Thursday, January 25, 2007

Minneapolis Dog Fight

It may not be a well-know fact about Muslims that they believe dogs make MUslim men religiously unclean, or at least their saliva, but as every dog owner knows, if you’ve got a dog, you’ve got the saliva. As a result, Muslims aren't crazy about dogs. Here in Dearborn the lack of barking dogs doesn’t make Muslim neighborhoods noticeably quieter, as there are still plenty of tricked out SUVs going up and down with their bass boosters thumping, and lots of tooting horns in the streets by way of saying howdy do.

The recently-discovered initiative by Muslim cabbies at the Minneapolis-St Paul Airport who've been refusing passengers carrying alcohol (also disliked intensely by the Prophet) also includes cabbies saying no to passengers with dogs.

And not just little foo-foos in leopard-skin purses, but service dogs, the kind that blind folks and some other disabled people depend on to get around.

The problem with refusing to let Leader Dogs ride is that refusing to reasonably accommodate disabled persons is a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, and perhaps state law in Minnesota as well—and reasonable accommodations have always been understood to include allowing service dogs into banks, restaurants, buses, cabs, and onto elevators, Even before the ADA or other disabilities-rights laws, the accommodation of service dogs was widely recognized by Americans just as a commonsense mandate of decency.

So, in the spirit of having pushed the envelope on this one as far as its going to stretch, CAIR’s Ibrahim Hooper, (whose vision for America includes the eventual imposition of sharia law), has issued a fatwa pronouncing that, “In the case of guide dogs, the need to accommodate handicapped individuals should outweigh the discomfort Muslims might feel in having dogs in their vehicles.”

Hooper’s fatwa was a counter-fatwa to the 2006 one from Muslim American Society of Minnesota putting the Metropolitan Airport Commission on notice that Muslim taxi drivers are forbidden from carrying passengers with alcohol so as to avoid “cooperating in sin according to Islam.” (And speaking of separation of church and state, what do you want to bet there was no Christmas crèche on airport property last year?)

As it is, the Muslim cabbies have been getting away with this discrimination for several years, it taking national publicity to get the airport commissioners to bestir themsleves. All this time airport authorities could have investigated passenger complaints and suspended the licenses of cabbies known to be breaking the law, but I’m sure they hated the thought of tangling with Muslim leaders over it. It's just easier to ignore the rights of passengers complaining about being refused cab service on airport property.

Hooper says there can be a compromise. But if by “compromise,” he means that Muslim cabbies will continue to be allowed to disobey the ADA and refuse passengers with guide dogs, I don’t think that will happen. Nor will the Muslim cabbies get themselves a class-dispensation from the ADA based upon their religious prejudices against dog saliva and wine bottles.

Being a cab driver is a licensed privilege, and cab drivers have a duty not to refuse passengers for discriminatory reasons. If you can’t hack that (pun intended), find another line of work. The airport commission has the licensing authority, and will be liable for damages in discrimination lawsuits from disabilities-rights groups if they continue licensing cabbies who intentionally discriminate. Who knows, maybe even the duty-free shops may want in on those suits, too, since they’re the ones selling the packaged spirits.

CAIR’s rare willingness to “compromise” is a sign that Hooper knows he’s on the losing side on this one. Yes, the commissioners have turned a blind eye (no pun intended) to the abuse before now, but I think what’s really driving this are the commission's risk managers screaming about the municipality's lawsuit exposure.

But isn't the real lesson here that this flagrant abuse of the law tolerated for years by the airport authorities would never have been addressed if the issue hadn’t attracted national press attention?

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

What is the real reason muslims don't like dogs? Well, given that the Koran says you can have sex with animals, the presence of a dog in a cab is just too much temptation for the cabbie. No alcohol allowed either because that would make the cabbie less inhibited about having sex with the dog.

Anonymous said...

Dearbern Underground, you've made me a (little bit) proud. FINALLY I see that you are doing (a little bit of) your God-inspired and God-required duty to defend Dearbern. As a Dearbernite, I think you should do more of this.

What I am talking about is the little tidbit you mentioned at the beginning of your article regarding the lack of dogs in dearbern moozlum houses, and the loud SUV's. but just as I was beginning to salivate, you changed the subject and started to talk about national MOOZLUM issues that so many blogs, news services, commentators, experts, agents and authors are ALREADY COVERING VERY WELL. DO YOU HAVE TO KEEP COPYING THEM??

Again as before, I ask you the most important question: who is looking out for Dearbern? Al I'm saying is that you gotta do MORE in exposing the MOOZLUM MENACE in Dearbern?

When was the last time you got a good-fer-nothin Dearbern Moozlum teererwrist arrested, or deported, or fired from their job, or kicked out of school?

What would "The Mayor", Orville Hubbard himself, say if he saw that NOONE in Dearbern is carrying out that very essential duty? Especially one who calls themselves Dearbern Underground?

Michael said...

timothy oreally:
By hooking Dearborn's issues to national issues, Underground is showing that this is not just Dearborn's problem, nor is it just an isolated set of issues.

The fact is, that muslim tradition and Shari'a law are not compatible with Western values of individual rights, constitutional law, etc. The creeping efforsts of muslims to "Islamicize" America (and the West in general) must be fought wherever they occur. Minneapolis' fight against the imposition of Shari'a is also Dearborn's fight.

Dearborn is one front. Minneapolis is another. I applaud Dearborn Underground for the work he's doing here.

Anonymous said...

Michael

You do understand the O'Really is a pompous ass. He(she?) could debate issues, but, assuming he is a lefty he cannot think for fear of being confronted with all of the inconsistencies of his liberalism. Welcome to the real world Oreally.


Oreally thinks that his backassward criticisms are clever, but insult and sarcasm are the last defense of all fools and cowards. Thanks, Oreally, for reminding me why we have to continue to carry the torch.



Bruce Almighty

Anonymous said...

Wait a minute

oreally,

Please be clear - Are you telling us there really are terrorists in Dearborn?

Ma Harum

Hail Mary Mother of God

Do Tell!

Michael said...

anonymous number one:
I do indeed understand that. Sometimes, however, I like to write for the lurkers, who may be looking for intelligent answers.