Who's country is this?

[Piña]

I'm pretty sure the tone for the thread was set when gae in her best imitation of a neo-con racist said:

Why, oh WHY are we pandering to the fanatics?

If they don't like this country, LEAVE.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The subtext was about intolerance from the git. The hospital gown aspect merely a catalyst.
You're right about the irony of her choosing businesses complying with consumer wishes to complain about but then she's never really been all that bright. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Lew]

Pina-

you're taking a more complicated issue and trying to simplify it.

Regarding the hospital gowns, I have no problem with a hospital choosing to offer choices to its patients. One would hope that, in time, the market would dictate that most medical facilities would offer those choices. Better patient relations, better for the medical personnel working there, better for the person who manufactures the gowns, better for all. And it's not like hospitals don't already make concessions out of religious concerns, like offering kosher meals, vegetarian meals, etc.

Now, should a Muslim be able to sue a hospital for not accommodating their religion? Absolutely not. Why? Well, for one, hospitals are not, in most cases, run by the government. Second, I'm not sure where the "right to hospitalization" is a fundamental right, but if it is, I'm not sure how religious accommodation would be inherent to that right.

That said, I can at least see the arguments in this case. The driver's license issue is nowhere near as comlicated. Driving is a privilege, not a right, and if you want to drive on our highways, you will be licensed and that license will have your photo on it. If having your picture taken or removing your burka or whatever it's called is against your religion, fine; just don't expect to get a driver's license.

[LanDroid]

1. Muslim women did not sue the hospital to get them to change the gown, one reason I find this controversy so amusing.

2. The Muslim woman that sued about the drivers license photo LOST the case. [img]graemlins/camera.gif[/img] She had to decide if wearing the Burqa was more important than getting a driving license - I expect she is somewhere on the road as I type this, enjoying a freedom she probably wouldn't have in the Middle East. [img]wink.gif[/img]

<font color="#000002" size="1">[ August 14, 2004 03:03 PM: Message edited by: LanDroid ]</font>

[Piña]

Originally posted by Lew:
Pina-
you're taking a more complicated issue and trying to simplify it.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I?m not sure that?s how I would characterize this thread. What I believe I?ve been doing is addressing two points.

One: The absurd argument, absurd coming from someone who supports the idea that market forces should dictate social practices anyway, that a commercial concern, the hospital, should not accommodate the wishes of it?s customers to enhance its? services.

Two: The separation of americans into us (with rights) and not-us (without rights) categories based on religious affiliation and not on citizenship.

The first point is merely amusing but illustrative of the mindset that makes the second point possible.

The second is deeply troubling and at it?s hate based core absolutely un-american.

Now, should a Muslim be able to sue a hospital for not accommodating their religion? Absolutely not. Why? Well, for one, hospitals are not, in most cases, run by the government. Second, I'm not sure where the "right to hospitalization" is a fundamental right, but if it is, I'm not sure how religious accommodation would be inherent to that right.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Haven?t been arguing a legal right to health care but since you bring it up. I do believe that it should be a basic right. As to religious accommodation: If you allow that basic health care should be a right, as I do, and you also believe that religious freedom is an american right, then I believe it is incumbent upon our health care providers to make reasonable accommodations for those beliefs. I think hospital gowns designed for modesty fall into that category.

That said, I can at least see the arguments in this case. The driver's license issue is nowhere near as comlicated. Driving is a privilege, not a right, and if you want to drive on our highways, you will be licensed and that license will have your photo on it. If having your picture taken or removing your burka or whatever it's called is against your religion, fine; just don't expect to get a driver's license.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I think a better way to resolve the license thing is to see if an alternative way of identifying license holders could be created. How about fingerprint id for those who choose not to have their faces displayed publicly. I?m pretty sure that islam does not have any problems with fingerprints and with biometrics readily available I don?t see why one car on each shift couldn?t carry a fingerprint reader. (Hell, they might already be available.) Worst case scenario would be taking them down to the station for id.

