• On CBSSports.com: Mike Tyson's daughter dies in accident
News.com special coverage:

Real ID vs. the states

Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBack    E-mail this story to a friendE-mail    Add to your del.icio.usdel.icio.us    Digg this storyDigg this

Religious minorities face Real ID crackdown

By Anne Broache
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
February 6, 2008 4:00 AM PST


Editor's note: A May deadline looms as just one flash point in a political showdown between Homeland Security and states that oppose Real ID demands. This is the third in a four-part series examining the confrontation.

No television, no wedding or family photographs, and definitely no image of herself on her driver's license: That was the devout Christian life that Nebraska resident Frances Quaring was trying to lead.

Which is why, after the state of Nebraska rejected her request for a license-without-a-photograph in the mid-1980s, Quaring sued the state in a landmark case that ended up at the U.S. Supreme Court. She won, with the justices agreeing that preserving her freedom of religion outweighed the state's interest in requiring an ID photograph.

More than two decades after the Quaring case, approximately a dozen states now offer religious exceptions when issuing driver's licenses. But because of a federal law called the Real ID Act that takes effect on May 11, residents of those states who have pictureless licenses could expect problems flying on commercial airliners and entering federal buildings, including some Social Security and Veterans Affairs offices.

The new rules could affect thousands of Americans in states including Nebraska, Pennsylvania, Oregon, Minnesota, Kansas, Arkansas, and Indiana. Religious groups including some Amish, Old Order Mennonites, Muslims, members of Native American faiths, and fundamentalist Christians object to identification cards bearing their photographs--or, in some cases, even showing their unshrouded faces in public.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which has criticized Real ID on numerous grounds, says it has received complaints about the law's rigidity toward religious groups and is "exploring all options," including a legal challenge to the law.

No photo ID, no admittance?

Starting May 11, the Real ID Act is expected to cause hassles for anyone with a pictureless license. Also affected are residents of a separate list of states--shown on this map--who may have trouble when flying on commercial airliners or entering federal buildings. Click a state below to see what it has told us about whether its driver's licenses will meet Real ID requirements.

Real ID by state DC DC ME NH VT MA RI CT NY NJ DE MD PA WV VA NC SC FL GA OH IN KY TN AL MS LA AR MI IL WI MO IA MN OK KS NE SD ND CO WY MT ID WA OR UT NV CA AZ NM TX AK HI
Click a state above to see what that state has told us about whether or not it's going along with the federal Real ID Act.
Alabama

Alabama plans to ask for an extension. "At this point, one option that's being considered is a 'hybrid' approach to Real ID in Alabama, by which the state would offer compliant and noncompliant driver licenses and ID cards. We do plan to ask for an extension."
--Dorris Teague, Public Information/Education Unit, Alabama Department of Public Safety

Alaska

"Alaska does indeed intend to request an extension to meet the requirements of Real ID. We haven't submitted our extension request yet, but we fully intend to do so in the very near future."
--Whitney Brewster, spokeswoman, Alaska Division of Motor Vehicles

Arizona

Arizona says that Homeland Security has said the state will "automatically get an extension" because of an existing plan to revamp its licenses, according to Jeanine L'Ecuyer, spokeswoman for Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano. That means its driver's licenses and state ID cards will be treated as Real ID-compliant until December 31, 2009.

But L'Ecuyer added that final compliance is still an open question: "Will Arizona do Real ID? Maybe is the honest answer to that question."

Arkansas

"We have asked for the first extension, but in the extension letter, we say we are not committed to implementing Real ID. We just need time to look at it and evaluate it."
--Mike Munns, assistant revenue commissioner for Arkansas

California

California reiterated in January 2008 that it has no problems complying with Real ID. Its statement did, however, mention "privacy and funding issues, which continue to be a concern for California."

