Cabbie ordered to pay $10,000 for telling lesbians to stop kissing

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Domo1

Might as well face it, the GLBT group is now an elite protected class.

Don't say, do anything that might offend them.

Keep your opinions to yourself.

Or else.

Agree,

And YOU will agree with them.....

Or Else.

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Domo1

Might as well face it, the GLBT group is now an elite protected class.

Don't say, do anything that might offend them.

Keep your opinions to yourself.

Or else.

Agree,

And YOU will agree with them.....

Or Else.

a reply to: nenothtu

Ok how about having a buffet which promotes gluttony, or having ever been divorced.

Oh and the second the business owner has an affair, ect. Or servicing someone who's had an affair. Or serving someone who ordered excess food for themselves. There's so many things other than being gay that they need to prove they hold in equal contempt and treat with the same prejudice in order to use religion as a defense. One can not pick and choose and use their religion to defend their prejudice while ignoring it whenever it's inconvenient.

At work yesterday religion came up slightly and not a single christian that worked with me the agnostic had ever read the bible or knew the first thing about Jesus, but it certainly didn't stop them from claiming christianity and judging others.

Someone needs to prove that one, they actually are christian, and two, they aren't picking and choosing for their own benefit and thus a hypocrite.

Using religious beliefs to defend bigotry is not a simple thing. People think they can just say it's against my beliefs and that should be it without them needing to defend or prove that they are truly committed to those beliefs and not just using them as a weapon and or shield.

originally posted by: PaddyInf
I'm fed up with this whole LGBT/LMFAO/RSVP/WHATEVER label people keep shoving on themselves or others. It promotes a them and us attitude and increases division, which is surely completely against the intention of those who campaigned over the years to be accepted as people, not a sexual orientation.

Who is it that's creating the division?

If people just accepted LGBT are people like everyone else - - there wouldn't be a division.

As you yourself pointed out: ". . . campaigned over the years to be accepted as people, . . ."

Was just thinking, the very act of having a pizza place and restaurant where you allow people to buy and eat as much as they want is participating, promoting and profiting from gluttony one of the seven deadly sins.

Last I checked, deadly sin was worse than random passages on sodomy, or am I mistaken?

Participating, promoting and profiting from a deadly sin is acceptable, but Participating and profiting from a lesser sin is not?

a reply to: Annee

The division was created by a society who derided people of different persuasions. However these divisions have broken down in most of society, and there is a MUCH greater tolerance of peoples differences today. This was brought about by campaigns. They are now an accepted societal group and have integrated.

For some reason many members of this group still feel the need to define themselves by this orientation. My point is - Why? The only difference is who they are sexually attracted to. Why is this something that deserves any special recognition or treatment?

originally posted by: PaddyInf
For some reason many members of this group still feel the need to define themselves by this orientation. My point is - Why? The only difference is who they are sexually attracted to. Why is this something that deserves any special recognition or treatment?

Do they?

Yes, why? Why was no complaint ever made in 17 years against this cab driver from a hetero couple kissing in the back seat? And don't try to tell me it didn't happen.

Probably because he never said anything or objected to a hetero couple kissing in the back seat.

Who called who out? Who made who "special"?

a reply to: Annee

My point is that a group of people who have spent many years (rightly) demanding the same status as the rest of society are done a disservice when the very thing they were discriminated for is used as a defence.

How do you know that he never demanded a "straight" couple stop kissing in his cab? You don't and neither do I. I do know that this makes some people uncomfortable and that they should be allowed to voice this without being labeled as a bigot.

a reply to: PaddyInf

How do you know that he never demanded a "straight" couple stop kissing in his cab? You don't and neither do I. I do know that this makes some people uncomfortable and that they should be allowed to voice this without being labeled as a bigot.

I am sure he have done that many times in his 17 years as a taxicab driver. He have seen crap that most of us do not ever want to see. Watch Taxicab Confessions show and you'll understand.

The thing is that he threatened to kick them out of his taxicab. After 17 years of seeing crap and he decided that this one is bothering him?

edit - $10k is too much for him to pay for that tho.

a reply to: Annee

Not to be nit picky, but um, can you give me one good reason why a straight couple might make a big stink about it?

It's,

A: A reasonable request

and

B: As a straight couple with no basis with which to insist on discrimination, especially as it's a completely reasonable request.

It's only because the couple was gay that a big deal could be made of it or would be. I suppose it's possible a black straight or mixed race straight couple might complain he was a racist for doing so if he did it to them, but I don't see it likely.

It's the sexual nature of kissing that makes it so open to being treated as an attack on gays for telling them to stop in his cab or get out.

