Real ID called threat to religious freedom

As whiny scumbags like Michael Chertoff tout the greatness of Real ID - the national ID that the Bush regime plans to make mandatory for all Americans - the idea is still being fought by states that don't have the money to comply or are sick of their citizens' rights being violated. But Real ID isn't just a threat to the constitutional right to privacy and state powers but also to the constitutional protection of religious freedom.

In the '80s there was a case of a Nebraska woman who refused to have a photo of herself on her driver's license, because she felt graven images violated her Christian beliefs. She was so opposed to graven images that she reportedly used a marker to blot out pictures of the Quaker Oats man on boxes of cereal she purchased. Her belief was certainly in the minority, but it was her belief.

The Supreme Court backed her right to have a driver's license with no photo. The woman wasn't imposing her beliefs on others, and nobody - not one person - was harmed by her refusal to have a picture taken. I was skeptical of this case 20 years ago, but when you look at the ruling, it makes sense.

Following this ruling, states are required to have religious exemptions for drivers who object to being photographed. But the Real ID ukase forces states to put photos on licenses - the Supreme Court ruling notwithstanding.

Real ID won't just affect a small number who object to the photo mandate. Under the new law, the federal government barks down a minimum standard for state-issued ID's that may also include other features besides photos. Maybe it'll include a barcode? Biometrics? Fingerprints? Eye scans? Feces samples? (The document that's supposed to list the new standards is lengthy and rambling, and I'm not about to wade through it all.)

Some states already have some combination of these features - but Real ID seems to just suck in the very worst features of every state, only to vomit them up all over the whole country. Large numbers of Americans find some of these features to violate their religion. These aren't just small, unaffiliated congregations or rigid adherents but also groups that are considered very mainstream and are actually quite progressive in practice. The ACLU's Daniel Mach said, "The faithful shouldn't have to choose between a driver's license and their religious beliefs," and that applies not just to photos but other features as well. Real ID also violates some state laws that specifically allow religious exemptions to government rules - in addition to the Supreme Court ruling on photos.

Real ID is nothing short of high-handed religious persecution. It's also nothing short of decreeing what religious practices the public will follow. But the Department of Homeland Suckyurity says violating the Constitution's religious freedom guarantee "serves important security purposes."

I say it serves important security purposes for Michael Jerkoff to shove the Real ID requirements up his ass. The liars in the Bush regime who go around screaming about how security should trump the Constitution are guilty of nothing less than treason: Terrorists want freedom to be chipped away, and Bush's quislings are giving terrorists what they want. I'm reluctant to support any presidential candidate who does not pledge to prosecute for treason those who have let the terrorists win.

If the Bushists' fantasy world conflicts with the Constitution, the Constitution takes priority. I'm not into organized religion, but I'll defend the right of others to stand tall against the whiny gallery of losers that tries making exceptions to the Constitution to suit their whims. To tens of millions of Americans, following the Real ID law is defying God.

(But don't say that in Florida. It's the only state that said that they "applaud the federal government" for passing Real ID.)

(Source: http://www.news.com/Religious-minorities-face-Real-ID-crackdown/2009-1028_3-6229258.html)