Colorado

"We requested and received the extension until 2009, and we expect to be fully on the road to implementing Real ID satisfactorily by that point to get another extension in the future if we need to."
--Mark Couch, spokesman for the Colorado Department of Revenue

Connecticut

Connecticut has not decided whether to comply with Real ID, reject it completely, or request an extension to keep its options open. "We are still studying the issue. (Department of Motor Vehicles Commissioner Robert Ward) remains supportive of the concept, but no firm decisions have been made."
--Bill Seymour, spokesman for the motor vehicle commissioner.

Delaware

Delaware has not decided whether to comply with Real ID, reject it completely, or request an extension to keep its options open. "The DMV director and secretary are going to give a briefing to the governor next month, February. Because we've got until the end of March to decide...After they have this meeting with the governor is when we're going to make our official choice."
--Mike Williams, spokesman, Delaware Department of Transportation

Florida

Florida has not announced whether it will or will not request an extension. "Thanks to the leadership of our governor, cabinet, and legislature, Florida already provides our citizens a secure and safe driver license and identification card, and we are well postured to incorporate any changes that may be required. We applaud the federal government on their efforts to protect all of our citizens with the implementation of this act."
--Ann Nucatola, public information director, Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles

Georgia

Georgia has not decided whether to comply with Real ID, reject it completely, or request an extension to keep its options open. The legislature has approved legislation authorizing the governor to reject Real ID if federal regulations do not "adequately safeguard and restrict use of the information in order to protect the privacy rights" of Georgia residents. "Our legislature has to make that determination within the next few months."
--Susan Sports, public information officer, Georgia Department of Driver Services

Hawaii

Hawaii has filed for and received an extension. "We are moving forward on reviewing the rules and coordinating with the county DMVs to see how the rules can be implemented and coordinated."
--Russell Pang, chief of Media Relations for Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle

Idaho

"We've asked for an extension, but we still have serious concerns and reservations about it and its future here is to be determined."
--Jon Hanian, spokesman for Idaho Gov. C.L. "Butch" Otter

Illinois

"We have every intention to file for an extension."
--Henry Haupt, spokesman for Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White

Indiana

"We do intend to comply, and we have filed for and received an extension. Over the past couple of years, we've done some security enhancements to our own system that we were going to do regardless of how Real ID rolled out."
--Dennis Rosebrough, spokesman, Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles

Iowa
"Yes, Iowa will be implementing Real ID and we will be requesting the first extension."
--Dena Gray-Fisher, spokeswoman, Iowa Department of Transportation
Kansas

"Kansas has obtained authorization for the extension, which gets us out to the end of 2009 and affords us the opportunity to see where we are, negotiate a few different things with our vendor and others. It gives us a little breathing room."
--Carmen Alldritt, director of the division of vehicles, Kansas Department of Revenue

Kentucky

"A Real ID would be an entirely new document. The current KY license would not meet the new standard...Kentucky has asked for the extension."
--Mark Brown, spokesman, Kentucky Transportation Cabinet

Louisiana

State officials have not responded to repeated requests for information about Real ID compliance. One bill in the state legislature asks Congress to repeal Real ID, while a response to a DMV survey says that "We believe that Louisiana will meet standards."

Maine

Will not comply. "There is currently no effort being undertaken within the state to roll back the public law preventing the secretary from moving in the direction of Real ID. It is a situation where Mainers may face some inconvenience at airports come May 11."
--Don Cookson, spokesman for Maine Secretary of State Matthew Dunlap

Maryland

Maryland requested a deadline extension. "We're still going through 300 pages of federal guidelines. We're currently evaluating those guidelines and then we'll develop a program that is Real ID-compliant."
--Jack Cahalan, spokesman, Maryland Department of Transportation

Massachusetts

"Massachusetts did apply for the waiver and received it. We are basically telling (drivers who call us) that we've gotten the exemption, which means that you are going to show your valid driver's license to get on an airplane just as you have in the past until December 2009."
--Ann Dufresne, spokeswoman, Massachusetts Department of Motor Vehicles.

After December 2009, states can apply for a second extension, but will receive it only if they're taking affirmative steps to comply.

Michigan

Michigan has not decided whether to comply with Real ID, reject it completely, or request an extension to keep its options open. "At this point, we have not requested a waiver. We're still trying to work out some of the details."
--Kelly Chesney, spokeswoman for Michigan Secretary of State Terri Lyn Land. The state's Web site says: "There are still many unknowns...Michigan law changes will be necessary."

Minnesota

"We did receive a letter from Homeland Security and it said that our extension had been granted, so that would mean that our documents, our driver's licenses, and ID cards, are compliant until December 31, 2009."
--Minnesota Department of Public Safety spokeswoman

Mississippi

No response to repeated inquiries.

Missouri

No response to repeated inquiries. The state Web site says: "January 11, 2008 the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released the final rule establishing minimum security standards for state-issued driver licenses and identification cards. The rule is 284 pages in length. The Missouri Department of Revenue is in the process of reviewing the rules to determine the impact to Missouri."

Montana

Montana's legislature has flatly rejected Real ID in a bill that the governor has signed into law. Gov. Brian Schwitzer has called on his colleagues in other states this month to join Montana in opposition to this "major threat to the privacy, constitutional rights, and pocketbooks of ordinary Montanans." Lynn Solomon, a spokeswoman for the Montana attorney general's office, told us: "Right now we're not even sure that the existing Montana law allows us to ask for the extension. We're just sort of sitting tight."

Nebraska

"Nebraska has requested and has been granted an initial extension. That extension does not require you to technically commit to Real ID compliance--it says we need some time, and that's what we said, we need some time. Whether or not Nebraska is ultimately going to be compliant is really for the most part right now in the hands of the legislature."
--Beverly Neth, director, Nebraska Department of Motor Vehicles

Nevada

Nevada has applied for a deadline extension. "Certainly this is something that the governor supports and believes is important, although he believes in some respects it is an unfunded mandate and that the federal government should assist the states with the funding," Melissa Subbotin, spokeswoman for Nevada Gov. Jim Gibbons, told us.

New Hampshire

New Hampshire last year enacted a law that prohibits the state from changing its driver's license and identification card laws to comply with Real ID. It doesn't appear that is going to change. "As it stands now, the only action that has been taken is legislation to keep us out of it. There would be no way that the state could pass amending legislation or undo that within that time frame; it's just not going to happen. I don't see that anything could be done in the intervening time to change it," Jim Van Dongen, spokesman for the New Hampshire Department of Safety, told us.

New Jersey

New Jersey has not decided whether to comply with Real ID, reject it completely, or request an extension to keep its options open. Mike Horan, a spokesman for the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission, said there are a number of factors that the state is considering, including cost and wait times at the DMV. "Are the Real ID requirements going to add 15 minutes more to a person's wait? Are we going to need a new computer system to manage the requirements? We're in a bit of a fiscal crisis like many states across the country. That's a major concern--there are so many things that are in need of money."

New Mexico

New Mexico has applied for the first deadline extension from the Department of Homeland Security. "We have not made a final decision on whether we are going to implement Real ID or not," said David Harwell, a spokesman for the state department of taxation and revenue, which issues driver's licenses. "We are in the process of studying all of the regulations that were issued by Secretary (Michael) Chertoff several weeks ago."

New York

New York has already received an "unsolicited extension" from the Department of Homeland Security as part of a recent agreement to change its driver license policies, said Jennifer Givner, deputy press secretary for Gov. Eliot Spitzer.

North Carolina

North Carolina said it will request an extension if it's necessary for state residents to travel after May 11, but has not yet done so. "We're feeling that we are on track to follow along the Real ID plan as it is right now. We don't see any situation at this point where our citizens' driver's licenses would be in jeopardy and keeping them out of federal buildings or off of airplanes...Basically we feel like we're in a good place."
--Marge Howell, spokeswoman, North Carolina Division of Motor Vehicles

North Dakota

North Dakota has applied for a deadline extension. "Our application is stating that we'd like the extension and we would still like to reserve the opportunity to investigate committing to full implementation," said Linda Butts, deputy director of driver and vehicle services, North Dakota Department of Transportation. "The other thing that's muddying the water is that so many of these rules are long-term and seem to continue to mutate and change a little bit, so that's another thing I think all states are looking at is the cost of implementation. Are these truly going to be the rules in 2015? Will the rules today be the rules that are implemented five, seven years down the road?"

