parts they cabs are even subsidized by the taxpayers), and as long as the person is not breaking any laws, the cab driver has no right to refuse transportation. If he/she can't live with that then they need to find another occuapation.

YOU DON'T KNOW THIS FOR SURE. Some taxi cabs are owned by the individual and a company name is put on the side of it. When I call for a taxi over the phone that company contacts me and I drive there. Since they are offering me service thought their name I give them a cut. And if that was the rule..... I guess If i lived in a Section 8 House of course sponsered by the govt. I can't refuse someone bring alcohol and smokes into my house. Since the governement sponsers my dwelling. Hmmm.......

341.170. Duty to accept passengers.No driver shall refuse or neglect to convey any orderly person or persons upon request anywhere in the city unless previously engaged, provided that such person agrees to pay the legal rate of fare. No taxicab driver shall refuse or fail to provide services to any person protected under the Minneapolis Code of Ordinances section 139.10. No taxicab driver shall carry any other passenger than the person first employing the taxicab, except as provided in section 341.730, and then only with the consent of the first passenger or passengers. (88-Or-004, § 5, 1-15-88)



Airport Check-in: Fare refusals in Minnesota

Updated 9/18/2006 11:04 AM ET E-mail | Save | Print |

By Roger Yu, USA TODAY
MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAUL
Changes in taxis, Metro Transit

Minneapolis-St. Paul is concerned that its taxi service is deteriorating. Citing their religious beliefs, some Muslim taxi drivers from Somalia are refusing to transport customers carrying or suspected of carrying alcohol. It started with one driver a few years ago, but the average number of fare refusals has grown to about three a day, says airport spokesman Patrick Hogan. "Travelers often feel surprised and insulted," he says. "Sometimes, several drivers in a row refuse carriage."

Taxi drivers and officials from the airport, taxi companies and the Muslim American Society are discussing how to address the issue. Partly out of concern that taxi drivers might be citing religion to avoid short-distance fares, the airport is now forcing drivers who refuse a fare to go to the end of the line for waiting taxis. It is not a popular decision among drivers, Hogan says.

Before you site any law you need to do further reasearh on the subject. Unfortunatley the Airport Commission officials of Minneapolis are allowing the taxicab drivers to refuse drives who violate their Islamic laws of carrying alcoholic beverages. They have allowed it to the point where they are working with representatives of the Muslim American Socieity to work around this.

<i>
Now the airports commission has a solution: color-coding the lights on the taxi roofs to indicate whether a driver will accept a booze-toting fare. The actual colors haven't been decided on yet, but commission officials met Thursday with representatives of the taxi drivers and the Minnesota chapter of the Muslim American Society to continue working on the plan.
</i>

from: http://www.jewishblogging.com/blog.php?bid=80306

The point is this regardless of whatever laws you create. If the vast majority of your people won't follow them.

In this case almost all. How the hell are you going to get people from the airport to their hotel or whatever. You have to work around it. The same with employee related strikes. So as far as that law goes I'm sure it's in the works of getting revamped or a clause will be placed inside of it addressing this issue.

Do you read the links you post?

When people lack the will to stand up for their rights and for their Constitution, they will find it replaced by an Islamic will and an Islamic law.

Regardless of what laws one create? So should we throw out the first ammendment too if that community doesn't want to follow it.

And you are the one who questioned the existance of a law and now you are questioning the law saying it is of none effect, and about employee strikes new york city stopped it using the law.[/quote]

Yep I did read that, the site was biased in the first place because it was a jewish site. However, i was just siting or concentraining on the fact that the airport is changing the rules to acomodate musilm islamic laws. As far as the law goes its a small piece of civil code that can be change easily. An Admendment to the USC is extreamly strong and it effects everybody in the US. If an Admendment was made to affect Taxicabs like this small civil law the taxicab drivers would have no choice but to accept passengers.

As far as questioning the laws goes. If no one questioned laws they would never change that is the very basis of our legal system in the United States. People argue and change laws.

 

[GoPackGo]

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: dahunan
Can I refuse to let anyone in my cab who is wearing clothing that offends me.. and that clothing happens to be religious attire?

