Friday, March 6, 2009

Headscarves and Driver's Licences, and a Note from Me

"Dispute over hijabs on driver's licenses resolved"
March 6, 2009
A controversy over head scarves on Minnesota driver's license photos may have come to and end at the State Capitol, now that an exception has been carved out for religious head coverings.

Representative Steve Gottwalt, a Saint Cloud Republican, created a stir in Muslim communities with a bill that would mandate driver's license photos display the "full head and face" of the driver.

It was an effort, endorsed by the Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association, to rid such pictures of head gear that would obscure a person's identifying features. The group contends it's difficult to verify the true identity of people they encounter if their heads are partially hidden on those official photos.

The legislation immediately raised the spectre that the head scarves worn by Muslim women, known as hijabs, wouldn't be allowed on driver's license photos. They consider removing those scarves in public contrary to their faith, and a violation of their freedom of religion.

"The bill as written smacked of discrimination," area Muslim commentator Khalid Elmasry told KARE, "It allowed an exception for people who have medical reasons to cover their heads but not for those with religious reasons."

As he put it, "Is someone who covers their hair for religious reasons somehow a greater security risk than someone who covers it for medical reasons? I don't think so."

More of this story at "kare11.com" Twin Cities, MN (linked title above), and at CAIR news.

For more on the similar head covering bill in Oklahoma, see Tulsa World's article: "Anti-scarf bill draws concern" and the concern to Sikh men.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Don't leave Canada out of this. A similar problem with head coverings in license photos occured in BC: "Muslim man told to remove religious head covering; ICBC cites misunderstanding". Story by Sheila Reynolds - Surrey North Delta Leader

~~~~~~~~~~~~

I, LisaM of ThoseHeadcoverings, am not Muslim nor Sikh, and I don't intend to preach that everyone is acceptable in God's eyes. Nor am I a "politically-correct" advocate. I myself believe in many things that are not mainstream American but are conservatively Christian, following the words of the Bible, the words of Christ; and I sympathize with these women and men who are ostracized, criticized and told what their attitudes and agendas "are", despite the fact that many of them are just trying to be what they believe God has asked them to be. People, and even other followers of Christ, have misjudged me and others like me too. I desire that all who are called to be different from the world be encouraged to continue on their walk of faith, continually learning and growing in their faith, which often means submitting to God and to others more and more, and less to their own likes, comforts, reasoning and tradition.

For the record, this story concerning headcovering in id photos does not closely concern Christian women, for even those who cover "24-7" can uncover their hair and not be "immodestly attired" as orthodox Muslim and Jewish women believe they would be - the Christian headcovering, though modest, is for praying and prophesying. But this is one of those areas of life where head coverings are misunderstood, and we can get "lumped into" the idea of head coverings as a mere "religious requirement" and a man-made oppression or political law.

Those who do not discern things spiritually see physical symbols like head coverings as oppressive, demeaning, or man-made and thus not spiritual. Instead of accepting the difference in opinion and behaviour, they often see this as a threat: is it because they think that since I believe that this physical symbol is good, then I am going to force them to do it too, even though they do not understand it? I can understand that fear, because it has been done before, in every religion. If the people of a nation so fear another religion, is it because they have no faith in their own religion? Perhaps that is the "secret" of true faith, which is spiritual. Even those who outwardly appear spiritual because they follow the same religious requirements, may not truly have faith in a Spirit, but in a list of religious actions. But there are those who are spiritual, who are led into or out of their previous merely religious behaviour into spiritual behaviour (which looks very similar), because they are led by the Spirit, and by spiritual examples. And I personally believe in the words that "those who seek, find."

If you are led to do something physical like put on a headcovering - a thing so small but so outwardly visible and so criticized in all religious and non-religious circles -, and by faith - and not mere rationalization or fear or pride or "religious requirement" (which may indeed have been your first reason) - you do it, then I think you are one step further along in your path of true spiritual faith. And I say, keep on walking.

Please write to me and let me know what you think about this or any other thing. - LisaM

9 comments:

Unknown said...

I don't understand these bills...the reasoning does not make sense. I could understand wanting the face uncovered in license photos, but hair as an identifier? I am hardly the only person with hair my length and style...and I could cut it off immediately after taking my photo and no longer look the same! I am much more recognizable by wearing a hijab...at the least, no less so. It's a ridiculous law/bill, and I can see no reason for it other than prejudice. I hope this doesn't pass anywhere, or that it is quickly overturned.

Lili said...

I don't understand it either - you're supposed to look like you normally would, so how is removing your headcovering going to help someone identify you? It makes no sense.

Agreed, that hair is changeable. I have a friend who lost 100 lbs and shortly thereafter was stopped by the police (I think one of his lights was out). The officer cut up his license with a pair of scissors because the weight didn't match. (Unfortunately, it made it a lot more difficult for him to get a new one).

