Sunday, January 07, 2007

What's Good For The Goose...

I'm driving home from Bloomington last night, punching around the AM dial (nothing better than late night AM radio...STILL). I pick up Nashville, Cincinnati, Detroit, Dallas, Minneapolis, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Atlanta...I'm having a blast! And then I pick up a talk show on out of Denver.

The host on that station is upset that Muslim cabbies in Minneapolis are refusing to transport people with alcohol. He says, "if it's part of the job, you have to deal with it. If you knew that going in, why take the job?!?!?"

He then tells of a time when he was at a major league baseball game and ordered a hot dog with chili, and the girl behind the counter had to wait for someone else to come over and help her because "she didn't handle pork products". So again, he says, "why would you take that job if you can't handle the job requirements??!?!"

So a caller joins in and says he's a cabbie in Reno, and if a gay couple wants a ride to a gay bar, he has to take them, whether he supports their "behavior" or not, because "that's the job I signed up to do." And the host says, "see? that's what I'm talking about. Good for you! You just do the job, right? Because if you DIDN'T transport the gays, these liberals would be calling you a bigot!"

Well, guess who's the next caller...yep, me! I say, "I gotta tell ya, I agree with what you're saying...if you take a job knowing what the requirements are and still refuse to DO some of the requirements, why should you be allowed to keep that job?"

And he says, "right on, that's what I'm saying! Why is that so hard to understand?"

I add, "I dunno. I just think these Muslims shouldn't be letting their religious beliefs get in the way of their job."

And he's excited now, "Exactly...no one is telling them they can't be Muslim (the old conservative cabal there, see it?), but they've gotta do the job as described."

I go on: "Absolutely, I agree. And because of that, I feel the same way about druggists. If a guy takes a job at a pharmacy that sells the pill and other forms of birth control and doesn't want to do that based on his religious beliefs, then he shouldn't work there or shouldn't even have applied in the first place, right?"

Silence. Or, as we call it in the business, dead air. Then I hear a click on my end.

I crank up the radio, hear the end of my own comments as the 7-second delay kicks in, and then I hear the silence.

Followed by this intelligent comeback: "Okay people, let's stick to the topic here...we've been talking about only ONE thing here...Muslim cabbies and their refusal to take fares that have alcoholic beverages on them. See how these liberals are? For the last five minutes, I've been laser beam focused on Muslim cabbies, and then they gotta try and spin the subject and twist what I'm saying. (heavy sigh) We'll be right back."

Just to recap...the guy who brought up the big league ballpark situation and allowed the caller right in front of me to express his displeasure with gay people says he's "laser beam focused" on Muslims/cabbies/alcohol and hangs up on me without remotely answering my question.

I drove on, shook my head, laughed out loud, and punched up a Jeffrey Steele CD.

5 comments:

Chef Kevin said...

Ok, I'm going to play the devil's advocate here. Let's say I'm a pharmacist and it is 1992. There is no morning after pill for my religion to be against. I didn't have to dispense it. Still working in the same pharmacy in 2007, now that the pill exists, if you are my boss, you say I have to find a different job if I don't like it due to my religious beliefs? Isn't religious persecution one of the reasons why we left Europe in the 1600s? Isn't it one thing to take a job knowing that you have to dispense drugs, touch pork, drive around Cubs fans, and then refuse to do it than it not part of your job and then you are required to do it?

BTW..I'm not against your stance on this...my only objection is that if it becomes easy to get, does it starts promoting irresponsible sex?

BJ Stone said...

So the drugstore world is not supposed to change and adapt and develop new medicines/methods?

My question would be why the morning after pill is any different from the morning before pill? Birth control is birth control, IMO. Besides, since I'm pro-choice but DON'T want abortion to be used as "birth control", I'd say the morning after pill might be a way to actually cut down on abortions.

As far as what promotes irresponsible sex...it seems the best way to get kids to have irresponsible sex is to promote abstinence, refuse to teach the birds-and-bees story to them, and tell them they CAN'T have sex.

Abstinence education is a proven failure. Prudishness will get this country nowhere. Repression causes more problems than it solves.

Chef Kevin said...

So you are saying that if your employer makes you do\sell\promote something tomorrow that you aren't currently doing\selling\promoting now and it is against your religion, morale fiber, felt strongly about, etc. you'd be happy and just conform? I didn't...I quit.

BJ Aberle said...

First off, it was wrong for the host to hang up on you without responding. But then again it is his/her show. Who was it btw? If you don't mind me asking? But to be honest, I don't think your comparison is relevant. I agree with you on the point that if a pharmacist can not fulfill his obligation at a certain job because of religious beliefs, then he should quit or not apply. But it is something completely different for the government to force you to carry a certain drug. If it is the law then it is the law. End of debate for me. But it is not law (yet). If the government is going to make me carry a certain drug then they should have a hand in the stocking and delivery fees for it. I don't see that happening. So I can see how you would have gotten hung up on, because you were off topic and you were not making a fair comparison.

So the drugstore world is not supposed to change and adapt and develop new medicines/methods?

No... change, adapt, develop all you want. Just don't force us to carry drugs that we don't feel we need or want to. What if a pharmacist didn't want to carry a drug because he didn't feel it was safe? Should he not be allowed to choose? I could care less if all he want to carry was Nyquil. I will go somewhere else. Let the consumer decide.

As far as what promotes irresponsible sex...it seems the best way to get kids to have irresponsible sex is to promote abstinence, refuse to teach the birds-and-bees story to them, and tell them they CAN'T have sex.

I don't think anybody is telling them they "can't" have sex. I think they give many reasons as to why they should wait.

Abstinence education is a proven failure.

Please provide some data for this nonsensical notion. Just because it doesn't jive with you progressive liberal views does not constitute it as a failure.

Prudishness will get this country nowhere.

And hedonism will get us where exactly?

Repression causes more problems than it solves.

True. But abstinence is not about repression. Abstinence should be taught at home and reinforced by our society. But our society reinforces promiscuous behavior as acceptable. Would you agree or disagree that abstinence is a better way than even safe sex? I hope that you realize that there are plenty of reasons, religious and non-religious, why abstinence is beneficial. We need to let our children know that we expect them to abstain. And show our disappointment when they don't. That doesn't mean we ostracize them when they fall short. But for some reason the notion of "expecting things" out of our young people has been lost. Probably so we won't hurt the "sacred cow" of the left....their feelings. I'm sorry but your well-being is more important than your temporal feelings.

Harriet said...

Good for you BJ!!!!! :-)