Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Angel Heart, Jul 16, 2007.
Well rules are rules. If nobody was fired, then nobody should care. I dont see why the opressive symbol of the head sheet is so important to muslims though. Can they read the quran? Is it really necessary to cover up the face if it was not allah who told them to do this, it was males needing to feel dominant over the female.
anything that keeps one from being identified is not acceptable, including the above and sunglasses.
I agree with you Kathy.
A DL is a priveledge and not a right.
If they dont want to show their hair for ID purposes then they need to forgo a DL.
It must be a what "God" wanted them to scarafice.
It's said to be that no man should look upon another mans woman. That's what it comes from. They can take them off when in a room full of just females. Why not make it where only females take their photos? How ever we must have a record of what they actually look at for them to drive.
The distinction was made that the FACE can not be covered or obscured. a scraf is not a problem in my opinion. More importantly the women in question did as asked and then went through proper channels to see about changing the license.
The State took no action against any employees, so no problem.
because the chance of a policeman being male is pretty high? Our institutions should not have to change for them or any one group.
I really reacted rashly before.
I was thinking of strickly ID purposes , when I did I forgot the fact that hair is not a good indication of identity.
Your hair can be changed dramatically in no time at all.
Covered or not covered hair really makes no differance.
As long as the face is NOT obscured it would make no differance.
In thinking it over more deeply I retract my previous stand.
The question your position raises however is whether, if enacted, it constitutes an act by the government which, directly or indirectly, prohibits the free exercise of religion. Now, the Constitution is somewhat murky, but on this point it's VERY explicit, and it's a BIG no no.
what timing Mr Conley,
I do still stand that it is a privledge and not a right to drive.
If one was to try and say get a DL with a burqua on that would be tough luck for the Burqua wearer.
Now as an American I cant think of anything they would be forced to take it off for as an American and should not be forced to.
This would be part of the problem with a forced ID to vote.
Separate names with a comma.