75% of Minneapolis airport taxis refuse customerswithalco hol

[Steven Jamar]

  The state may well choose to accommodate things for which the  
constitution does not compel accommodation.

Is it the religious motive of the driver that matters?  Or the  
conduct of the passenger?  Can these taxi drivers discriminate  
against all those who drink alcohol?  For that matter, why don't  
they, if that is the basis for the action.

This is an arbitrary, idiosyncratic interpretation of the dictates of  
Islam with so many internal inconsistencies as to not be the sort of  
thing that needs be granted the hammer of constitutionalizing the  
accommodation.  Of course the fact that it is so idiosyncratic  
doesn't really matter (much) except insofar as it can be shown to  
really be non-genuine -- because how do they (logically) distinguish  
between those who had wine on the plane, those carrying bottles in  
luggage, those carrying bottles in bags, those carrying bottles in  
the "open"?

As to color coding by this or that passenger -- is that not a form of  
discrimination against passengers too?  You can only take green cabs,  
but others can take either green or purple?

Curious to me how this little aberrant understanding of Islam in  
practice would get started and then grow as it did.  Interesting  
demonstration of group-think.

Steve



-- 
Prof. Steven D. Jamar                               vox:  202-806-8017
Howard University School of Law                     fax:  202-806-8567
2900 Van Ness Street NW                   mailto:stevenjamar at gmail.com
Washington, DC  20008	                          http://iipsj.com/SDJ/

"In these words I can sum up everything I've learned about life:  It  
goes on."

Robert Frost