Dennis Prager's Taxi Drivers and Mailmen
In the latest Uncommon Knowledge, Dennis Prager (at around the 17 minute mark) begins telling a story to emphasize a point he was making about how Islam does not value liberty. He mentioned the Somali cab drivers at the airport in Minnesota refuse to allow passengers who carry alcohol or have dogs into their cabs.
By contrast, Mr. Prager got a call from a mailman in Colorado who is a fundamentalist Christian who said he, as a mailman, has to deliver pornography, and he is at least opposed, as a Christian, to pornography as Muslim is to alcohol or dogs. But, he delivers the pornography because he believes in freedom.
Forgive me, but am I the only one who noticed problems with this?
First of all, that man delivers pornography because he is paid to do so. It is his job. He is paid a generous salary, very generous benefits and will collect a very generous pension on my dime. So, while he may believe in freedom, he delivers it because he is paid.
Second, as far as I am able to tell (with limited research), those Minnesota Somali cab drivers, unlike the sanctimonious mailman, are not federal employees suckling on the public teat. More likely they are independent operators or they work for a cab company. If they are independent operators, who own or lease their cabs, its their business if they refuse, because of their belief system, to serve some customers.
This is a measure of values. Those cab drivers believe enough in Islam to stand on their principles, refuse money and risk the economic consequences. This mailman may claim to have an objection to pornography, but obviously not enough to stand on principle and refuse that government pay check, those generous government benefits, or that pension.
That is what freedom is. The freedom to associate or not associate with whom you choose based on your own personal values system. Those taxi drivers value Islam, the mailman values his government pension. To each his own, but it doesn't prove Islam is anti-freedom.
Addendum: If I've misunderstood, Dennis is invited to clarify things.
- Comment (278)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (12)
Comments:
Dec '10
Re: Dennis Prager's Taxi Drivers and Mailmen
I should note for the record that I do not buy all the public accommodation and commerce clause legal mumbo-jumbo that some may apply to the question. But I do acknowledge said mumbo-jumbo is-- for now, at least-- ensconced in our society and politics. So my position is, of course, entirely theoretical.
I would not, for example, make this position a plank in my platform if I were running for office. I could, perhaps, even see myself lying about it. What useful end would advocating that position politically serve?
This is a lesson Rand Paul seems to be slowly learning. And, I should point out, if Kevin thinks Fred's position is beyond the pale, then he also thinks Rand Paul is beyond the pale, and not welcome on Ricochet.
[Oh, and I know you were and are being relatively light-hearted, Kevin! I am sounding more earnest, here, than I intend.]
Edited on June 22, 2012 at 3:29pmDec '10
Re: Dennis Prager's Taxi Drivers and Mailmen
EThompson
Say what you will, but this site isn't nearly as interesting as it once was when Kenneth and Lady K were participating. At least we weren't suffering- then- from the tyranny of nice and overtly aggressive religious views.
This is not the first time we've heard this complaint from you, E. If you were editing Ricochet, would you do that? Would you limit the expression of, in your words, "aggressive" religious views? Do you have a similar problem with "aggressive" atheistic views? Because my sense of it is, we get both here on Ricochet (although I wouldn't use the same adjective).
I've never understood why you don't just filter what you read. I admit (without naming names), there are certain members whose tastes in conversational topics differ from mine and I just skip them when they post. And if you'd prefer, there is a filtering option (see Comment Filter above right) where you can hide the comments of religious aggressors to your content. Have at it. It would diminish the site for me, but it's good to have choices, don't you agree?
Aug '10
Re: Dennis Prager's Taxi Drivers and Mailmen
Mama Toad, I never called anyone a "Kenneth". Frankly, I never sparred with Kenneth, I don't know what his views were, and I don't know exactly what got him into trouble. All I'm saying is that Kenneth and Derb got dumped. I think Fred got perilously close to expressing views that could get a member into trouble. It was not an ad hominem attack on my part. Personally, it doesn't bother me if people get outrageous. I can't imagine hitting the "Flag" button unless something was really egregious. Lastly, I'll note that Fred did not express to me that he was insulted. If he was, I'm sorry, because that was not my intent. I do, however, feel protective of Ricochet's reputation, and I'm glad this conversation was not promoted to the Main Feed.
