The ongoing bickering over the location of ETOH manufacturing and distribution facilities in UC up and coming locales should be an opportunity for us to knowledgeably, critically, and judciously discuss both land use and political correctness. I thought the following two articles highlight how the upward spiraling application of PC threatens the bedrock of durability for our extraordinary democracy -the balancing of rugged individualist freedoms with the moderations enabling the good of the greater society. In the first article at what point do we allow minority religious freedom to violate majority civil rights not to mention commerce? In the second article the use of the word "gay" is socially insensitive and actionable, while suggesting a child's Mormon family practices polygamy is not.
Back to local self-determination, the last major change to local zoning by legislation that I remember, excluding banning vendors, was app 1980 and south of Baltimore. Perhaps the changing nature of the community and the expansion of the University should motivate those vested in the community to revisit local land planning practices, not just let politicians rewrite the zoning code. _http://www.planphilly.com/_ (http://www.planphilly.com/) Ciao, Craig 1) October 16, 2006 – 12:02 AM A two-tiered airport taxi system could lead to 'Chapter Two' By Katherine Kersten, Star Tribune Imagine you're returning from a trip with a bottle of French wine to celebrate your wedding anniversary. At the airport, you drag your bags out to the taxi stand in the cold breeze. As the cab pulls up, you hoist your suitcases, eager to get home. But when the driver spots your wine, he shakes his head emphatically. The Qur'an prohibits him from accepting passengers with alcohol, he tells you. OK, so you'll take the next cab. But the next driver waves you off, and the next. Scenes like this have played out hundreds of times at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport over the last few years. About three-fourths of the 900 taxi drivers at the airport are Somali, many of them Muslim. In September, the Star Tribune reported that one flight attendant had been refused by five drivers, because she had wine in her suitcase. Taxi drivers who refuse a customer, except for safety reasons, must go to the end of the taxi line. They face a potential three-hour wait for the next fare. Muslim drivers asked for an exemption, and officials of the Metropolitan Airports Commission proposed color-coded lights on cab roofs to indicate whether the driver would accept a passenger carrying alcohol. But last week, the MAC announced that it would not adopt the new policy. Officials cited an overwhelmingly negative public reaction, among other reasons. "I've had over 500 e-mails and calls, and not one supported the change," said Patrick Hogan, MAC spokesman. Why? Aren't Americans accustomed to granting modest legal accommodations to groups or individuals on the basis of their religious beliefs? For many people, Hogan speculates, the issue may have been bigger than drivers' reluctance to transport alcohol. "I think people were afraid there would be a Chapter Two." In some other cities, "Chapter Two" has already begun. Muslim cab drivers elsewhere, for example, have refused to transport blind customers with seeing-eye dogs, which they say their religion considers unclean. On Oct. 6, the Daily Mail of London reported that two cab drivers had been fined for rejecting blind customers. In Melbourne, Australia, "at least 20 dog-aided blind people have lodged discrimination complaints" after similarly being refused service, the Herald Sun reported. In Minneapolis, Muslim taxi drivers have repeatedly refused to transport Paula Hare, who is transgendered, KMSP-TV, Channel 9, reported this month. Daniel Pipes, director of the Middle East Forum, wrote about the MAC's two-light proposal in the New York Sun on the day its rejection was announced. While the proposal seemed like a common-sense compromise, he wrote, on a societal level, it has massive and troubling implications. Government sanction of a two-tiered cab system would amount to an acknowledgement that Shari'a, or Islamic law, is relevant to a routine commercial transaction in the Twin Cities. The MAC, a government agency, would be officially approving a signal that differentiates those who follow Islamic law from those who don't. And what if Muslim drivers demand the right not to transport women wearing short skirts or tank tops, or unmarried couples? After taxis, why not buses, trains and planes? Eventually, in some respects, our society could be divided along religious lines. The negative reaction to the two-tiered solution does not spring from hostility to Muslims. Muslims have thrived in America. On average, they are well-integrated and have higher incomes and more education than other Americans, according to Peter Mandaville, director of the Center for Global Studies at George Mason University in Virginia. America offers Muslims an important