A Woman and her Veil

[Catsmeow]

Amen to that! Work in Progress {WIP} calls it the Clinton News Network...

[nebula]

I don't know, I am thinking "Corrupted News Network" would be more accurate and less demeaning in ways we should guard against going. Think?

[Catsmeow]

Well, today we heard the sentence handed down by the judge...and the verdict is...the "veil goes"...

For reasons of national security, the woman has to remove the veil for her photo ID on her driver's license.

Naturally, the ACLU is saying they'll appeal...ho-hum...

[Guest Lazarus]

I am really interested in this story, but have found no stories at Fox News, the Orlando Sentinel, the Tampa Tribune, St. Pete Times or the Miami Herald, much less CNN to veify your allegations of criminal records and false I.D.'s, Catsmeow. I would be thankful for any information indicating a withholding of pertinent information on the part of the state and the media.

I do agree that she should be denied a driver's license if she will not remove her veil for a photo. Driving is a priviledge. She may choose to remove or veil, or to concede her driving priviledges.

Unfortunately, I fail to see the relevance of the color of this woman's skin, and the skin color of her husband. Could you please enlighten me?

[Catsmeow]

Very simple. According to one Muslim cleric who was interviewed, she claimed an issue of "Modesty" for wearing her veil. The cleric said that her wanting to wear a veil seemed ridiculous because the wearing of a veil generally has to do with "CULTURAL" issues...certain women from certain Arab countries wear the veil because of culture, not because of Islam.

While it's considered a modesty issue, it didn't start out as a modesty issue. It was originally done in countries where they had severe sand storms and the women covered their faces to keep the sand out...later, they incorporated it into their religious beliefs.

This isn't a woman who was raised Muslim in an Arab country where veils are worn more out of the cultural tradition of that region. This was a woman born in America with a criminal rap sheet, according to what was said on the local news.

On WFTV, Channel 2, I heard with my own ears a brief taken from the judge questioning the woman's husband {an excerpt on tv} about why he had so many false ID's found in their apartment. He looked rather irritated with the judge's questioning, {rolling his eyes and sighing loudly, etc}.

The news report showed a picture of the woman when she was booked at the police station. That photo DID show her face. Back then, she was in trouble for abusing foster kids. I don't recall what state charges were filed for the abuse case...Also, they had charges against them for writing hot checks.

Having been a foreign missionary, I am well aware that cultural concessions need to be made ....it DOES matter where a person is from..and yes, race is an issue.

If you go to another country and live, you discover the people have their own customs, their own culture, their own traditions/food/clothing styles, and of course, religious beliefs...to which clothing and dress are often linked.

But a person in America, born and raised in America, who has ALWAYS lived within this culture lacks credibility in this kind of argument. {We don't have too many sandstorms in the dessert here}.

Evidently, the Muslim community here agreed. I was thrilled to see them respond with a level of sarcasm when interviewed on camera about this woman's case.

They thought if she really didn't want to show her face...fine. Don't drive. They reasoned that if THEY show their face, so should she. They argue that it are no rules in Islam that a woman must cover her face.

I lived in a Muslim country in southeast Asia and I never saw a woman with her face covered there...only their heads. So, clearly this whole issue is raising eyebrows...particularly considering the woman's past.

I believe her name is Soldana Freeman...I'm sure about the last name but not about the first name or it's spelling. Hope that helps you in your websearch.

[Guest shadow2b]

I am really interested in this story, but have found no stories at Fox News, the Orlando Sentinel, the Tampa Tribune, St. Pete Times or the Miami Herald, much less CNN to veify your allegations of criminal records and false I.D.'s, Catsmeow. I would be thankful for any information indicating a withholding of pertinent information on the part of the state and the media.

I do agree that she should be denied a driver's license if she will not remove her veil for a photo. Driving is a priviledge. She may choose to remove or veil, or to concede her driving priviledges.

Unfortunately, I fail to see the relevance of the color of this woman's skin, and the skin color of her husband. Could you please enlighten me?

Hello lazarus------just to keep the FACTS straight------the supreme court & the appelate courts have ruled that; driving IS a constitutional RIGHT that canNOt be ruled as a privilege & sold--i.e.--charge a fee for the privilege of driving-----the so-called laws concerning driving such as REquiring a drivers license,mandatory insurance,mandatory seat belt wearing,license plates,environmemtal inspection,& any & ALL other traffic laws

are UNconstitutional & violate sections 241 & 242- of the uscs--it's called "extortion under color of law" & criminal charges can be filed against the law enforcement officer,the judge,the prosecutor & anyone else involved in this "conspiracy" to violate a citizens rights..A citizen may also file a civil suit against the city,county, or state for monetary damages--------so lets just keep the facts & the law straight--------

just stating "FACTS" that Americans ought to be aware of---------------------{Gary}--

[Catsmeow]

Huh? Gary, I have never heard of such a thing! Driving is a "privilege" we are given assuming we can show we're able to drive safely and without endangering the lives of others. I've never heard anyone call it a right...

It wouldn't even make sense - if a person drives drunk, for example...the privilege to drive is denied because the driver is endangering others.

The judge in this case ruled that this woman's rights were not violated...all persons must have a photograph to verify who the driver is. The judge's ruling seemed fair and balanced to me... Oh, oh...I've been watching too much Fox News...