Feb '11
Re: Dennis Prager's Taxi Drivers and Mailmen
Fair enough -- and I agree with your last sentence especially, if for entirely different reasons. But if you are not familiar with Kenneth or why he or his many faces were banned over time, comparing Fred Cole to him seems a little weird, no?
Edited on June 22, 2012 at 4:41pmAug '10
Re: Dennis Prager's Taxi Drivers and Mailmen
Don't worry. Fred's nowhere close.
I think I know what got Kenneth and Lady K banned -- it wasn't expressing unusual ideas, but rather taunting of a particularly nasty kind, a failure to control a vicious tongue. (A vicious tongue can be wickedly funny, as both demonstrated. But it can also be your downfall.)
As for Derb... Fred's also nowhere close. Derb indulged in racialist ranting. Fred doesn't.
Nov '11
Re: Dennis Prager's Taxi Drivers and Mailmen
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
Don't worry. Fred's nowhere close.
I think I know what got Kenneth and Lady K banned -- it wasn't expressing unusual ideas, but rather taunting of a particularly nasty kind, a failure to control a vicious tongue. (A vicious tongue can be wickedly funny, as both demonstrated. But it can also be your downfall.)
As for Derb... Fred's also nowhere close. Derb indulged in racialist ranting. Fred doesn't. · 3 minutes ago
There's a good reason for that.
1. Race is an arbitrary social construct, and a construct I refuse to participate in or perpetuate.
2. Racism is a form of collectivism. And I find collectivism morally abhorrent.
Aug '10
Re: Dennis Prager's Taxi Drivers and Mailmen
If we cannot say openly that we really do believe free markets are better than regulations at stamping out nastiness like racism, then where are we?
Feb '11
Re: Dennis Prager's Taxi Drivers and Mailmen
Amen, Sister Snake.
Apr '11
Re: Dennis Prager's Taxi Drivers and Mailmen
Mama Toad
Fair enough -- and I agree with your last sentence especially, if for entirely different reasons.
Uh-oh...
Aug '10
Re: Dennis Prager's Taxi Drivers and Mailmen
Mama Toad
...But if you are not familiar with Kenneth or why he or his many faces were banned over time, comparing Fred Cole to him seems a little weird, no? · 31 minutes ago
Edited 18 minutes ago
Sigh. I did not compare him to Kenneth. If you were going to take a car ride with a Kennedy, and I said, "Mary Jo Kopechne wants to speak to you," would I be "comparing" you to Mary Jo? I don't know much about her, except her fate. Same with Kenneth.
Edited on June 22, 2012 at 6:02pmJun '12
Re: Dennis Prager's Taxi Drivers and Mailmen
Here's what you missed. Yes, the cabdrivers are independent businessmen... But the cab company has a government sanctioned monopoly to drive cabs at the airport. The cab companies choose to use contractors instead of employees.
BUT, because of the monopoly power they have been granted, the cab drivers are in the same situation as the postal carrier. Government protected jobs, at hire than free competition rates. The offset is that these drivers, like the carrier, should not have the option to discriminate.
Imagine if the cab driver was this Christian... Would the government protect his right to refuse service to patrons carrying porn?
Aug '10
Re: Dennis Prager's Taxi Drivers and Mailmen
Mama Toad, see below. While I did not compare Fred's views to Kenneth's, I did compare Fred's point to Derb's, because they are comparable. A difference is that Derb was countenancing white-on-black discrimination, while Fred was countenancing Muslim-on-infidel discrimination. I'm not convinced the free market would take care of the problem. It's more likely that airport travelers would make accommodations to the bullies.
