Been There, Done That.

I first saw this Internet meme on the Liberal Logic 101 Facebook page.  The typo made me smile, but then right away I felt badly about that, because I know from experience how easily typos can occur.  Myself, I especially have trouble with homophones.  My brain says 'their' and my fingers type 'there' before I have a chance to intervene.  So "interprit" is no big deal since the meaning was understood, right?

What IS a big deal, however, is the misrepresentation of the truth.

New York city is about as "liberal" as anyplace in the country and there are a lot of taxi cabs here.  As you might expect in such a "socialist" stronghold, there are many, many regulations imposed on taxi and limousine services.

Fares are standardized and regulated, for example. And there is a rule that requires drivers to accept any fare to any destination within the five boroughs of the city. To see all the rules and regulations, you can visit the NYC TLC (New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission) website.

Of course, the fact that there is a rule does not mean every taxi driver follows it. It is not unheard of, for example, for a potential passenger to be left standing on the curb if the driver discovers that the destination is so remote that there is small chance of picking up a return fare. And though I've not experienced it myself, I suppose Muslim drivers have chosen not to pick up fares with service dogs.

But taxis and limousines have markings which identify them, which means that rule breakers, when reported, can be disciplined.

Here is the most recent memo on service animals:

Industry Notice #09-23 December 24, 2009
For Immediate Release
REMINDER TO TLC DRIVER LICENSEES:
SERVICE ANIMALS MUST BE WELCOMED
IN ALL TLC-LICENSED VEHICLES
TLC-licensed drivers are reminded that service
animals are required to be welcomed in all taxicabs and
For-Hire Vehicles (FHVs).
If a passengers states that an accompanying animal
is a service animal, the driver must, regardless of whether
the animal is or is not secured, allow them in the taxicab or
FHV.
Refusal to transport a passenger with a service
animal is classified as a service refusal and carries
penalties, upon conviction, up to and including TLC
license suspension or revocation.

Clearly it is unfair to suggest, as this meme does, that an individual Muslim driver's decision to refuse service to a passenger with a seeing-eye dog is authorized by the liberal lawmakers of New York City.

The second half of the meme references a lawsuit in the state of Washington.  The Attorney General filed a suit against a florist who refused to provide flowers for a same-sex wedding ceremony.  The customer who placed the order had been a long-term customer but the proprietor would not provide flowers for his wedding because of her "relationship to Jesus Christ".

Washington has a law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender or sexual orientation. The law requires that a florist who routinely provides wedding flowers for heterosexual weddings also provide them for same-sex couples.

Strangely, the two examples presented in this meme are exactly the same while being entirely different.

Both the Muslim taxi driver and the Christian florist are acting in accordance with the tenets of their respective religions.  Each clearly believes that it is more important to abide by those tenets than to comply with civil law. Both behaviors are examples of Civil Disobedience:  protest by peaceful non-compliance.

However, in the first case, the Muslim taxi driver who refuses to carry a service animal would be in violation of regulation and punished accordingly if reported and found guilty of the violation.  Therefore it cannot be said that liberals condone his behavior.

In the second case, the florist is breaking the law by refusing to provide equal service to all customers. Liberals, therefore, are correct in expecting the law to be upheld.

The thing about Civil Disobedience is that you have to be willing to pay the price for the disobedience.  If the taxi driver is caught he faces fines and eventually can lose his licence to drive a taxi.  The florist will have to decide if she's willing to forgo all her wedding flower business in order to avoid having to sell flowers for same sex weddings.

There is another possible recourse, however:  the taxi driver and the florist could work together to get such laws repealed, allowing each service provider in our society to decide which customers will be served and which will be turned away.

Here are some images to help us imagine what such a society might look like: