Is it okay for the rights of one religious groups to supercede that of citizens? Should Muslims who have an issue with dog's be allowed to refuse service to those with eye seeing dogs or even harm dogs?

I don't understand it. Time and time again we are hearing reports of what different groups who benefit from the protection of Mainstream Media not reporting on their hate crimes portraying actions progressives "claim" they are opposed to. Are they only opposed to them if it fits their narrative? Must they be a certain color or race? What if they are the people they say are upstanding? In this case muslims.

Why are those who point out the obvious hated and despised rather than the crime of the populace committing the actual evil. It is as if the we are witnessing the Bible verse which states,

Isaiah 5:20

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

Why do you suppose they do this? Is it just following the people they idolize, they leaders they align themselves with or simply all out rebellion to God's ways and protection?

How do animal lovers rectify this? They say they are tolerant and pretend this is only a small segment of this population. Many feel they are unclean and others feel it is an outright sin and indoctrination of western beliefs in which a dog is man's best friend. No matter what your belief and whether you try to respect the beliefs of all muslims, if you are a dog lover you will run into trouble with this one. I don't like it one bit because the one True God believes in caring for all of His creatures and not harming them. Am I saying all muslims do this? No, but many admit it is okay and justify the killing as they Are considered unclean and that it is due to westerners that dog's are called man's best friend. Why is this supported by those who claim to love animals? Not sure what I am missing, but this story says it all.

According to the Washington Times,

A pet rescue operation has saved three puppies from Muslim Brotherhood clutches, after discovering the militant members were dousing the animals with gasoline, setting them on fire and throwing them into the chaos of a Tahrir Square demonstration, as makeshift bombs.

Robyn Urman, a rescuer with the New Jersey group, Pet ResQ Inc, said this isn’t the first time Muslim Brotherhood members had been busted trying to use animals as gasoline-fired bombs, Breitbart reported. And this particular discovery didn’t end well for all the dogs.

The Muslim Brotherhood members were caught near Tahrir pouring gasoline over more than 20 puppies — but only three could be saved.

Ms. Urman’s group described the scene in a release that was reported by Breitbart: “Ten cruel bearded men gathered more than 20 puppies and start[ed] pouring gasoline on them and throw[ing] them at the army. These flying fire balls were puppies that were used as weapon [sic]. We only could save these three poor babies. All are 12 weeks old.”

The group is trying to find homes for the three rescued puppies, which weigh about eight pounds each.

Well that's just the Muslim Brotherhood one might say, this doesn't represent all Muslims. No, but who allowed infiltration of the Muslim Brotherhood into the United States though it has been proven they do deeds like this?

The hate relationship with dogs and many Muslims has been documented. Once again, not saying all, as I do not know all Muslims and I would hope not all would do harm to an animal. In these cases many want nothing to very little to do with dogs.

I believe that is their right, but should their rights extend so far as to interfere with other citizen's rights? What are your thoughts on that?

According to PJ Media,

A Muslim taxi-driver in England, one Abandi Kassim, was recently fined for refusing to take on a blind passenger’s seeing-eye dog because, as Kassim claimed: “For me, it’s about my religion.”

There have been many such cases in the U.S., the UK, and Canada of Muslims refusing to pick up fares with seeing-eye dogs. Many of the Somali taxi drivers who made up three-quarters of the 900 taxi drivers at the Minneapolis airport refused to pick up blind passengers because of their dogs. When forced to do so, some of them simply quit.

In Toronto, a guide dog’s owner was refused taxi service by a Muslim driver. In Saskatchewan, the same problem. In Montreal, in Ottawa, and all across Canada, Muslim drivers have refused service to seeing-eye dogs. In London, in Nottingham, in Reading, and in Tunbridge Wells, taxi drivers have refused service to fares with dogs.

Blind or poorly sighted people with guide dogs have been forced by Muslim bus drivers to get off -- often to calm the hysterical reaction of other Muslim passengers. Much worse, killings of dogs, chiefly by poison, in areas populated mainly by Muslims has been reported in Spain, Sweden, France, and Great Britain.

When researching there are a wide range of reasons you will come across as to why many Muslims hate dogs. There is the story of the following found in (from Sahih Muslim, Book 024, Number 5246) which states,

Gabriel (peace be upon him) made a promise with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) to come at a definite hour; that hour came but he did not visit him. And there was in his hand (in the hand of Allah's Apostle) a staff. He threw it from his hand and said: Never has Allah or His messengers (angels) ever broken their promise. Then he cast a glance (and by chance) found a puppy under his cot and said: 'A'isha, when did this dog enter here? She said: By Allah, I don't know He then commanded and it was turned out. Then Gabriel came and Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said to him: You promised me and I waited for you. but you did not come, whereupon he said: It was the dog in your house which prevented me (to come), for we (angels) do not enter a house in which there is a dog or a picture."

