|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
 Posted: Wed Aug 22, 2007 4:55 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
delete, see below.
Last edited by On the other hand on Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:00 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The_Conservative wrote: |
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Tony_Balony wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Having said that, I now call on Tony Baloney, BJWD, et. al to take a similar stance on pharmacists who refuse to prescribe birth control or the morning after pill to customers because it's against their religion. Let's all have fun watching them wriggle out of applying the same standards to Christian extremists that they did to Muslim extremists. |
Ok - Christian phamacists need to obey the law. |
Yes, but what about those Christians who lobby to get the laws changed so as to be able to legally avoid certain workplace duties? This is what I was getting at when I mentioned the "conscience clauses" earlier.
? |
Then that's fine. In a democracy if you don't like the laws you are perfectly entitled to lobby and attempt to change them whether you are Christian, Muslim or worshippers of the Great Pink Unicorn |
Okay...
| Quote: |
Under the terms of the settlement, North Shore Taxi was ordered to immediately establish a policy forbidding any driver to refuse a fare from a blind person accompanied by a certified guide dog.
The only exceptions are for drivers allergic to dogs and those who satisfy the company that they have an honest religious belief that precludes them from transporting certified guide dogs.
|
So, they did lobby the government(in the form of the human rights commission), and they did get their exemption. Thus, according to the law, they are now free to refuse to pick up guide dogs. Are you okay with that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony_Balony
Joined: 12 Apr 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 22, 2007 8:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
So, they did lobby the government(in the form of the human rights commission), and they did get their exemption. Thus, according to the law, they are now free to refuse to pick up guide dogs. Are you okay with that?
|
No, I'm not happy with that. The rule is bad. I think we should obey the law as little as possible to show compliance and then rail against Islam and political correctness as much as possible.
We have a good quality of life in the West because we do care. I certainly care fore the blind. I can understand a slobbering dog making a mess of a taxi, but for the blind we should chip in. I won't use taxis driven my Muslims. Same reason I don't eat Schwarma even tho I'm told how cool it is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 22, 2007 8:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No laws should ever be changed to appease some cult. They are well within their "rights" as "new Canadians" to try and change them and Canada is well within her right to tell them "NO". Canada isn't a muslim country. Canada isn't a Christian country. Canada is a secular country.
And the Christians too. All progress is progress against religion. That is what progress is. Moving away from sorcery and towards reason. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don Gately
Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Location: In a basement taking a severe beating
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| caniff wrote: |
| Don Gately wrote: |
Much as I'm loath to get on the side of our conservative board members here, I have to say that the muslim cab driver had a choice when he decided whether or not to work for a cab company.
I don't take jobs that involve clubbing baby seals because it goes against my morals. Once I accept the position, it's up to me to fulfill the duties. If you want to sacrifice money for morality you make that choice *before* you go into the line of work; you don't impose your morality on your customers.
Having said that, I now call on Tony Baloney, BJWD, et. al to take a similar stance on pharmacists who refuse to prescribe birth control or the morning after pill to customers because it's against their religion. Let's all have fun watching them wriggle out of applying the same standards to Christian extremists that they did to Muslim extremists. |
As far as I know, Christian fundamentalist pharmacists plying their wares in Muslim countries have not yet become a source of controversy.
Let me know when they hit Al-Jazeera with their discriminatory practices. In the meantime, try to stick to the topic. |
The topic, as I saw it, is that we don't want others imposing their religious beliefs on us. Is that not the topic? If not, could you more narrowly define it for me so I don't get off topic again? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don Gately
Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Location: In a basement taking a severe beating
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
Regarding the pharmacist's, they must first obey the laws of the land. If the laws say you must dispense then they must. If the laws say it is their choice, then it is their choice.
Related, in Canada, discriminating against individuals due to their disabilities is against the law. If we live in a new country where all the warm and fuzzy stuff I was taught has been jettisoned in favor of keeping the muslims peaceful, then I'd like an official email from Harper confirming this. |
So our problem with this guy is that he broke the law? That's a broad topic indeed. Hard to imagine how I could have gotten off topic with such a broad topic.
Regardless, bold stance BJWD. I, too, join you in condemning people who break the law. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don Gately
Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Location: In a basement taking a severe beating
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tony_Balony wrote: |
| Quote: |
So, they did lobby the government(in the form of the human rights commission), and they did get their exemption. Thus, according to the law, they are now free to refuse to pick up guide dogs. Are you okay with that?
|
No, I'm not happy with that. The rule is bad. I think we should obey the law as little as possible to show compliance and then rail against Islam and political correctness as much as possible.
We have a good quality of life in the West because we do care. I certainly care fore the blind. I can understand a slobbering dog making a mess of a taxi, but for the blind we should chip in. I won't use taxis driven my Muslims. Same reason I don't eat Schwarma even tho I'm told how cool it is. |
Ah, so the law isn't the issue then, because if this law were made and supported the muslim cab drivers you guys would still have a problem with the muslim guy's behavior. Holy christ this thread is confusing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don Gately
Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Location: In a basement taking a severe beating
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 23, 2007 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
| That is what progress is. Moving away from sorcery and towards reason. |
I have to say, this is the closest to my thoughts on the topic.
To me, the leap from not agreeing with Muslim cab drivers to not agreeing with Christian pharmacists is a pretty short one. I just think people (liberals and conservatives alike) get so caught up in dogma that they can't see the obvious parallels. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pligganease
Joined: 14 Sep 2004
Location: The deep south...
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 23, 2007 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| How did the blind guy get the cab's plate number? Maybe his dog was really, REALLY smart? |
|
| Back to top |
| |
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