Ohio

Ohio said this month that it has applied for an extension and was the first state to receive one.

Oklahoma

Oklahoma's legislature has approved legislation saying that Real ID "is inimical to the security and well-being of the people of Oklahoma" and, therefore, "the state of Oklahoma shall not participate in the implementation of the Real ID Act." Paul Sund, spokesman for Oklahoma governor's office, told us: "I'm not aware of any repeal efforts, but our legislature does not convene until February 4."

Oregon

Oregon has requested and received an extension. In the longer term, however, the state may not comply. "Oregon hasn't made a decision for or against compliance with Real ID. But since the final federal rules were released January 10, our legislature is likely to put that on its 2009 agenda."
--David House, spokesman for the Oregon Department of Motor Vehicles

Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania has requested and received an extension. In the longer term, however, the state may not comply. "We're undergoing a comprehensive review of those regulations right now to look at some potential options, the cost that would be involved and also the impact to the citizens of Pennsylvania. Being granted this initial extension just allows us more time to do that and allows the citizens of the commonwealth to continue using their state driver's licenses and IDs through December 31, 2009."
--Danielle Klinger, spokeswoman, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation

Rhode Island

Rhode Island has applied for and received the first deadline extension from DHS, according to state DMV spokeswoman Gina Zanni. "Our governor supports the Real ID initiative," Zanni told us. "We have applied for part of the grant money that has been made available...we'd sure like some money."

South Carolina

South Carolina has enacted legislation saying the state "shall not participate in the implementation of the federal Real ID Act." Beth Parks, spokeswoman for the South Carolina Department of Motor Vehicles, told us: "Yes, it is true that South Carolina is a nonparticipatory state for Real ID. The South Carolina legislature is the only entity that can change that position. We are comparing the new regulations to the proposed regulations and our previous cost estimates. Once we have completed our review, we will provide information to South Carolina lawmakers and answer any questions they may have."

South Dakota

"We've applied for an extension and received one, but we have not committed to Real ID yet," said Mitch Krebs, press secretary for South Dakota Gov. Michael Rounds.

Tennessee

"The Department of Safety is conducting a detailed review of the final rules in order to fully evaluate the impact Real ID implementation will have on the citizens of the state of Tennessee. While we anticipate filing an extension, no official request has been signed as of this date. Keep in mind, an extension request is not necessarily an indication of our intent to comply."
--Mike Browning, spokesman, Tennessee Department of Safety

Texas

Texas has not decided whether to comply with Real ID, reject it completely, or request an extension to keep its options open. "We're still reading the fine print." --Tela Mange, spokeswoman, Texas Department of Public Safety

Utah

Utah has requested and received a deadline extension. "Our driver's license division is not a policy-making body. It would be up to the legislature and the governor. We are currently going through our legislative session--it just started. That will be one of the topics, whether to go through with it."
--Sgt. Jeff Nigbur, spokesman, Utah Department of Public Safety

Vermont

"Vermont requested and was granted an extension until December 31, 2009."
--John Zicconi, spokesman, Vermont Agency of Transportation

Virginia

Virginia has not decided whether to comply with Real ID, reject it completely, or request an extension to keep its options open. "The Virginia DMV is currently reviewing the regulations to determine our next steps."
--Melanie Stokes, spokeswoman, Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles

Washington

Gov. Christine Gregoire signed legislation last year prohibiting the state from implementing Real ID unless the federal government provides funding and greater privacy protections. But, in an apparent effort to avoid inconveniencing state residents in May, Gregoire requested a compliance extension. "By not filing an extension, effective May 11, Washingtonians would have automatically been subject to additional security screenings at airports and federal buildings," Gregoire said in a recent statement. It also said: "I will not allow for confusion and chaos at our busy airports. This extension will allow our residents to continue use of their Washington state driver license or ID card to board planes and enter federal buildings...The federal regulations on Real ID compliance are ambiguous, and I share funding and privacy concerns held by many state legislators."

