Muslim Woman Fights To Keep On Veil For License Photo (Updated)

mycfnow ^

[chance33_98]

Muslim Woman Fights To Keep On Veil For License Photo

Posted: 12:34 p.m. EDT May 27, 2003

Updated: 2:51 p.m. EDT May 27, 2003 ORLANDO, Fla. -- Florida's refusal to issue a driver's license to a Muslim woman unless she is photographed without her veil violates her religious rights, an ACLU attorney argued in court Tuesday. The requirement by the state Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles is a burden on Saltaana Freeman, a 35-year-old convert to Islam whose religious beliefs require her to keep her head and face covered out of modesty, said Howard Marks, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida.

"This is about religious liberty. It's about whether this country is going to have religious diversity,'' said Marks at the beginning of Freeman's nonjury trial. "Allowing the state to chip away at religious liberties is not a path we want to go down.''

"There's no dispute in this case, your honor, that my client came to Florida in February 2001, was issued a Florida driver's license persuant to the rules and regulations in place at that time," Marks said. "The testimony is going to be that the law has not changed."

Marks also pointed out that Florida has issued more than 800,000 temporary driving permits in the last five years without photographs. And that some of the driver's license photos are 18 years old and barely resemble the card holder.

But Assistant Attorney General Jason Vail argued that having an easily identifiable photo on a driver's license was a matter of public safety since the photos are used during traffic stops, in financial transactions and to prevent identity fraud. Vail said there are limits to the religious liberties extended in the Florida Constitution if public safety is at stake.

"It's the primary method of identification in Florida and the nation,'' Vail said of the driver's license. "I don't think there can be any doubt there is a public safety interest.'' Circuit Judge Janet C. Thorpe must decide whether taking the photo would violate Freeman's religious beliefs and if the state has a compelling interest in not allowing her to obtain a license with her covered face in a photo.

In February 2001, Freeman obtained a Florida driver's license that had a photo of her face covered in a veil, but she received a letter from the state nine months later warning that it would revoke her license unless she returned for a photo with her face uncovered.

She refused and sued for the right to get a driver's license with a photo showing her face uncovered.

Her attorneys argued that state officials didn't care that she wore a veil in the photo until after the Sept. 11 attacks, an allegation denied by attorneys for the state.

Florida attorneys plan to call Islamic experts to the stand this week to testify that it is not mandatory or a sin for a Muslim woman to show her face for a state issued photograph, according to Local 6 News

Local 6 News also reported that the state also plans to submit into evidence a Time magazine photo of Elizabeth Smart that shows part of her face veiled. Attorneys would not comment on why they want to use the photo but there is speculation that they will use it as an example that a veiled face could hinder identification for authorities.

The trial is expected to last through the week, Local 6 News reported.

[george wythe]

The Slippery Slope is a fallacy in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any argument for the inevitability of the event in question. In most cases, there are a series of steps or gradations between one event and the one in question and no reason is given as to why the intervening steps or gradations will simply be bypassed. This "argument" has the following form:

1. Event A has occurred (or will or might occur).
2. Therefore event Z will inevitably happen.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because there is no reason to believe that one event must inevitably follow from another (from A to Z) without an argument for such a claim. This is especially clear in cases in which there is a significant number of steps or gradations between one event and another.

Examples of Slippery Slope

1. "We have to stop the tuition increase! The next thing you know, they'll be charging $40,000 a semester!"

2. "The US shouldn't get involved militarily in other countries. Once the government sends in a few troops, it will then send in thousands to die."

3. "You can never give anyone a break. If you do, they'll walk all over you."

4. "We've got to stop them from banning pornography. Once they start banning one form of literature, they will never stop. Next thing you know, they will be burning all the books!"

[bootless]

Just stupid - God save us from runaway diversity.

Never mind the driver's license picture - I don't want someone on the road with no peripheral vision!!

[Kudsman]

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because there is no reason to believe that one event must inevitably follow from another (from A to Z) without an argument for such a claim.

This is truth to me and well spoken GW. I suspect some of the argument may come from the point of reference of the person espousing the slippery slope however.

expat guy is living in a culture greatly influenced by Isalm already. Expat do you have any idea how long Malaysia has been so strongly influenced?

We know the US is udergoing change so our reaction tends to be either defensive (as in vs. change) denial or arrogantly offensive when dealing with any issue related to Islam. Especially after 911.

I firmly believe the peaceful Islamic movement has had their acceptance in America drastically set back if not dealt a fatal blow in the minds of many of my countrymen. I still cling though to the teaching of forgive others their tresspasses as ...... in America there should always exist peace and Godwill towards men. It is who we are. At times tested. Always strived for.

But driving is still a priviledge. To be granted and withdrawn at the State's (not individual's) discretion. Whatever the court decides, I as an American will live with the results or be free to try and change them by a petition of grievances. As long as I do either peacefully, I will stay out of jail.

[Kudsman]

I also believe the slippery slope reasoning is not "fallacious". Rather I would suggest it is subjective. IOW where did it start from and what is the end game. As well as what point are we currently at on the hill. Upslope or downslope?

[Prince Charles]

Has anyone raised the issue of exactly how this woman plans to safely operate a motor vehicle while wearing a veil with only narrow eyeslits in it?

[Centurion2000]

Florida's refusal to issue a driver's license to a Muslim woman unless she is photographed without her veil violates her religious rights

She can always go to the Middle East ... oh wait ..they won't let her drive.

Driving on public roads is considered privilidge. Removal of the veil is required for proper ID needed to exercise that privilidge.

[c-b 1]

I think Driver's Ed made a valid point years ago. Driving is a PRIVILEDGE, not a right.

I didn't take drivers ed, but my dad mad that point very clear to me, Driving is a priviledge, not a right, either comply with the regulations of the issueing authority, or don't drive, your choice.

[Amore]

I can't believe this lawsuit is even being tried. It's been established for quite some time now by the U.S. Supreme Court, as well as by the Florida courts, that driving is a privilege, not a right.

[expatguy]

"...I suspect some of the argument may come from the point of reference of the person espousing the slippery slope however...expat guy is living in a culture greatly influenced by Isalm already. Expat do you have any idea how long Malaysia has been so strongly influenced?..."[sic]

And seriously, what better that to have that point of reference that you snidely refer to?

A point of reference I offer is from a multi-cultural country where one has seen firsthand the conflicts that arise from Islam's interrelation with other religions and cultures.

I don't see it as a stretch to predict that many of the problems that have already happened here might eventually resurface in the United States.

Two years ago if I told you that schools in the future might be banning certain children's stories for fear of offending Muslims you might think I was crazy and yet that is happening now.

Pig books banned in deference to Muslims

With regards to fast food restaurants in the United States and Europe, I do believe the day is coming when these restaurants will be serving only "halal" beef and chicken products. This neither alarmist nor is it fallacious reasoning but rather, what I believe will be become an informed business decision.

Companies will need to decide whether to include Muslims or exclude them and with one billion muslims worldwide, the decision seems only logical, and that is to include them.

Do you expect companies such as Tyson, KFC and McDonald's to continue to produce both "halal" and "non halal" products considering the huge costs involved by carrying two types of meat and the fact that there is little to no difference in taste?

A "halal" chicken nugget and a "non halal" chicken nugget look identical and taste almost the same. Im betting that McDonald's thinks you won't notice the difference.

Chances are that you might be eating "halal" food right now and not even know it.

"...Muslim Students Get Foods Meeting 'Halal' Guidelines For years, Muslim children in Dearborn, Mich., public schools have eaten their lunchtime veggies and thrown away most meats, which are not halal (lawful) under Islamic dietary laws. But that is starting to change. School officials, heeding parents' requests, are finally working on a plan to add more halal items to menus.

Foods that meet halal guidelines include all fish as well as poultry, beef, mutton and rabbit (but only if they are butchered in accord with halal procedures). Forbidden foods include anything with pork, animal gelatin, and animal fats. As in kosher cooking, halal utensils must be kept separately. The first halal offerings-chicken nuggets and hot dogs-will supplement rather than reform the menu.

"We're trying to provide food that our customers can eat," says Bob Cipriano, business manager for the school district. Dearborn, a Detroit suburb, has one of the highest concentrations of ethnic Arabs in the country, according to the Arab-American Institute in Washington, D.C. About 50% of Dearborn's 17,200 student enrollment is Muslim. At some schools, as many as 95% are Arab-American..."

Dearborn Public Schools to introduce 'Halal' food

Explain the logic to me how a public school district bows to this kind of pressure. Is it merely a financial decision? From what I read, it seems a bit more. It seems like a minority group (while close, but still >50%) is imposing their religious restrictions on everyone else.

