Besides, we all know where the road paved with good intentions leads to.....
Posted on 05/05/2006 7:21:22 AM PDT by churchillbuff
Is the national ID card the next step toward the imposition of the biblical "mark of the beast" Christians believe will be required to buy and sell during the Last Days?
That's the contention of a growing group of believers who are working to turn back the approval of the Real ID Act by Congress last year. Public Law 109-13 requires the national ID portion of the plan go into effect by May 2008.
"There is a prophecy in the Bible that foretells a time when every person will be required to have a mark or a number, without which he or she will not be able to participate in the economy," states the Christian website NoNationalID.com. "The prophecy is 2,000 years old, but it has been impossible for it to come to pass until now. With the invention of the computer and the Internet, this prophecy of buying and selling, using a number, can now be implemented at any time. Has the time for the fulfillment of this prophecy arrived?"
The site asks visitors to sign an online petition vowing not to vote for any candidate who does not commit to repealing the Real ID Act.
The goal, states the site, which is sponsored by Endtime Ministries, is to get 100,000 signatures on the petition.
On the site is a link to purchase a DVD entitled "666 – How Close? Will the National ID Become the Mark of the Beast?"
Americans choosing not to carry a national ID, the site warns, will be prohibited from driving a car, boarding a plane, train or bus, entering any federal building, opening a bank account, or possibly from holding a job.
"This is probably our last chance to head off the mechanism before it is actually implemented as the mark," states the site in the FAQ section. "It truly may be now or never."
The Real ID Act requires states to participate in a federal data-sharing program when issuing driver's licenses, making those licenses de facto national ID cards.
Touted as a tool of the war on terrorism, the ID card provision of the law, which also includes border-security measures, has attracted the most negative attention.
After May 11, 2008, "a federal agency may not accept, for any official purpose, a driver's license or identification card issued by a State to any person unless the State is meeting the requirements" specified in the Real ID Act. While states can issue non-federal ID cards, they would not be accepted by the Transportation Security Administration for travel purposes, grounding those who don't carry federally approved cards.
The data required to be included in each card are, among other things, the person's full legal name, date of birth, gender, driver's license number, a digital photo, the person's address and machine-readable technology so the information can be ready easily by government or banking personnel.
Each state must agree to share the data on the cards with every other state.
Supporters of the law say it does not require a "national" ID card because each state issues its own cards, not the federal government. But detractors note the cards are virtual national IDs since the federal law has dictated what data must be included and that each state must share its database with the others.
The New Hampshire Senate yesterday voted to reject a bill to rebel against the Real ID system and not participate in a pilot program for which the state had been tapped. The state House of Representatives passed the measure last month, but the Senate instead voted to study the driver's license requirements.
U.S. Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., is urging his home state to give Real ID a try, saying it's needed to keep terrorists and illegal aliens from entering the country.
According to the Manchester Union Leader, Gregg argues that New Hampshire residents will find it difficult to get on airplanes or enter federal buildings if New Hampshire doesn't embrace Real ID.
Groups opposed to the Real ID Act are making strange bedfellows, with Christians like those running NoNationalID.com fighting on the same side with the American Civil Liberties Union, which sponsors the website RealNightmare.org.
The ACLU site decries the fact that a motor vehicles department staff person will be required to ask for immigration-status papers from those applying for driver's licenses.
"REAL ID will inevitably cause discrimination against U.S. citizens who may 'look' or 'sound' foreign to a DMV bureaucrat," states the site. "REAL ID requires DMV employees to decide whether someone is a citizen or foreigner before issuing a driver's license. The law demands that DMV bureaucrats distinguish among citizens, permanent resident immigrants and other non-citizens in deciding who is eligible for a license and what type of license may be issued.
"Based on past experience when similar requirements were imposed on employers, widespread discrimination resulted against citizens who 'looked' or 'sounded' foreign."
The civil-liberties group also slams a requirement of the law that some immigrants be issued a temporary "tier-two" license that has a prominent expiration date.
U.S. governors also have come out against the law, saying it is a huge unfunded mandate imposed on the nation's states.
The National Conference of State Legislatures is equally opposed to the Real ID Act, saying, "Federal legislators and rule makers are negating state driver's license security efforts, imposing difficult-to-comply-with mandates and limiting their flexibility to address new concerns as they arise. In other words, decades of state experience is being substituted for a 'command and control regime' from a level of government that has no driver's license regulatory experience."
Endtime Ministries' Irvin Baxter, a radio host, believes the national ID is a precursor to the forced embedding of radio-frequency chips under the skin.
Baxter told the Concord, N.H., Monitor: "That's where we are headed right now. The prophecy states that you will have to receive a mark on your hand or in your forehead."
No what counts is the rule of law and being held accountable when you break it. The ID is simply an accurate way of enforcing the rule of law.
DNA is the best ID we have today. A bit off subject, but that is the main reason I oppose cloning today.
Redundancy leading to unproductivity is the failure of our ID system today.
SS # was formed to be an anonymous way to track your tax payment. It is being used for something today that it was not intended to be used for. This is one reason it is so disfunctional.
I often wonder why people are so intimidated by their own Identity and an accurate representation of it. Could it be that they are really scared of that Identity being tied to their choices of action and actually being held to account for them? I sure think so. What is another possible explanation for this?