West Virginia

West Virginia has not decided whether to comply with Real ID, reject it completely, or request an extension to keep its options open. "In West Virginia we are still weighing our options based upon the recent changes to the act's requirements."
--Susan Watkins, spokeswoman, West Virginia Department of Transportation

Wisconsin

Wisconsin has not decided whether to comply with Real ID, reject it completely, or request an extension to keep its options open. "We've not made a final determination regarding next steps for Wisconsin as it relates to Real ID," said Patrick Fernan, operations manager for the Wisconsin Department of Motor Vehicles. "We have not requested an extension as of yet."

Wyoming

Wyoming plans to request a deadline extension. "Unless the law for implementation of Real ID is changed in Washington D.C. or our Wyoming Legislature passes legislation not to comply with the Real ID, we will work toward implementation," said Jim O'Connor, support services administrator for the Wyoming Department of Transportation. He added, however: "We are concerned about this unfunded federal mandate and the effect it will have on the people of Wyoming."

Washington, D.C.

The nation's capital has not decided whether to comply with Real ID, reject it completely, or request an extension to keep its options open. "The DC DMV is still deciding on next steps," said public information officer Janis Hazel. "Nothing further to report at this time."

"We are deeply concerned that Real ID and the associated regulations intrude on the religious liberty of many Americans who for reasons of faith wear head coverings or object entirely to having their photo taken," said Daniel Mach, director of litigation for the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief. "The faithful shouldn't have to choose between a driver's license and their religious beliefs."

Under Real ID, there's no obvious wiggle room for Americans who object to facial photograph requirements on religious grounds. The lengthy new regulations released by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security last month set minimum standards for state-issued driver's licenses and IDs, among which is a "full facial digital photograph" that adheres to specific federal requirements.

This could pose real problems for some residents of states with a history of allowing the devout to obtain valid driver's licenses without photographs in an attempt to accommodate religious beliefs. Still more states have enacted laws known as "religious freedom restoration acts," which more broadly allow for accommodation of religious beliefs in the face of government regulations.

"My understanding is that the Real ID legislation takes that option away from states," said Steve Nolt, a history professor at Goshen College who has studied Amish interaction with government regulations in recent decades.

For some Christians, Quaring included, one source of religious objections to Real ID comes from the Christian Bible's Second Commandment, which in one translation says: "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below."

Homeland Security justifies its mandates by saying a facial photograph "serves important security purposes." Its stated goal through Real ID--approved unanimously by the Senate and overwhelmingly by the House of Representatives as part of a "Global War on Terror" bill--is to improve driver's license security and thereby handicap terrorists, identity thieves, and illegal immigrants.

"Given these security concerns and the clear statutory mandate, DHS believes that a driver's license or identification card issued without a photograph could not be issued as a Real ID-compliant driver's license or identification card," the agency says.

Translated, that means in just over three months, federal agencies may no longer accept those "noncompliant driver's licenses" for Americans who are boarding a commercial airplane or entering a federal building. In addition, Homeland Security can add other requirements--one Homeland Security official recently suggested Real ID could be required to buy certain cold medicines--without consulting Congress first.

"You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below."
--Bible

The lack of flexibility is troubling to Herman Bontrager, the secretary-treasurer of the National Committee for Amish Religious Freedom. His all-volunteer group has met at least twice with Homeland Security officials to try to seek a compromise, and it's also talking with some members of Congress, as the Amish don't generally file lawsuits. They've had "congenial" conversations that discussed alternative possibilities for verifying identity--the Amish are amenable to fingerprints instead of photographs, he said--but no actual progress has been made so far.

