Muslim Woman Sues To Get Florida ID Card

WKMG TV ^

[Rummyfan]

Lady, you have been brainwashed big time!

[Imagine]

Islam is NOT a religion
– it is a CULT OF HATE

ACTION PLAN:

1) Assemble fleet of troop transport vessels in port cities; 2) move, via bus and/or train all US dwelling Muslims (immigrant or American Born Muslims ABM) to said ports; 3) Load all muslims onto ships, send forthwith to any middle east muslim country; 4) Bulldoze all mosques and islamic schools in US;
5) Concurrently, close borders with military; 6) Pop any American brewed beer, gloat over job well accomplished and relax.

[MortMan]

She will win. The problem is that Florida is one of those states that will issue a license without a photo. In the place of the photo is the statement "valid without photo." Florida routinely issues these to, among others, military members who claim Florida as a home of record and need to get a license renewed. They send in their money and a new license is issed without a photo attached. What makes her any different? If they do it for one they have to do it for another.

Not so fast - most such instances are prescribed using words that require the person to be legally a resident while living and working outside the state/area/country/etc. I don't know about FLA, but I would suspect that the law/resulation is worded such that one can only get a license sans photo in the case of enforced absence caused by such things as military duty.

Having said that, however, I wouldn't want to bet too heavily on her winning or losing the battle over her veil.

[Elkiejg]

Please don't communicate with me any more. If you have married a Saudi that's all I need to know. My knowledge of Islam does not come from watching television - I lived in Saudi Arabia for two years and Turkey for one, so I do have some direct experience with Muslim societies. When your husband absconds to the KSA with your child, then talk to me about the wonders of Islam.

GOOD FOR YOU!! I wanted to say somewhat the same to her - re: married to a Saudi. But you have the knowledge to back up your statement - thanks.

[OmeSaara]

First of all, the fact that my husband is Saudi has nothing at all to do with my beliefs on the matter. I felt this way BEFORE I EVEN MET HIM, back when I was a Presbyterian. To assume that people are bad only because of where they come from is called RACISM.

Secondly, anyone who bases their knowledge on Islam solely on what they know from living in Saudi or in Turkey is severely misled, to say the least. I've already mentioned the fact that their governments are corrupt and follow a warped perception of Islam.

Third...I am sick to tears of people who claim that "good Muslims" have done nothing to renounce the 9/11 attacks. We're damned if we do, damned if we don't. There isn't a day that goes by that I don't hear about some high-ranking Muslim official or Muslim celebrity fervently condemning the attacks, and just about every decent Muslim world leader has done the same. I don't ask for America's redneck hicks to apologize every time a black person is beat up, so why should I apologize for something I neither have anything to do with nor would ever CARE to be associated with?

Fourth, I never said the government was wrong in what they are asking of Sultaana Freeman. I merely said that if they are going to force her to do it, they need to enforce it on EVERYONE...including those Pentecostals in Nebraska and Colorado whose religious beliefs say they can't have their pictures taken, those convicted drunk drivers in Florida, and all those other people I mentioned who DON'T have to have their pictures on their licenses. That's not too much to ask...that's EQUALITY.

Fifth...I don't care to be a character witness for Ms. Freeman. I did do my homework on this case, and I found out that she pled guilty to assault on one of the two foster children under her care, and that is horrible for anyone to harm a child. I don't care who they are. But the fact of the matter is no matter what she did and what she is, she is still entitled to the same rights as the rest of us, like it or not. She served her punishment for that crime, as well she should have. But my point still remains...who would you rather have driving behind you...her or a convicted drunk driver?

Sixth...don't bring my daughter into this. She is a happy and healthy little girl, and she is being brought up in a stable household full of love with two working parents who love each other very much...how many kids in America can say that nowadays? Not many...believe me...I teach high school, so I know.

Seventh...I frankly don't care if you listen to me or not. Yes, this is a free country, and you are all entitled to your beliefs, just as I am. I choose to believe differently than you, and that is fine. I'm not trying to convince you that is right...I am trying to point out the other side so that we can have a friendly, intelligent debate on the matter, but if some people would much rather resort to name-calling and personal insults, that is your business, not mine.

Eighth: I wish I knew where some people got their warped view of Islam. What propaganda are you reading? When did Mohammed ever rape a 9-year-old girl? When did he PERSONALLY slaughter thousands of Jews? Wow...he must have been a busy man. When you can back that up with factual references, I will address it, but until then it's just talk. I could say anything I want to about anyone, that doesn't make it true.

Have a beautiful day. Thanks to the people who make valid and intelligent responses...I love getting the other point of view to consider.
MA'ASALAMA

[OmeSaara]

Incidentally, I wanted to apologize because my last post says "To elkiej" and that whole post was not intended entirely for that person...as already brought up, I am new here, and I wasn't quite sure how to simply reply to the group, so I replied to the last message. I'm sorry about that!

[OmeSaara]

"When your husband absconds to the KSA with your child, then talk to me about the wonders of Islam."