Well, it is your cab and you do have the right to refuse service to anyone. But I would suggest that any company that made strict moral judgements about every customer and based their decision to engage in commerce with those customers on those judgements isn't going to be in business very long.

I've read your other questions. In a bizarro, alternate universe where muslims controlled every cab in the world we'd have a lot more people killed by drunk drivers. But thank God we don't live in a static economy and your scenario isn't even remotely possible.

Exactly,

I'm surprised after so many post nobody until now mentions this. Technically if it is his Taxi Cab and he owns the taxi you are in his personal property. Therefore he can she wheather he wants you in or not. And it would be PERFECLTY LEGAL. It's the same as if I don't want you smoking in my house or not. As far as musilms controlling cabs so what. Nobody complains when another large majority of another ethnicity dominates another business. But since it's Musilms I guess and after 9/11 everybody wants to point out the ovbious. Also you have the right to refuse business if you feel so. However, your refusuals cant of course be based on race/religion/sex/ etc.... The people who bought alcohol into the taxi cab had a choice. If they want to ride a taxi they must dump the alcohol. If they don't get out. It's the same thing like in some convient stores they say you can't bring in bookbags. Well most studetns wear bookbags so your dening most students from entered your store. I think this is more negative then the taxi cab thing.

What if your religion requires drinking? or at the very least is ok with it?

What is riduclous is that they like to "make up" rules as they go along...whats next pork? pr0n? Women not wearing burkas? These people are the very definition of the slippery slope.

This situation has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with what you can and can't do legally. The Musilms have done very very little to put their religion on a non-believer. You don't hear much about that. You never see musilm missionaries stroll through your street/neigborhood like you see mormans do.

Not here, not yet...their movement here is quite young...

however, in the middle east and europe, that is far from the case.

 

[steppinthrax]

Originally posted by: dna

Originally posted by: steppinthrax
Well i'm just curious how close is that capped bottle going to go from capped to uncapped. It is very possible and the taxicab driver technically can't control this. So would it be safer to not bring it at all.

Are you grasping at straws? We're talking about the transport of capped bottles. Period.

Perhaps it would be safer if the alcohol wouldn't be manufactured at all. Am I getting closer to your real opinion?

Yep technically it would be safer. If alchohol wasn't manufactured I guess you will see statistics all across the board lower as far as fatalities go.

 

[GoPackGo]

Originally posted by: 1prophet

Originally posted by: steppinthrax

Originally posted by: 1prophet
Gay Men Claim Driver Ousted Them From Cab

(WCCO) Three gay men say they were kicked out of a Twin Cities taxi by a cabbie who said a couple's kiss violated his religious beliefs.

The three men took a cab home after partying at The Saloon in downtown Minneapolis last Friday.

Brent Opall said his friends exchanged a kiss in the cab. "It wasn't anything very intimate, just a peck on the cheek," he said.

Opall said the driver started yelling, "making statements like he can't be surrounded by people like us -- it was against his religion, (making statements such as) 'Burn in hell,' 'Go to hell.'"

The men said the driver ordered them out. The men did not get the cab's number, but said it was a Blue & White taxi.

The general manager of Blue & White said the incident is under investigation and that he is trying to determine who the cabbie might have been.

The manager said that kind of behavior by a cab driver is unacceptable and has never happened in the company before.

Many local cabbies are Muslim, and many Muslims believe homosexuality violates Islamic law.

State Rep. Keith Ellison, a Muslim and an attorney, told WCCO-TV the cab incident probably violates state law.

"It was really hurtful," Opall said.

Opall's friends declined an on-camera interview because of privacy concerns.

Ok this happens once and a big deal is made out of it. How many times have another ethncity been treated like this. Many, (Rosa Parks)..... And regarding gays. They are one group of people in society that multiple ethnicities (almost across the board) tend to dislike. It will take society a couple of decades before they may even be fully accepted. Until then they are being treated like blacks were being treated many years ago.

And because of one incident like Rosa Parks society is changed.

Exactly and since when is gay bashing ok?

I guess as long as it happens only once.