Also, if a straight couple were to complain he requested they stop kissing they'd be,

One: Not honestly taken seriously, cause this whole thing is frankly ridiculous

Two: Have no case in the first place, there's nothing wrong with requesting people not engage in PDA while in your personal domain.

Three: As straights are a non discriminated group in this country, there's no reason for the idea that they are being discriminated against to pop into their heads at this request. In fact at worst they'd likely think this guy was a prude religious nutbag and stop and just go along with it for the rest of the ride because it's not worth getting another cab. Then once out of the car laugh at and talk # about the cabby as they go about their day.

Main point being, the likeliness that any straight couple ever being asked to stop kissing by this guy would ever see the light of day or be heard about is quite literally next to none.

originally posted by: PaddyInf
a reply to: Annee

My point is that a group of people who have spent many years (rightly) demanding the same status as the rest of society are done a disservice when the very thing they were discriminated for is used as a defence.

How do you know that he never demanded a "straight" couple stop kissing in his cab? You don't and neither do I. I do know that this makes some people uncomfortable and that they should be allowed to voice this without being labeled as a bigot.

I know what your point is.

LGBT are not the ones making themselves stand out. It is the anti-gay crowd that is making it an issue.

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: Annee

Not to be nit picky, but um, can you give me one good reason why a straight couple might make a big stink about it?

Human nature and the law of average.

Cabbies lawyer claims he's had a perfect 17 year record.

With his claim of he keeps a decency standard in his cab - - - in 17 years he didn't do the same to a hetero couple?

And by human nature - - a hetero couple would not complain?

Of course they would.

originally posted by: Puppylove

It's only because the couple was gay that a big deal could be made of it or would be. I suppose it's possible a black straight or mixed race straight couple might complain he was a racist for doing so if he did it to them, but I don't see it likely.

I was a customer service manager. It doesn't take much for some people to complain.

I can honestly tell you, churches are the worst, they are rude and mean, and think you owe them something. Hated dealing with anything religious.

Don't remember any cab companies or cab drivers. Did have some truckers and trucking businesses. They were wonderful.

a reply to: Annee

Sorry but it wasn't the "anti-gay crowd" who made the original complaint. It was the 2 girls who couldn't take being told to knock it off for 10 minutes who made it an issue by using their sexual orientation as the basis for a complaint about a perfectly reasonable request.

And yes this does happen to straight people (and other gay couples too I'm sure ), trust me. They generally just don't make a big deal out of it.

originally posted by: PaddyInf
a reply to: Annee

Sorry but it wasn't the "anti-gay crowd" who made the original complaint.

There wouldn't have been a complaint made if there wasn't an anti-gay Cabbie.

The origin comes from an anti-gay Cabbie objecting to behavior.

The behavior is innocent. The behavior did not ask for "special" rights.

originally posted by: Domo1
This is complete BS. I don't care if the guy was actually being homophobic (and he doesn't appear to have been), this is overkill.

I don't care if it was a quick peck on the lips, it's overkill.

If someone is uncomfortable with PDA and asks you to knock it off, the appropriate response should be to knock it off. Especially in a cab or other closed in space.

CHELSEA — A taxi driver must pay a lesbian couple $10,000 for telling them to either stop smooching in the backseat of his cab or kiss their ride goodbye, a city administrative judge ruled last month.

This next part seems like pure BS.

However, the judge disagreed.

"The more likely reason for [Dahbi] stopping the taxicab and directing Ms. Spitzer and Ms. Thornton to stop kissing was, not that he objected to all kissing, but that he was uncomfortable with two women sharing a romantic kiss," Spooner said his decision.

The more likely reason? Is this a joke? There is no proof, no real evidence but because the judge thinks it's a more likely reason?

After Dahbi gave his ultimatum, Thornton told him that he was discriminating against them because they were gay, according to the decision.

"Don't make me out to be an a--hole," Dahbi responded to her, the decision says.

So if all parties agreed he said that, doesn't that make it seem like the reason was because of the PDA and not because of sexual orientation?

One comment I saw from someone who is apparently a member of the LGBT community said he thought it was disgusting to see people wielding their sexuality as a weapon. I completely agree.

$10,000 for mildly insulting someone (at worst). Thats a pretty hefty fine, especially for someone driving a cab to have to deal with.

www.dnainfo.com... ork/20150410/chelsea/cabbie-ordered-pay-lesbian-couple-10k-for-telling-them-stop-kissing

I would have to tell the Judge to lock me up. I'm not paying you #. I'll never pay you #. I don't give a # what you think or your vile justice system thinks. I'm going to be a problem until the day I die. You'll never tell me what's right and wrong. I'll spit on you when they drag me off.