What the heck does this have to do with Islam? Men who kidnap their daughters and run away like cowards to KSA where their mothers can't reach them aren't acting as Muslims! In the event of a divorce, Islamic shariah dictates that the mother shall have custody of all minor children under the age of 10 unless she is physically unable to care for them or unwilling to take them, or unless a court has found her an unsuitable mother. Then, once the children are of an age to make their own decision (usually around the age of 10), they are asked whether they wish to remain with their mother or stay with their father. THAT is how it's SUPPOSED to be done. Why do you judge all Muslims based on the actions of the few who don't follow it the way they should and just so happen to make the news? The best among us rarely if ever make the news. If I were to judge every group based on the horrible few I see on the news, I'd think all white men were UniBombers and Branch Davidians and OK City bombers...I'd think all Germans were Nazis...I'd think all black men were rapists and held up liquor stores. BUT I DON'T. I have the common sense to realize that just because a few of that type of person does something wrong, that doesn't mean they ALL do it that way!

And I'm brainwashed? Sure, THAT makes a lot more sense than I just wanted to find out information for myself so I read about it and researched it and came to my own conclusions. Sure...someone kidnapped me and brainwashed me, like Elizabeth Smart. Yep. That's what happened. COME ON. I love it how when someone disagrees with someone else, they automatically jump to the conclusion that that other person is brainwashed, just because they believe differently. Like you must be SO RIGHT on EVERYTHING that there is NO POSSIBLE WAY anyone could have a different point of view. Hey, I'm GLAD you don't think the same way I do...the world would be a pretty boring place if everyone was just like me or just like you. I know I wouldn't want to live in a place like that...how dull. Kudos to you for having a different opinion. That is your right, and nobody on here can say that I have ever or will ever in my life say that people don't have the right to their own opinions. BUT SO DO I.

[OmeSaara]

You know, I was just thinking about something...

If I were to follow the logic of many people on this forum, I'd be jumping to a LOT of conclusions:

Let's see...
When I was Presbyterian, these two guys from my church used to go out all the time and smoke a whole lot of pot, and then they had sex with several different girls (pre-marital, of course). And our pastor had an extramarital affair with his secretary. SO under the logic displayed here, all Presbyterians are pot-smoking sex-crazed cheaters.

I used to be friends with a Methodist guy. He was gay. He had sex with guys he met online. He even was engaged to a girl and led her on and cheated on her with 5 guys behind her back, then dumped her 4 months before the wedding because he had to be "true to himself". So, using the same logic, all Methodists are homosexuals.

One of my college roommates was Jewish. A very beautiful girl, and she knew it. She'd show her body and breasts to anyone who asked. She even posed for PlayBoy. And there wasn't a weekend went by that she wasn't plastered out of her mind and having sex with God knows how many guys. So, again...same logic applies, hence all Jews are drunk sluts.

Do you see how ridiculous this reasoning is?!

[FreedomCalls]

I don't know about FLA, but I would suspect that the law/resulation is worded such that one can only get a license sans photo in the case of enforced absence caused by such things as military duty.

I could be wrong. Someone pointed out to me that although Florida does issue photo-less driver's licenses to military living out of state, the licenses are invalid unless accompanied by an current military ID card which DOES have a photo of the person on it.

[george wythe]

Even if she loses at the trial level, this lady has a good shot at prevailing on appeal.

In 1984, the U.S. Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in Quaring v. Peterson, 728 F.2d 1121 (1984), heard a case in which a Christian woman requested a non-photo driver's license because she considered the photograph to be a "graven image" forbidden by her religious beliefs. The court held:

(1) Nebraska driver's licensing requirement that applicants submit to having color photograph taken for affixing on the license unconstitutionally burdened subject applicant's free exercise of her sincerely held religious beliefs, supported by historical and biblical tradition and implemented in her daily life, that the taking of her photograph would violate the Second Commandment's express forbidding of the making of any graven image or likeness of anything in creation, and
(2) requiring that applicant receive her license without complying with photograph requirement was reasonable accommodation of her religion and did not violate establishment clause.

The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed this ruling in Jensen v. Quaring, 472 U.S. 478 (1985).

The two other cases directly on point are Dennis v. Charnes, 646 F. Supp. 158 (D. Colo. 1986), and Bureau of Motor Vehicles v. Pentecostal House of Prayer, Inc, 380 N.E.2d 1225 (Ind. 1978). Both cases found the right to a non-photo driver's license under religious exemption.

The Colorado case, also a federal case, is Dennis v. Charnes, 646 F. Supp. 158 (D. Colo. 1986). Once again, the plaintiff was a Christian who objected to photographs on the ground that they were graven images. The Colorado district court found for the plaintiff and granted him a religious exemption.

The Indiana case, although is a state case, is the earliest case I've seen. The case is Bureau of Motor Vehicles of The State of Indiana v. Pentecostal House of Prayer, Inc, 269 Ind. 361 (1978). Like the other cases, it deals with a Christian who believed that photographs were graven images and didn't want a photo driver's license. The Indiana Supreme Court upheld this right.

