| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Home Front | |
| Muslim Woman Cannot Wear Veil in Driver’s License Photo | |
| 2003-06-06 | |
A Florida judge ruled Friday that a Muslim woman cannot wear a veil in her driver's license photo. Prosecutors had argued that allowing people to cover all but their eyes in their ID pictures could allow potential terrorists to hide their identities. After hearing three days of testimony last week, Circuit Judge Janet C. Thorpe ruled that the state has a compelling interest in protecting the public, and that having photo identification was essential to that interest. Thorpe also said Sultaana Freeman's right to free exercise of religion would not be infringed by having to show her face on her license.
Yes! | |
| Posted by:Steve |
| #8 "arrangements could be made to have Freeman photographed with only women present to allay her concerns about modesty" CRAP. These are the little throwaway concessions that are cited in the NEXT case as precedent. YOU try telling your DMV or Secretary of State's office that you can only have your next driver's license photo taken by Anglican ministers, or stockbrokers, or dolphins, or whatever you fancy YOUR peers to be. You'll be walking to work the next day. Yes, my DMV is always eager to hear about MY special arrangements. CRAP. I'm delighted this nasty little faker didn't pull off her scam... but this is still an incremental victory for the enemy, and you bet it'll be cited soon in something equally ridiculous. |
| Posted by: Mark IV 2003-06-06 23:14:25 |
#7 argued that Islamic law has exceptions that allow women to expose their faces if it serves a public good Did I miss something? Since when does Islamic law have anything to do with state or federal laws? Why are these assholes given any leg to stand on? I know they hate it, but we don't live under their backward, stupid, cruel Shari'ah law. Stop giving it legitimacy! |
| Posted by: Celissa 2003-06-06 20:05:29 |
| #6 This might sound really bias but a case for beating your female children might be made on religious grounds as well. I'm sure the beatings are restricted to just wives and servants. |
| Posted by: Anonymous Coward 2003-06-06 19:34:06 |
| #5 Go to http://court.co.macon.il.us/caseinfo.htm and enter "freeman, sultaana" into the search box. It's fun! |
| Posted by: JDB 2003-06-06 17:47:27 |
| #4 You can probably bet the house on an appeal. ACLU Boy and Burqa Girl continue their lonely quest for "justice". This is about "religious freedom" after all. HA! |
| Posted by: tu3031 2003-06-06 15:02:35 |
| #3 NO! you can't take my daughters veil off so you can look for the bruises I put on her! You imperialist dog! Respect my religion, it's the "Religion of peace" |
| Posted by: Mike N. 2003-06-06 14:07:52 |
| #2 ON Fax news today....cant tell you how much this pisses me off... During the hearing, Freeman conceded that she has had her face photographed without a veil since she started wearing one in 1997. She had a mug shot taken after her arrest in 1998 on a domestic battery charge involving one of twin 3-year-old sisters who were in her foster care. The children were removed from her home, according to records from the Decatur (Ill.) Police Services. Child welfare workers told investigators in Decatur that Freeman and her husband had used their concerns about religious modesty to hinder them from looking for bruises on the girls, according to the Decatur Police records. |
| Posted by: Fed UP 2003-06-06 13:50:08 |
| #1 So is that ACLU scumbag attorney going to appeal and waste more of the public's purse, or is he going to probe around in another spon on society's soft underbelly for another opportunity to poke with a dagger? |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2003-06-06 13:46:32 |