The photo ID requirement has already raised practical concerns in recent years, particularly because of the newly instated passport requirement for crossing into Mexico and Canada, where the Amish often travel to visit family or seek medical treatment, Bontrager said. Because the Amish don't fly on airplanes, most do not have passports, he said, adding that he worried the Real ID requirements could make it less convenient for them to access federal buildings. Without a photo-equipped license, they won't be able to visit some Social Security offices, for instance.

"I think the Amish appreciate the conversations and the access to Homeland Security people, but we're now getting down to the implementation phase," said Bontrager, a Lancaster County, Penn., resident who runs an insurance company inspired by Biblical principles. "Each step in the rulemaking progress, we provide comment, and so on and never get any response. We have not yet seen any evidence that they're willing to make accommodations or provide options."

Next page: Religious freedom vs. security?



Add a Comment (Log in or register) Showing 1 of 2 pages (128 Comments)
No-brainer
by PKADavid February 6, 2008 5:34 AM PST
It seems like a no-brainer that an ID should have a full-face photograph. How else are you supposed to ID the person? Although I am an atheist, I am for religious freedom as long as it does not impede on my own freedom or safety. Why should believers have the right to bypass certain security procedures? At what point does a belief become an ?official? religion that can then also bypass security measures? There is a line that needs to be drawn, and religious people need to realize that certain sacrifices need to be made in order to function in society.
Reply to this comment
disfranchisement of the highest order.
by inachu February 6, 2008 5:48 AM PST
Soon employers will demand they have rights to all the data on the card which will bypass the rights to medical privacy.

Sorry sir you must allow us into every facet of your data on your national ID card. If not then sorry sir you will not be hired or employed with us anymore.
Reply to this comment
The map graph paints a false picture
by whois101 February 6, 2008 7:12 AM PST
In the map picture, the states who said 'Yes' and the ones that asked for an extension are all listed the same 'Yes' color. That might be a decent indication of who can travel after May and who cannot, but it also suggests that the majority of states accepted the Real-ID for sure.

However, if you read the captions per state, you can see that for several states requesting an extention does not mean acceptance yet. The map would be more honest if it also made a difference between the states that actually said 'yes' and the ones that asked for an extension. Again, these states that asked for an extension could still be 'no' states in the end.
Reply to this comment
How has this become an issue?
by JM_Brazil February 6, 2008 7:36 AM PST
Do those religions who bar their followers from being photographed allow them to drive a motor vehicle?

Do these Muslim women who wear face veils wear veils while they drive? Did they object to being photographed for their passport to enter this country?

Would they allow an expert artist to draw an accurate rendering of them, (subject to inspection and approval, of course) for their license?

The answer is simple ? If these people are so devoted to their religion that they cannot comply to basic, essential laws which every other American must abide, then giving up the right to drive a motor vehicle should not be a problem. Why should the state need to make sacrifices for these people? If they believe so deeply in their religion, let them make the sacrifice ? take a bus.
Reply to this comment
Making a sacrifice
by MadLyb February 6, 2008 7:51 AM PST
If your religuous beliefs do not negatively impact the security and safety of others, then have at it. But, as in this case, where there is a clear impact, expect some sacrifices.

If you don't want your picture on an ID, then the government should have a process in place to address. For example, at airports, you would be put through a much more stringent search process. At Federal buildings, you would have to accompanied at all times while in the buildings.

Would these be bad for the person, probably, but then again, I don't want people on the same plane with me that have not been properly screened.
Reply to this comment
Which Came First?
by Renegade Knight February 6, 2008 8:00 AM PST
Religious Freedom or The Real ID Act?