Or alternatively, how about having little removable burkas on the license itself, some sort of overlay, so that their faces could be selectively displayed, say to only female officers. We call women cops in for searches of women now, why not for this?

[travelinman]

I go away for two weeks and pinhead is still a dick

[Piña]

Perhaps as an experiment you should length the time of your abscence by a factor of two. Then repeat, oh, ten or twelve times.

At the end of the experiment you can let us know if things have changed.

[Sluggo]

gae - I'm with you on this one!! [img]graemlins/thumbs_up.gif[/img]

[travelinman]

Originally posted by Pi?a:
Perhaps as an experiment you should length the time of your abscence by a factor of two. Then repeat, oh, ten or twelve times.

At the end of the experiment you can let us know if things have changed.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Do I bother you pinhead?

<font color="#000002" size="1">[ August 16, 2004 05:17 AM: Message edited by: travelinman ]</font>

[jumper69]

Pina said...
Last time I looked this was "their" country. Just because someone is muslim does not strip them of their citizenship here. Your assumption that being muslim automatically means you are from Iraq or Iran or wherever is ignorant and frankly bigoted.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Perhaps I should have said middle eastern, would that make you feel better. I believe I mentioned several predominantly muslim countrys then added that all encompassing "et al" but I digress...

Nobody is stripping anyone of citizenship wheter muslim, hindu, or even...heaven forbid, a jehovah's witness! [img]eek.gif[/img]

They can go to their mosques, pray to allah 5 times a day, do whatever.... but when they want, need, or make use of American services and then complain about the manner in which they're provided...then I say fuck them. I'd prefer they say thank you and move on about their business. Either way, I don't GIVE A GOD DAMN which of their sensibilities we've offended.

(Shamelessly stolen from "A Few Good Men")

Because acceptance of different beliefs and practices is what this country is founded on. It is the cornerstone upon which everything else here is built. It?s what I was protecting when I served and, like it or not, it is what you were protecting

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I can accept different beliefs Pina. I can accept that people want to look different, practice different religions, where clothes that make them look totally stupid. I can accept all that and THAT is what I was defending.

What I cannot accept is the subjugation of our established policies and practices whether it be a hosptial dressing gown, a drivers license photo, or playing a call to allah over a towns loudspeaker.

We have a fundamental problem in this country in that we are trying so hard not to offend anyone that we're losing our national identity. Go to Miami and try and speak English for example.

I am sick and fucking tired of making exceptions for groups of individuals at the expense of our national identity.

It's a slippery slope and we're well on our way down it.

[gae]

As posted by Jumper:

It seems those countries figure if you're going to live here you should learn the language. There's a novel idea.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Pina, the point you are missing, and will probably continue to miss is that those of us on this side of the fence don't care what people look like (i.e., the fact that by 2040, I think, there will be more hispanics here than whites), what their particular traditions are or who or what they worship.

This is AMERICA. We speak ENGLISH here.

If folks from around the world want to come here LEGALLY, that's fine.

However, (and this is just a ferinstance) they need to realize that the majority of this country celebrates something called "Christmas". For most of us, I think it's secular. For some, it's very religious. But if the newbies that come here don't want to, for whatever reason, fine. I don't care. But they shouldn't complain and insist that it be called "Winter Holiday". That would be like me moving to Mexico and being upset because it's largely Catholic.

We've had this argument time and time again. Most of us here have grandparents or great-grandparents who came from other places. Those folks kept what they wanted of the old country, and then assimilated into this one. The immigrants now want everything HERE to be their way. If my ancestors and Travs and done the same thing we wouldn't be able to talk to each other, because I would be speaking German, and he'd be speaking Italian.

Used to be, being an American meant that... well, you were AMERICAN. And f'ing happy to be here.

Since I know a bit of your history, Tomas (from all that email exchange that didn't happen, according to you), where do you think YOU would be if you were still back in the old country?