The primary reason to purge elements from our society seems to be based recently on whether or not it can be deemed offensive to anyone. California school districts have purged over 500 words from textbooks in a move to be more tolerant and sensitive to those who might be offended. Is it such a stretch of the imagination to think that elements offensive to Islam will be purged as well?

As such, these are issues to ponder and discuss, they might become problems and issues and then again they might not. What I don't find is that this type of reasoning is fallacious.

[Kudsman]

As such, these are issues to ponder and discuss, they might become problems and issues and then again they might not. What I don't find is that this type of reasoning is fallacious. I agree and I wasn't trying to be snide. If you look back at my post immediately after the one i pinged you to I said the same thing as you. Thank you for your response. TCN.

[Redleg Duke]

On a hot day, a cold Fosters. On a cooler day, a Sam Adams.

And when I am really shitfaced...any ol' beer will do! :-)

[AmishDude]

I suspect this American lady will be deported after we deport the Amish, the Jehovah's Witnesses, and all the other weird Protestant sects.

1. The Amish do not get driver's licenses, for reasons that should be stunningly obvious.
2. Other Muslim women have had their pictures taken. You do not get to make up religious convictions for your own convenience. Think: ulterior motive.

[george wythe]

The Amish do not get driver's licenses, for reasons that should be stunningly obvious.

What a chutzpah to ride 5 mph on a 55 mph highway with no driver's licenses and no reflectors!

-- Last week, at a district justice's office just north of here, two Amishmen pulled up in buggies, came out of the snow into the warm and were found guilty of failing to mount state-mandated reflective orange triangles on their carriages.

The fine was $100 apiece.

An hour later, at a district justice's office 10 miles to the north, the routine was repeated, this time with three Amishmen, all found guilty, each fined $100.

Nobody paid up, though.

"We don't think it's too much to impose on these people. It's good enough for everybody else," said Ted Farabaugh, a township supervisor in West Carroll Township, home to many of the Swartzentrubers. "Take away the triangle, and people have less chance to see the buggies. Then, there's going to be a head-on collision, with people trying to avoid them."

In Ohio, the largest single Amish enclave in the world, a study done through the state Department of Transportation and Ohio State University branded the orange reflective triangle "the single most recognizable emblem" to mark slow-moving traffic. That's important, Ohio Highway Patrol Lt. Joel Smith said, since the driver of a 55-mph vehicle bearing down on a 5-mph buggy will see the gap between them close from 500 feet to 44 feet in six seconds.

The new cases, and any more that come along, will be joined in a court fight framing a state traffic code provision as infringing on religious liberties of a small sliver of the state's Amish population, said Witold Walczak, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Greater Pittsburgh Chapter. source

Other Muslim women have had their pictures taken. You do not get to make up religious convictions for your own convenience. Think: ulterior motive.

Other Amish have their orange reflectors installed in their buggies.

The fight centers on a tiny, 88-year-old branch called Swartzentruber Amish, rigid by even mainline Amish standards. While the rest of the Amish spectrum has adopted, sometimes grudgingly, the orange triangles, the Swartzentrubers refuse.

[ATOMIC_PUNK]

MAY 28--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, 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. http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/sultaana1.html

[hawaiiandreamin]

Many people would consider this is where the seperation of state and religon come in. I have read many arguments where people suggest that her religious rights are being violated. This is one of the opions I have recieved:
FL Statute 761.03 states that "the government shall not burden a person's exercise of religion, even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, unless the government can show a compelling governmental interest and it is done in the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling government interest." This means that the FL government cannot interfere with the way she chooses to practice her religion, and that is what they are trying to do. The idea that having a female photographer will make it all better is ridiculous because that ID will be seen by many people...at the bank, when she applies for a job, when she would get pulled over, etc. so ALL those people would see it. Plus, what is then to stop an officer from requiring her to remove the veil for him when/if she ever gets pulled over, because "you did it for your license!"

Separation of church and state means just that...they are SEPARATE. The state/government cannot force you to be one religion or another, just like they cannot tell you NOT to be that religion. She has just as much right to dress that way as the girls on the beach have the right to wear hardly any clothes at all.

What do you think of this side of the coin?? Please be mature about your response, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and I really dont care if shes ugly or not.

[DemonDeac]

Photo IDs would become pointless if you didn’t have to show your face for them. That would create a security nightmare at airports, etc, and would sure fuel a booming market for real “fake” IDs.

If this woman wants to live like that she should go to some hole of a country where people would gladly treat her as subhuman and force her to cover up her face.