advantage beyond economic opportunity. We are a more religious people than Europeans, and so more respectful of religious belief. The first freedom guaranteed in our Bill of Rights, after all, is the free exercise of religion. But the issue at the MAC seems to raise nagging "Chapter Two"-related questions. It suggests that -- if we don't handle such matters right -- down the road could lie a legally sanctioned religious separatism that is incompatible with America's unifying civic vision. ©2006 Star Tribune. All rights reserved 2) ‘That’s so gay’ prompts student lawsuit Student sent to principal’s office insists it was not a homophobic putdown The Associated Press Updated: 9:41 p.m. ET Feb 28, 2007 SANTA ROSA, Calif. - When a few classmates razzed Rebekah Rice about her Mormon upbringing with questions such as, "Do you have 10 moms?" she shot back: "That's so gay."Those three words landed the high school freshman in the principal's office and resulted in a lawsuit that raises this question: When do playground insults used every day all over America cross the line into hate speech that must be stamped out? After Rice got a warning and a notation in her file, her parents sued, claiming officials at Santa Rosa's Maria Carillo High violated their daughter's First Amendment rights when they disciplined her for uttering a phrase "which enjoys widespread currency in youth culture," according to court documents. Testifying last week about the 2002 incident, Rice, now 18, said that when she uttered those words, she was not referring to anyone's sexual orientation. She said the phrase meant: "That's so stupid, that's so silly, that's so dumb." But school officials say they took a strict stand against the putdown after two boys were paid to beat up a gay student the year before. "The district has a statutory duty to protect gay students from harassment," the district's lawyers argued in a legal brief. "In furtherance of this goal, prohibition of the phrase 'That's so gay' ... was a reasonable regulation." Superior Court Judge Elaine Rushing plans to issue a ruling in the non-jury trial after final written arguments are submitted in April. Her gag order prevents the two sides from discussing the case. A confusing set of terms Derogatory terms for homosexuality have long been used as insults. But the landscape has become confusing in recent years as minority groups have tried to reclaim terms like "queer," "ghetto" and the n-word. In recent years, gay rights advocates and educators have tried teaching students that it is hurtful to use the word "gay" as an all-purpose term for something disagreeable. At Berkeley High School, a gay student club passed out buttons with the words "That's so gay" crossed out to get their classmates to stop using them. Rick Ayers, a retired teacher who helped compile and publish the "Berkeley High School Slang Dictionary," a compendium of trendy teen talk circa 2001, said educating students about offensive language is preferable to policing their speech. "I wouldn't be surprised if this girl didn't even know the origin of that term," he said. "The kids who get caught saying it will claim it's been decontextualized, but others will say, `No, you know what that means.' It's quite talked about." Rice's parents, Elden and Katherine Rice, also claim the public high school employed a double-standard because, they say, administrators never sought to shield Rebekah from teasing based on Mormon stereotypes. Daughter singled out, parents say In addition, the Rices say their daughter was singled out because of the family's conservative views on sexuality. They are seeking unspecified damages and want the disciplinary notation expunged from Rebekah's school record. Eliza Byard, deputy executive director of the New York-based Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, said nearly nine out of 10 gay students her organization surveyed in 2005 reported hearing "That's so gay" or "You're so gay" frequently. "It bothers them a lot," Byard said. "As odd or funny as the phrase sounds, imagine what it feels like to be in a setting where you consistently hear it used to describe something undesirable or stupid, and it also refers to you." She said it is OK to discipline students for using the phrase after efforts have been made to educate them. "The job of a school is to deal proactively and consistently with all forms of bullying, name-calling and harassment," she said. Jordan Lorence, an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian legal organization, agreed "That's so gay" carries a negative meaning and said he would not want his children to say it. But he said formal discipline is not the answer. "Reasonable people should say, `Let's put a stop to this kind of search-and-destroy mission by school officials for everything that is politically incorrect,'" he said. © 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. <BR><BR><BR>**************************************<BR> AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.
