Skip to comments.Poll FReep! People to remove religious clothing for their driver's license photos? Yes No
Posted on 06/03/2010 9:59:54 PM PDT by DogByte6RER
FReep This Poll!
Should the DMV have the right to ask people to remove religious clothing for their driver's license photos?
Go to the link provided on this post. Scroll down a bit on the Fox 5 San Diego homepage and look for the poll on the right hand side right above "Chrissy's Outfit of the Day"
Vote your choice.
(Excerpt) Read more at fox5sandiego.com ...
Current poll results ...
Yes - 86.4%
No - 13.6%
(Results not scientific)
Yes and no. If you’re referring to burqas and other items that hide your face or identity, then yes. But if you’r referring to something like a Sikh turban, then no.
Why even have a photo if they burqa-up. It’s pathetic^insane.
Hear hear. I was about to make the same point about yarmulkes (sp?). You KNOW a “yes” vote could easily be twisted to be proof of rank anti-Semitism.
The question should have been “...religious clothing that covers their head/identity...”, since identity is the whole point of the picture. Then it would be even more than the 89.9 that it already is.
There is a difference between the burka and mormon holy underwear.
I voted yes, but ofcourse it only apply to stuff that hide your face <your identity
Perhaps Fox should hire less crack heads.
The dispute, viewed honestly is over clothing that obscures the head and face, with no exemption for religion.
Not over all religious garb.
I have no use for idiot leftists who try to restate the old “Have you stopped beating your wife?” meme and think its cute.
Speaking of fashion...
Are you kidding?! They made me move my hair away from my face when I renewed my license! BTTT
Holy underwear? What’s the average number of holes?
Her face was fully visible; only her hair was covered. But it’s a case of the ‘camel’s nose under the tent.’ It’s all or nothing, and they will take advantage of any concessions and will advance to the next level.
Wrong “holy”. ;)
The question is poorly written. There are many obvious alternate answers.
The question should add...if it obscures the person’s image. The way it is written, I can’t answer it.
Changed my mind. I voted.
Now 92% YES and 8% NO.
Either only racist old white people voted OR the poll wasn’t in 380 languages to reflect CA’s diverse population./s
Trick question in a false poll.
The case in point is that of a mooslim female who felt her rights were violated because she was asked to remove her scarf for the required picture to obtain a drivers license.
Mooslim females aren’t allowed to drive! It’s in their rules, look it up. Besides that, they’re property and aren’t allowed to talk either! She should have had the sharia police called on her the minute she walked into the DMV! Splash some acid on that bitch she’s done! I divorce you, I divorce you, I divorce you! There!
Sheesh, come on people! Next!
Yeah, any article that obscures a person’s identity, religious or not.
I have to take my glasses off when the DMV takes my beautiful photograph. Or I suppose I must since I have never refused to do as they ask. So how is that different than taking off something that hides your face or your head?
No, send the ragheads back to their sand box.
Just don’t give them licenses...it will be harder for them to drive explosives to a location!!!
Yarmulkes, turbans, and the like are one thing. Burqas are qutie another. Unfortunately, I don’t think theSupreme Court would permit a law that specifically targeted burqaas.