Seems simple to me. No matter how hard you try to turn Americans into Cookie Cutter Citizens it's just not going to work. The Feds need to find another way to keep us safe than eroding our freedoms in the name of security.
Reply to this comment
Consequences
by pstodgel February 6, 2008 8:31 AM PST
Since when did ID's and Drivers Licenses become a right. These are
privledges. If these individuals do not want their picture on the ID,
then they do not have to have one and they will have to deal with
the consequences of these actions. The whole purpose of the ID is
to include the picture. One without the picture really is not much
of an ID to begin with.
Reply to this comment
Is this really new? (Horse Drawn Planes?)
by TV James February 6, 2008 8:38 AM PST
When I want a hamburger and there's no drive-through, I have to get out of my car and walk into the restaurant. I can't declare my religion prevents entering the restaurant and therefore they must bring my food to my curbside.

And if my three-year-old wants to participate in craft time at preschool, she must help tidy up the toys first.

Sometimes if you want to be a part of society, you have to play by the rules.

I've been required to show photo ID every time I fly for years now. Are these religious minorities who can't even watch TV or drive a car (generalizing, yes), really allowed to even fly on a plane that flies under its own power? Do these people also avoid all stores and public places that have video cameras or intersections with speed cameras? You're already on camera any time you're anywhere near a federal building or airport.

This doesn't sound like a religious choice so much as someone who has had any sort of self-esteem or self-worth beaten or bred out of them to the point that they lack (or are not permitted) to place any value on who they are. Or they are hiding from something. Do they hold jobs or social security cards? Or pay taxes? I just don't buy the religious angle. Seems like a cover for something negative, either by their choice or forced upon them.

(Yes, I am a Christian, but I've never heard of anything in my Bible to suggest that I should not take photos of my family.)
Reply to this comment
Not a National Security Issue
by JM_Brazil February 6, 2008 8:41 AM PST
Agreed. This is not necessarily a case of National Security - it's about a Police Officer validating that the driver of a motor vehicle is indeed licenced to do so. It's about ensuring that little Johnny isn't using a fake ID to purchase alcohol. It's about impeding little Johnny's dad from being able to forge a check.
Reply to this comment
Photo ID
by Drummond1 February 6, 2008 8:44 AM PST
Why is the state pandering to these dopes who don't like photo ID? Anybody who thinks having a photo taken is an infringement of liberty ain't playing with a full deck.
Reply to this comment
RealID is Unconstitutional
by Dr_Zinj February 6, 2008 8:55 AM PST
1st Amendment of the U.S Constitution:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

Ergo, the requirement for a photo id is unconstitutional and cannot be used by the federal government in any way, shape, or form to discriminate against that person.

If the federal government uses state licenses as their RealID 'vehicle', then the holding of a federalized state license no longer is a privilege, it becomes the right of that person.

IT DOES NOT MATTER IF SOMETHING IS A PRIVILEGE OR NOT, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CAN NOT DISCRIMINATE AGAINST A PERSON BASED ON THEIR RELIGION!
Reply to this comment
Give me a break already!
by kapstaad February 6, 2008 9:37 AM PST
Im sure nothing pleases the terrorist leaders more than watching the dumb-ocracy here stall any effective measures against infiltration while it argues over infantile patent absurdities like whether or not some minority's arcane superstitions should take precedent over an entire nation's security.

Yes, Real ID is imperfect; name something that isn't? Democracy isn't perfect, but it's the best idea we've come up with so far, so we stick with it and try to improve on it. Same with Real ID: until something better comes along, it's much better than our present wide-open vulnerability.

Security is an all-or-nothing deal. As soon as an exception is made for even one minority group, an aspiring terrorist wishing to bypass security merely needs to claim membership of the minority group. Since by it's very nature, the minority's members are un-identifiable, any claim of membership is impossible to verify or refute.

We can't even stop under-age drinking with current ID technology, but American citizens seriously expect their security forces to protect them from terrorists by using the same ineffective tool? Duh!!

Oh, and let me guess; the next "news item" will be "illegal immigrants face Real ID crackdown"?

Spare me.
Reply to this comment
Economic responsibility.
by duggerdm February 6, 2008 9:56 AM PST
Sorry, but as a fellow tax payer - I am not willing to foot the bill for handicapped compartmentalized thinker's personal belief systems. Their subjective belief systems are their choices - whether by default (inherited belief systems from parents) or by choice (compartmentalized and or limited non-critical thinking processes). As such they must be directly responsible for any consequences - especially economic for those choices.