Break into their cars and steal their #. They want to take your livelihood away, go monster.

Keep taking it and you'll deserve it.

originally posted by: Rocker2013
a reply to: Domo1


If "PDA" offends your sensibilities, I think you're living in the wrong century.

I must be from the wrong century. I find it very offensive. A peck on the lips or warm embrace at the airport.....fine. Locking lips exchanging saliva with hands on thighs while I'm trying to eat or shop for items, nope. Get a room means just that. There's more space and it's uhhh PRIVATE. I am thoroughly disgusted and It's hard to respect people who can't control their sexual desires in public. Would you think it's OK at the opera or a visit to the white house? If not, don't do it in public around others. Then you'll be respected.

a reply to: Annee

I just lost a huge major post by slipping and hitting some random button, sigh... so I'll just try and much shorter version.


1st point was,

I disagree you'd ever hear anything about this from someone straight, it's not media worthy and frankly complaining your cabby asked you to stop kissing is for most people embarrassing. It's only recently that hate crimes towards the majority is getting any real traction. For example, rape and abuse and harassment towards men by women is beginning to become more recognized, which as I experienced while young and "male" I appreciate.

2nd point was,

As a member of the LGBT community I appreciate you want to help, I get that, we need all the help we can get, but frankly when we or anyone else defends this and thinks lawsuits like this are alright, it does us more harm than good. I'm honestly saddened by how few realize that. It gives bigots the fuel they need to point out how out of touch with reality we are, and how quick we are to destroy others for even the most minor sleight.

3rd point was,

There's still real crimes happening to the LGBT community, rape, murder, hiring problems (keeping a job as transgender is one thing, but try getting one), ect. Things far more important than the occasional bigot. Which frankly, if it's to the point where the only thing we have to complain about is some cabby requesting we quit with the PDA while in his cab, then it's time to break out the champagne and celebrate because we've won. In a continually more progressive society, if that's the case all that's needed to combat them is time, as they're a dying breed in their death throws.

4th point, and the most important one in my opinion,

4A: We've lost our best tools to fighting social injustice (or as I suspect the bigots and government have wised up and figured out the power of a good extremist plant) the tools that Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. used so effectively. The power of truly peaceful protesting and marches. See if you can truly protest and march peacefully, if you can bring to light the crimes against you without hate, vitriol and crazy lawsuits, while those against you continue spewing hate and doing their crimes, you both give them no ammunition to use against you, while at the same time causing them to hang themselves and make their bigotry and hatred as clear as day for all to see. You make the hate and bigotry undeniable, and the wrongs unarguable.

4B: When we make a big deal out of every petty grievance, when we throw mud as much as our enemies do, when we seek vengeance over justice, we come out the other side looking just as bad as they are. It's this I argue against, I have to, not enough of us are, and we need to be seen, because if we're not, then that dirty muddy side of us is all anyone knows. The crazy lawsuits, the vitriol, and our oversensitivity to even the smallest slight is all anyone knows. If I don't make a stand against those on our side, who often without realizing they are, harm our side, even if trying to do right, then it means no one is working to counter the damage that is done. It means no one sees those of us who care about what's just and right above and beyond all else, that not all of us are petty, and that some of us see the bigger picture. That when our side does wrong, that when laws and rules unjustly work in our favor, that some of us care, that it's not just us verses them, that we truly do care about what's right whether it's crimes one way or the other. It's necessary we police our own, it's the only way we don't all come out hypocrites pretending our own # doesn't stink.

Conclusion:

What we have here is a minor grievance, we have mud being thrown in both directions, we have a crazy fine, and situation where whether anything really wrong occurred is murky at best. So doing anything besides speaking against this crazy fine, and recognizing how minor a grievance this really is, is shooting the cause in the foot. It makes us look as bad as the other side. It makes us look like petty monsters willing to throw anyone under the bus for even the smallest of slights, not to mention make us look seriously crazy when we refuse to acknowledge that being asked not to not engage in PDA in someones immediate presence is a reasonable request.

That being said, I do think that there's nothing wrong with PDA myself. I've committed my fair share of it. I personally think that anyway we look at it the cabby was a bit of a prude at best, and is likely rather repressed as many highly religious nutjobs are. But it is still an completely reasonable request, and without proof, is a nondiscriminatory one, as by his religion, he should in theory have the same issues with a straight couple doing so in his cab.

Heh, the post isn't that much shorter after all...