What do our libertarian friends think about the application of sharia law in the U.S. among members of the Muslim community? From allowing Muslim cab drivers to legally refuse Jews, dogs, and booze-toters, it's not that much of a leap. How would the free market solve the problem of women being confined to burkhas and thieves getting their hands amputated?
Kevin Walker
Your statement that you are okey-dokey with a cab driver's refusal to pick up a passenger based on race reminded me of John Derbyshire, who had to part ways with NR because he thought it was okey-dokey to refuse to assist a motorist in distress based on race. · 15 hours ago
Nov '11
Re: Dennis Prager's Taxi Drivers and Mailmen
Ah. Finally clarification. So the real problem is a government established monopoly preventing market forces from working.
Aug '10
Re: Dennis Prager's Taxi Drivers and Mailmen
Dude. Seriously?
Free markets depend on exceptional rule of law to exists (which we are busy destroying, alas, with stuff like intrusive regulation). Not just any old laws will do. See De Soto and Coase for more details.
What, exactly, is anti-free-market about businesses being free to refuse clients who won't show their faces? Disclosure (in all things, including human faces) is the kind of custom that makes free markets work.
And how is an inefficient legal punishment for thievery a natural corollary of a free market?
Edited on June 22, 2012 at 6:08pmAug '10
Re: Dennis Prager's Taxi Drivers and Mailmen
Fred, let me ask you: Do you think monopolies on local electricity, natural gas, and water distribution are a bad idea?
Nov '11
Re: Dennis Prager's Taxi Drivers and Mailmen
Kevin Walker
Fred, let me ask you: Do you think monopolies on local electricity, natural gas, and water distribution are a bad idea? · 2 minutes ago
Government established and maintained monopolies on anything are a bad idea, be it natural gas, taxi services, cable or gambling.
Jul '11
Re: Dennis Prager's Taxi Drivers and Mailmen
I finally came up with a solution. Let the cabbies discriminate but make them wear a sign that explains it. Brad Pitt's character from Inglorious Basterds can carve a sign on their Jew hating foreheads.
Jun '12
Re: Dennis Prager's Taxi Drivers and Mailmen
I don't think Dennis is necessarily implying the cab driver does not have the right to deny whoever he wants from riding in his car. I believe his larger point was that although the mailman objects to pornography he recognizes the recipients right to have it regardless. Moreover I am sure if the mail man had the opportunity he would rather try to convince the recipient of the pornography his objection to it rather than reject his right to have it. However the cab driver objects to the right of the passenger to have that alcohol and thus sees no reason to even persuade the passenger of his position. Thus he avoids the situation altogether by not allowing the passenger to ride.
Aug '10
Re: Dennis Prager's Taxi Drivers and Mailmen
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
Dude. Seriously?
Seriously.
Sorry, but linking to Derb's piece does not constitute a counter-argument. I did not compare Fred's views to all of Derb's. I compared one of Fred's points to one of Derb's. Fred said it's OK to legally allow cabbies to refuse passengers based on race. Derb said it's OK to refuse to assist motorists in distress based on race. There are differences between the two points. In one case, a person is providing a service for a fee, and in the other case, a person is presented with an opportunity to volunteer his services. But they are very much comparable.
Addendum: I should note that Derb's view of the "motorist in distress" question was considered by many to be the most incendiary in the piece.
Edited on June 22, 2012 at 6:30pmSep '11
Re: Dennis Prager's Taxi Drivers and Mailmen
Taxi cabs are generally licensed to take money for carrying passengers provided that the driver follows certain rules. So "it's his cab" isn't exactly correct. True, you or I could refuse to transport a passenger carrying alcohol in our cars. But we can't legally collect a fare for transporting a passenger with or without alcohol, or wait in a taxi stand, etc. If someone wants the license to accept fares for carrying passengers, he loses some rights of refusal.
Possessing alcohol isn't a legitimate reason to refuse service; not carrying a passenger with a service dog is certainly a violation of the rules in most jurisdictions.