Violates the bill of rights? BWAAA HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHA ok then.
I said they had no concept of id'ing people getting on an airpane soas to weed out those that would fly them into buildings. If you really think that all of yesteryears contexts can be applied today then you are free to think that.
You have ID in your wallet and you want that ID to be unique to you......When it comes to your bank account....you do not want anyone else accessing your money....are you opposing this? NO. Alot of talk that leads nowhere in reality.
We need ID and that is a fact of today's life that you can not honestly dispute. I advocate that ID being as technologically advanced and accurate as it can be today and everyday moving forward. I advocate removing redundnacy and unproductivity by eliminating various forms of ID and replacing it with one all encompassing ID that is used for ID purposes across the spectrum where ID is needed. You can oppose it ( sometimes ....as is in your case) or you can support it.
Were those folks for or against slavery?
Talk about a straw man!!!!!!
INDEED we have a right a RESPONSIBILITY to alter their visions when time shows reality. Slavery was not proper and time showed us all that....and we took action to make the situation more proper. As we should do. Right?
Would not denying God's will of assigning you a unique identity lead you to the very same place??
You failed American history, didn't'cha?
Madison was against slavery. Franklin was against slavery. Jefferson owned slaves, yes. But even he understood that it was an evil and barbarian practice.
Maybe you should read some more and get a true understanding of why the 'three-fifths of a man" line was put in there. It was to LIMIT congressional apportionment in the states of Georgia and Virginia.
You insult the very men who gave you this great land. You're as bad as the looney-left liberals who claim that what a bunch of wig-wearin' old White guys wrote over 200 years ago is irrelevant to today's woprld...besides, their America-hating argument goes, they were a bunch of slaveholding racists who stole the land from the indigenous people....
Like I said. You're a real piece of work.
I don't deny God's will.
I DO deny the federal gum'mint's will to assign me a national database, biometric scans, RFID chips, ANY of that totalitarian nonsense.
Why do you buy all this neo-Stalinist Soviet-redux BS?
I'm beginning to have serious doubts about your loyalty to this nation and her Constitution.
I do not have distain. I do not buy your argument that the bill of rights prevents you ( or me..or anyone else) from being identified.
If noone can be truthfully identified (outside their own word about their identity, the rule of law cannot be ever be enforced. You know the rule of law you claim to respect????
Like every other post you make regarding this issue you oppose the ID when your real opposition is about the USE of it when it becomes ABUSE.
If people in this nation actually argued their opposition and offered solutions for debate that will lead to progress on the issue at hand then we wouldn't have endless threads where people pretend to argue the issue (ID) when they actually argue something entirely different(USE AND ABUSE OF IT).
Opposition without a qualifying alternative solution is the abomination. The lose of power by the leftist democratic party demonstrates where your line of opposition goes. It gets rejected by more and more people every day.
When people simply pose what they are against, the short term will see agreement by those that also disagree. Long term people want a solution. That means they want to hear the alternative that you would support to combat that which you oppose. Absent that message support for your opposition is lost.....like I said just look to the democratic party for example.
What form of ID do you support and in what contexts do you think an ID is proper?
I would love to hear your response to this two part question but my bet is that you will duck it because you know what questions I will pose to you when indeed you do answer them!
SO then three men that you consider right on all subjects and above any question whatsoever......did something everlasting in a document that they didn't support?
And this gives them the standing you call aboce dissent?
I did not ever say what they did was irreleveant and this is yet again a misrepresentation on your part. Many were slave holding racists and that was proper in that time and that context.....we simply learned that there is a better way and altered our actions to support a better way forward. SAME thing I call for now.
That is the history you need to learn. When something needs to be changed because it is the right thing to do IT SHOULD BE CHANGED because it is the right thing to do.
ATTACk me all you like there FRiend, that is your choice of tactics.
I will now ask you what I asked another.
What form of ID is proper in your book ( meaning what kind of ID do you support) and what contexts do you feel that ID is needed properly?
This qurestion is designed to find out what you support and not what you are against. So please post what you support and not what you oppose.
I doubt your loyalty to your own Identity as you wish to keep it hiden from everyone. Kind of like muslim terrorists do today when they have 11 names!
That't the point now, isn't it?
With so many laws, how do you even know you are not breaking at least one?
Anything that the government proposes is going to be abused, you can bank on that.
Why do you continue to push for more and more government?
From what I have seen of your posts, here and on some of the DWI threads, you don't strike me as being the least bit conservative.
If I am breaking a law with my actions then I will indeed accept the punishment laid out in the law for it.
I live my life honorably. I do not need a law saying that I should not steal or that I should not screw my neighbors wife. Nor do I need religious commandments to abide by such things. I simply ask myself if I would want something done to me or my family. If the answer is no then I should not take that action. Pretty simply really.
I know that I break a law by the fact I know I am not perfect. Noone is. All I can reasonably do is the best I can in an honest and open fashion and accept that I am responsible for my choices and actions.
I see you are not answering my questions. Cannot stand to your own words can ya?
If I am not mistaken you are claiming that the bill of rights protects you from being identified based on being protected in your personal effects. Right?
HOGWASH, the bill of rights prevents abuse of such things as an ID not the proclusion of the ID itself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.