If you want special ID and search procedures for people with special beliefs whether its Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, or other religions - ok let them pay for the complete cost for those special requirements - all of them. That would have to include set up of the "new" agency in charge, all the bureaucrats who justify their existence within that agency and empire building with its power, the rent for their space and the costs of all the resources they require.

Its time this country and this world quit confusing or excusing the mentally lame with the mentally lazy. Critical thinking is not a luxury or an option if your are a responsible citizen - any where. If you chose not to make choices in your life without critical analysis of their basis, worth, validity and subsequent consequences - you should pay for it - all of it. Insurance company's have finally wised up to those who chose to be addicted to tobacco, alcohol, etc. It only seems fair to extend the same logic to the supernaturally addicted - whose chosen belief systems require that they receive additional care and consideration. This includes making the third largest business in the US pay its appropriate share of taxes - that being religion.
Reply to this comment
Should we honor some religions that believe in Theocracy?
by semi4 February 6, 2008 10:01 AM PST
Some religions believe that the only true government is some form of Theocracy. Should we honor their religious beliefs too?

Religious freedom is not an absolute. If religious freedom were an absolute, we should then be allowing terrorists to blow up more buildings?after all it is their religious beliefs that drive them to strap bombs to their chests.
Reply to this comment
Sorry
by Norman Moore February 6, 2008 10:20 AM PST
If we are to have a real ID and have it mean anything then it has to be universal or it means nothing. If people want to make an overly literal interpretation of the Biblical admonition against creating idols then so be it, however their choice can not be allowed to affect the rest of us. It is just like those primitives who believe that capturing their image in a camera will somehow steal their spirit and cause them to die. Pure superstitious balderdash!
Reply to this comment
That ship sailed long ago.
by duggerdm February 6, 2008 10:38 AM PST
The idea that you can keep the gov. or anyone else with substantial financial resources out of your records - medical or otherwise in this day and age is technically if not exceptionally naive. Somewhere some computer(s) is recording, analyzing, categorizing and archiving everything we write here. If you don't believe it - type your user name(s) into Google.
Reply to this comment
Photo ID
by doninvest February 6, 2008 10:56 AM PST
Enough is enough we have a large percentage of our population who are in this country without any right to be here.

Its time to stop this now I pay for uninsured motorists who will buy insurance even if requided by law. My medical insurance is higher because we have a large population of uninsured by choice who feel they are never going to need medical,

If you don't like rules move somewhere else.
Reply to this comment
Can't reply
by JM_Brazil February 6, 2008 11:03 AM PST
My religion doesn't allow me to post replies on forums or Blogs, and you can't make me. Period.
Reply to this comment
Notice how REAL ID is already looking to expand
by m.meister February 6, 2008 11:17 AM PST
Did you catch the little statement about how DHS is looking to
require REAL ID compliant cards to purchase certain medications.

Expect this expansion of "oversight" to continue, since they can
do so without authorization from Congress.

I would not be surprised that at some point down the line, you
will be required to have a REAL ID compliant card to purchase
basics such as gas and food.

And then they'll have road blocks at each state border, where
they'll check and register your travels across state lines.

Now -- just so long as they don't accidentally "lose" our data
that they are collecting. It's not like they've ever done that
before.

Sure you're life and credit may be destroyed because some some
flub at a federal agency by some guy who hates his job -- but
don't you feel safer?
Reply to this comment
Umm..the Amish don't fly on planes...
by CraigSam February 6, 2008 11:27 AM PST
Amish people reject technology and prefer to stay part of their small-town style community. I really have trouble imagining long lines of Amish people at the Airport being held-up for not having IDs. They have no phones or TVs or computers or cars. Are we really talking about Amish plane trips? Really...?
Reply to this comment
Showing 1 of 2 pages (128 Comments)
CONTINUED: ...
Page 1 | 2
advertisement