This topic is in the Conspiracies in Religions discussion forum.  (rss)


Woman may not wear veil for license




Topic started on 6-6-2003 @ 05:03 PM by xaos


I have expressed my disapproval with the government over this infringement upon freedom of religion but, as many members prophesied, Sultaana Freeman has lost her lawsuit.

Yahoo Story Link

So much for the constitution... *shrugs*

XAOS



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 6-6-2003 @ 05:07 PM by James the Lesser


What???? It isn't against the constitution! It is a photo ID! You can't Identify the person if they have a mask on! If I wanted to get my drivers license photo while wearing a ski mask, and they said I couldn't, is that against the constitution?

Besides, masks impair your vision, which you need for driving, so shouldn't wear it anyways. DUH! How about I just blindfold you, cut two tiny slits in it, let you out on the freeway, then count how many seconds before you crash. Same difference!!!!

Besides, her husband has 8 drivers licenses, all in different names. Think that is suspicious or what?



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 6-6-2003 @ 05:11 PM by Leveller


It has nothing whatsoever to do with freedom.

They haven't stopped this woman from practicing her religion.
They've stopped her from driving a car.


Big difference.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 6-6-2003 @ 05:12 PM by xaos


I'm not arguing it anymore. Just posting the link to a story that some in the Religous forum might find intresting.

XAOS



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 6-6-2003 @ 05:54 PM by JediMaster


Yes!!! I am so glad she lost her law suit. I mean its just a ID for driving a car, and its not like its your right to drive its a privilage.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 6-6-2003 @ 05:56 PM by dragonrider


Your right, the government should not have the right to infringe on someones religion.

However, driving is NOT a right, but a privaledge. As such, she gets to play by the rules.

If her religion is that important to her, the government should not interfere. And she should not be issued a drivers license.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 6-6-2003 @ 06:29 PM by Illmatic67


Everyone is happy because it was a Muslim who lost this lawsuit. Had it been any other person other than a Muslim, people wouldn't be so happy and the media wouldn't be destroying this story with over air-play.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 6-6-2003 @ 07:58 PM by James the Lesser


Il67, not true. If a KKK(protestant group, made by WASPs) was told they couldn't wear their bed sheet on their head for their driver license, people would find that great. And protestants are a branch of christianity. Same with the White Knights of Katholic Krictianity.(Catholic KKK)

Or a jew couldn't wear, uh, do they have any groups that cover their face???? But you get the point.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 7-6-2003 @ 02:33 PM by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf


Id have to agree. besides, as a Muslim woman, what is she doing driving? Thats one of the reasons they dont let women drive in saudi, the veil obstructs the view of traffic. As such, because he viel is a hazard to people around her while driving, she should not wear it. And since a drivers licence is just that, something for driving, a privilage, not a right. Thus, her rights have not been violated.

Now if say it was for something mandatory, like, an id card, then her rights have somewhat been violated. Although her face should be visible for an id card, if its mandatory, then she should be allowed the veil.

If its a face viel, then she really doesnt have to wear it anyway. Muslim women just wear head scarves here. The viel is mainly for middle eastern countries where women cannot be seen at all.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 7-6-2003 @ 02:53 PM by Leveller



Originally posted by Illmatic67
Everyone is happy because it was a Muslim who lost this lawsuit. Had it been any other person other than a Muslim, people wouldn't be so happy and the media wouldn't be destroying this story with over air-play.



Not true.
If she truly were a Muslim she would have given up her right to drive instead of going to court.
Nobody should test their faith against a political system.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 7-6-2003 @ 03:53 PM by xaos


Good job JTL. You just compared Islam to the KKK...

XAOS



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 7-6-2003 @ 04:26 PM by James the Lesser


No, I compared Islam to a branch of Christianity.

But yeah, kinda I guess a comparision. In this country anyways. Where if you don't consume, conform, obey, you are bad. So the ones who don't and fail, the people celebrate that failure.



reply to this post:   copyright & usage 










Top Topics Right Now:



Active Topics Right Now:



ATS MIX Podcasts:











Newest Topics:
































ATS Server: www4.theabovenetwork.com
Powered by AboveTop:Board v2.3
Header data processed in 0.002 seconds
Page processed in 0.067 seconds
6 total database queries (1)









The Above Top Secret Conspiracy Community Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.





thread
Forums Directory