The sounds similar to many Amish beliefs, not regarding dogs, but pictures in the home.

There is also this found in Also; Sahih Muslim, Book 024, Number 5248:
"Then on that very morning he commanded the killing of the dogs until he announced that the dog kept for the orchards should also be killed, but he spared the dog meant for the protection of extensive fields (or big gardens)."

You will come across a lot of bias in regards to black dogs and of course dogs in general for many if not most.

In (Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 54, Number 541)

"Allah's Apostle said, "If somebody keeps a dog, he loses one Qirat (of the reward) of his good deeds everyday, except if he keeps it for the purpose of agriculture or for the protection of livestock. "

In regards to this, I still am not sure how those who defend the beliefs of Muslims rectify this as there are many progressives who are animal and specifically dog lovers.

According to American Thinker,

Muslims refusing service to people with dogs is just the tip of the iceberg.

In the UK, handlers with dogs who sniff out explosives in settings like airports, railways stations, and bus terminals have been taught to tread lightly and be aware of “cultural sensitivities.” That, of course, is code for don’t offend Muslims. Also in the UK, police dogs must wear special booties when entering Muslim homes so as not to offend. In addition, Muslim prisoners are given fresh sheets and clothes after dogs search their cells. The dogs are also not allowed to have any direct contact with prisoners’ Qurans.

Dogs are offensive.

In Scotland, after the police department sent out postcards with their new telephone number on it that featured an adorable puppy sitting on a police officer’s hat, the Muslim community reacted with (wait for it): outrage. The response to this response (wait for it): apology. And I quote: “We did not seek advice from the force's diversity adviser prior to publishing and distributing the postcards. That was an oversight and we apologise for any offence caused.” Heaven forbid anyone make a move without seeking advice from the “diversity advisor!”

Even Obama offended them once!

Offense and outrage. As when Muslims in Mumbai had a fit when a dog that is part of Obama’s security detail arrived with name tags identifying him as “Khan.” Giving a dog a Muslim name was seen as incitement.

When a young Muslim girl in Malaysia was photographed cuddling a puppy at an adoption fair, the picture went viral and the response was swift. Muslims in Malaysia are prohibited from having any contact with dogs because they are considered haram (forbidden).

In a town in Spain where Muslims comprise 20% of the population, large numbers of dogs have been found poisoned. (Mass poisoning of dogs is also taking place in Turkey.) And when non-Muslim residents took their dogs for walks, they were often harassed by Muslims. It got so bad they needed protection. Without enough police to keep them safe, they formed escort patrols so people would not have to walk their dogs alone. Meanwhile, Muslims in the town pressed for regulation of dogs in public spaces and a complete ban on public transportation because the presence of dogs offended them and they claimed it violated their religious freedom.

In Canada, a man was arrested for walking his dog in a public park near where Muslims were having a pro-Palestinian-Jew-hating Al-Quds Day rally. Sometime afterwards the man received a threatening call: “We’re going to kill you, you dirty Jew.”

Offended, outraged, incited, and threatening.

Of course there is a simple dhimmi solution to all of this: Ban dogs. Which is precisely what a Muslim politician in the Netherlands wanted to do when he proposed banning all dogs at The Hague.

If it offends Islam, no one should be able to do it. There is no coexist, no live and let live, no getting along. Because Islam is a totalitarian ideology. And it targets every living thing.

With unbelievable savagery.

In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood used puppies during violent protests by dipping the little pups in gasoline and setting them on fire. (Setting animals on fire is not uncommon in the Islamic world.) Puppies have also been placed in bags and thrown at border police in Jerusalem.

There is evidence of dogs being killed and a story in here of the Muslim Brotherhood lighting puppies on fire. Of 20 puppies a Pet Rescue was only able to save 3. Very sad.

This found on Gate Stone Institute,

This latest canine controversy -- which the Dutch public has greeted with a mix of amusement and outrage -- follows dozens of other Muslim-vs-dog-related incidents in Europe. Critics say it reflects the growing assertiveness of Muslims in Europe as they attempt to impose Islamic legal and religious norms on European society. See more in Sources below.

Please let me know if you believe the rights of one religious group should supercede that of the citizens who have rights in their own country to keep pets, walk them, use them as service dogs and enjoy their company in public?

Sources,

https://pjmedia.com/homeland-security/2017/03/14/why-do-so-many-muslims-hate-dogs/

http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/120729

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/2796/muslims-ban-dogs-europe

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/1/muslim-brotherhood-caught-using-puppies-fire-bombs/

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/10/islam_and_dogs.html