Please note that the US Supreme Court has reversed itself many times, therefore if the Florida case goes to the US Supreme Court, this previous precedent can be overturned or sidestepped by a narrow ruling.

[Political Junkie Too]

A question nobody has asked is if it is even safe driving with that little slit for viewing. How's her peripheral vision inside that veil?

-PJ

[Rummyfan]

I'm glad I don't think the same way you do too!

[OmeSaara]

Political Junkie-

ROTFLMAO

OK, even though I think she has the right to do this, I must say that your comment made me laugh. :O)

That's a very good question indeed...and I mean that in all seriousness...I wear hijab on my head, and sometimes when I turn around to check my blind spot, that gets in the way, so I'd imagine this is probably worse.

Thanks for making me smile!

[tutstar]

Driver’s identification rules in Muslim nations:

Saudi Arabia: Women aren't allowed to drive

Iran: Women wear a traditional chador, which does not cover the face.

Egypt: Women do not cover their face in I.D. pictures

United Arab Emirates: Women do not cover their face in I.D. pictures

Oman: Women do not cover their face in I.D. pictures

Kuwait: Women do not cover their face in I.D. pictures

Qatar: Women do not cover their face in I.D. pictures

Bahrain: Women do not cover their face in I.D. pictures

Jordan: Women can drive if their faces are covered but do not cover their face in I.D. pictures

[tutstar]

"Muslim" Driver's License Woman Is Convicted Child Abuser: See Her UNVEILED (Ulterior Motive?)

MAY 28--Turns out the Florida woman who is suing for the right to wear a Muslim headdress in a driver's license photograph has previously been subjected to an, um, unveiled government portrait. Following her 1997 conversion to Islam, Sultaana Freeman (formerly Sandra Keller) was arrested in Decatur, Illinois for battering a foster child. Freeman, 35, pleaded guilty in 1999 to felony aggravated battery and was sentenced to 18 months probation. As a result of the conviction, state officials removed two foster children from Freeman's care. The mug shot of the felonious Freeman (below left) was taken after her arrest in the Illinois case. Freeman returned to the dock this week--that's her testifying in the below right photo--to challenge Florida rules requiring prospective drivers to submit to unveiled photos for their licenses. Last year, Freeman sued the state after her license was revoked when she failed to allow officials to photograph her sans headdress. State officials contend that, in light of the September 11 attacks, it is crucial that all motorists now be photographed in an unadorned state. (1 page)

For more on Freeman's case, check out Court TV's coverage.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/919779/posts

[tutstar]

see post 95 ---link to article

[Imagine]

ACTION PLAN: Border Violators

1) Close all US borders to illegal entry by forthwith with all means possible, including military presence.

2) Maintain legitimate immigration levels at modest annual level with requirements that immigrants be employable or sufficiently wealthy for self-support if they do not intend to work, proficient in basic English and willing to be assimilated into American culture and language. All applicants shall provide prints, photos and DNA samples.

3) Legal immigration shall be awarded to individuals on a lottery basis, wherein all countries are given equal status in the immigration lottery, without regards to color or economic plight of originating nation.

4) Those from Muslim countries, or individuals of Islamic faith from any country, shall be denied immigration privileges to the US.

5) Detain all border violators, taking photos, prints and DNA samples of said violator while at the same time, checking for out standing warrants. If no warrants are outstanding, return border violators to home country within 20 days via commercial airline and submit cost of such action, including processing and housing costs for said violator, to country of origin. If costs are not paid within 30 days, reduce any and all aid to said country by a like amount.

6) Should any country from which a border violator originates not currently receive any aid from the US, the Justice Department shall be authorized to seize or secure liens on assets owned, managed or registered to that country to the full extent of the obligation.

7) Establish new Guest Worker Visa (GWV) category, renewable every 6 months, for unskilled labor positions wherein all applicants shall provide prints, photos and DNA samples. Work permitted of such applicants shall be limited to one of several categories, including childcare, lawn/gardening, restaurant staff, cleaning and the like. Families of GWV workers are not permitted to enter US, nor will the birth of a child to one of GWV status confer citizenship to either parent or child.

8) Any violation of civil or criminal laws shall result in the forfeiture of the GWV and immediate return to originating country.

9) GWV holders shall be prohibited from claiming unemployment benefits, welfare support or free medical service.

10) The originating country of all GWV holders shall be responsible for any uninsured loss caused by the GWV, including emergency medical claims and/or claims resulting from illegal actions committed while in the US.

11) Companies who hire GWV holders shall submit to the immigration dept the name and GWV number of that individual so employed, along with a description of employment tasks. Companies who fail to report employment of GWV workers, or hire illegal workers shall be subject to penalty. GWV workers shall be paid with check, having income tax withheld. GWV workers shall not be subject to unemployment tax because they are not eligible for unemployment claims.

12) Border violators, or any non-citizen not possessing a valid visa, detained by local police for any reason shall be turned over to immigration officials for immediate deportation action, except if they face criminal charges in other jurisdictions.

13) GWV workers shall be prohibited for voting in local, state and federal elections.