[codercpc]

In the past few days (I know I am a slow learner) I have this dreaded feeling of the great religious war, with the Muslims trying to take over the world.

But having said that, I really want to know what the difference between this and the pharmacist who refuses to dispense birth control based on his religious beliefs? I am 100% behind the pharmacist, so I must also agree with the taxi drivers right to deny service (it's not like there are not other taxis available). One thing I hate is hypocrisy.

[From many - one.]

I understand that most of the taxi-drivers in Minneapolis are Somali Muslims.

Makes getting anywhere from the airport a tad difficult.

If anyone doen't think this is simply a power play, raise your hand.

[montag813]

In the past few days (I know I am a slow learner) I have this dreaded feeling of the great religious war, with the Muslims trying to take over the world.

Don't listen to Savage then. Or you will see just how close we are to this.

[Wuli]

Sorry. I do not agree with the Pharmacist, unless the pharmacy is (1)part of a hospital that is run by a religious denomination that opposes birth control, (2)run by a religious institution that opposes birth control, (3)run by a private outfit that accepts no public funds and has a policy that agrees with the pharmacist.

Outside of those (or similar examples) I do not see an employee replacing the policy of the pharmacy with their own, on the basis of their own religious principals. If a pharmacy dispenses birth control and a pharmicist opposes the dispensing of birth control on religious grounds, then they need to find a job with a pharmacy whose policy, and legal basis for application of said policy, agrees with the pharmacist.

I too do not like hypocrisy.