I'm also astounded that a piece of cloth draws so much ire.

mary montgomery aka greatgranmary said...

Well put Lisa my dear glass of fresh water in a miry pit! I worked for 18 months in a maximum security prison and there were plenty of times the picture and the guy did not match. In fact it only took 30 days in the "hole" for a guy's whole appearance to change so radically that he was only identifiable by voice or tatoo.
I think American law inforcement likes control--so do legislators and church clerics. Being moved by the Spirit is messy business. Many of the people in my area who are religiously ultra conservative wear head coverings in church like a badge of honor but are as mean as snakes when it comes to others with different opinions or to the most distressing social needs around them. Walking by the Spirit and not by the law means that I may wear my covering for exactly the opposite reasons you wear yours--in fact I may be wearing mine as way of reperation for your soul. Thats messy. As a longtime resident of both Minnesota and Oklahoma I can tell you that neither state has a clear picture of who they are---one being so right it is left while the other so left it is right and yes it takes a score card to tell the difference.
I was in a religious bookstore this week that I will nevr return to. The owners in "demonstrating" their rightwing version of my particular denomination were so offennsive and judgemental as to border on being heretical themselves. In defending their viewpoint sinned by "ex-communicating" those who did not agree from their fellowship as they mi-represented the authentic teaching they purported to uphold. The funny thing is that they smirked at my "rag" and wondered if I'd been sick!
I am certainly one of the pack. As I believe we are on the verge of seeing the end of days I am glad for it. "Keep on doing good, keep on listening to the Spirit" my advisor said to me this very day. "Your gift of being able to laugh your sense of humor is an indication that God is with you and it is a gift of the spirit it is don't forgrt it" he insisted.
The scriture should have read "the knuckheads as well as the poor, you will always have with you".

mary montgomery aka greatgranmary said...

Wow the spelling does suffer when one gets excited___should have read " am certainly NOT one of the pack" and "the SCRIPTURE should have read" KNUCKLEHEADS like the poor you will always have with you
Same could be said for sinners like me huh?

Michelle Maddocks said...

LOL - don't worry about it, Miss Mary; the meaning came through the misspellings. :) Yes, the world will always have its sinners like us. I'm so thankful for mercy, and hope I can have it for others as well!

Sanil and Lili - thank you for your comments too - it is true that if you normally wear something on your head it would make more sense to have an identifying photo with something on your head. And it is amazing how something that's only a symbol - or at the most a modest covering of ones private hair - can raise so much ire! This is why it is so important to share the information.

Thank you all again for sharing with me!

Anonymous said...

Lisa, I think you are right on target! I will post a link directly to your post, for I find it explains your heart, and gives a good explanation of what happens when the Spirit calls a woman to go further on with Him. Thank you for this. I feel I understand you more. May Jesus continue to lead you, sister.
Auntie eM

margaret said...

I would think that a hijab or snood would accentuate the face and given how a hairstyle/colour can change someone's appearance drastically it should not be used as an identifier. For a long time in the UK at least after colour photography became cheap and common passport photos had to be b&w so that hair colour, make up etc, didn't distract from the person's features but now that has changed. Niqabs (sp?) are another matter - I do think women who wear them shouldn't drive and should be prepared to take them off for a woman immigration officer if asked.

Anonymous said...

I live in Oklahoma and headcover. I have been following this case. A local woman was harassed by our local DMV and told she couldn't have her picture taken with her scarf. Despite the fact that there are TONS of headcovering Muslim women in town and we have all had our driver's license photos taken with our scarves, for over 20 years with no problems. I don't know about the girl's intentions or how exactly everythign happened, but what shoudl have been an open and shut case of "the law says I can wear this scarf in my picture, go ask your manager/supervisor and see", this turned into a media circus. It shoudl NOT have. And the consequence of it turning into a media circus was that a local state representative who has previously expressed extreme bigotry against Muslims, inserted this provision into the bill at the last minute.

Apparently, it is not "resolved" however, because just yesterday I got a new email from the local chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations asking us to call our state Senators who are handling the bill now. Even though I also thought it was taken care of, apparently not everything is fixed yet.

Thank you so much for your letter. I have Christian friends who headcover too and they were also concerned about the bill. Modesty lovers unite! :)

Cheryl (SwineInsanity) said...

In Washington State... I had my drivers license picture taken with a head scarf with no problem.. They were very supportive about it.. Made me feel very comfortable about it. They told me how the law sees a head covering is on your head and a veil covers the face... I think they said veils on drivers license are not ok. Which in all honesty I understand.. Identity... That is the whole point of a drivers license... But I think as with hair, you can change the color of it, shave it off... hair is vain because it can be easily removed...