|
Gifts for all occasions in the Galleria! Add your comments on this week's "What is the Deal?" column at Uncle Hiram's Bulletin Board. June 1, 2003 What is the Deal with Masked Drivers? By Jan A. Larson Sultaana Freeman, a converted Muslim formerly known as Sandra Kellar, is suing the state of Florida for requiring her to remove her full-face veil for her drivers license photograph. According to a Fox News report, the ACLU is representing Freeman in the case that charges the state is violating Freeman's religious freedoms. She claims that her faith precludes her from displaying her face in public out of "modesty" or being photographed and that her veiled photograph was not a point of contention until after September 11, 2001. The state counters that a driver's photograph on his or her driver's license is a matter of public safety. The state need not deny Freeman her driver's license on the grounds of her refusal to be photographed without the veil. They could simply deny her a license for not having a functional brain. The consequences of a court upholding Ms. Freeman's claim would be as hilarious as ludicrous. There would soon be thousands of veiled women driving the highways of Florida, and of course, some of them would not be women. There would be an assortment of convicts, fugitives and various other ne'er-do-wells. If pulled over by police, the masked driver would match the masked photo on the license. The effectiveness of America's Most Wanted in capturing wanted fugitives would be greatly diminished. New religions would likely spring up claiming that they too cannot be photographed without appropriate cover on their faces: The Holy Order of the Lone Ranger, the Richard Nixon Society and, of course, the Crusaders of the Nylon Stocking. Even if the state of Florida went along with Ms. Freeman's claim, I have my doubts as to whether the Transportation Security Administration would view Ms. Freeman's driver's license photograph as a valid means of identification should she decide to fly on a commercial airline. Her religious convictions aside, I would prefer not to fly on any plane with someone that was allowed to board while hiding behind a veil or mask. I seldom agree with the positions that are defended by the ACLU, but in this case, I fully support the ACLU's involvement. When Ms. Freeman's case is dismissed, she will not be able to claim that she received inadequate representation. Ms. Freeman's religious convictions may very well be sincere, but she doesn't seem to grasp that the right to drive is not a right at all but rather a privilege. The state not only has the right, but also the duty, to set reasonable standards and impose reasonable restrictions before granting that privilege. Ms. Freeman's claim of religious persecution constitutes nothing more than a warped sense of entitlement. -- Send feedback to the author. The "What is the Deal?" column will appears weekly on the Pie of Knowledge website. Guest submissions are welcome and encouraged. To submit an article to "What is the Deal?" click here. To subscribe to the "What is the Deal?" mailing list and receive early notification when a new column is available, click here. The Pie of Knowledge will never, ever divulge email addresses to any third party for any reason unless so ordered by a court of law. Contributions to the Pie of Knowledge are greatly appreciated. 
|
||||||||||||||
