The way I look at it is very simple. If you don’t want to abide by the rules for the licence, don’t get one. Take the bus and shut-up.

Complete story here: http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1479552/posts

Interestingly, I agree with this statement but not in the context in which you meant it. When I read that I initially thought you meant that the increasing insanity of religous people was causing more and more people to realize they are wierdos, thus making more Agnostics and Athiest (hence, breeding them).

As for the post subject. A few years ago, I think here in Florida where I live, some Muslim woman tried (dont know the outcome) to SUE the DMV because they would not let her have a drivers license picture in her full burka. Now, sit back and absorb that for a moment to let the full impact of stupidity sink in. What the HELL is the point of a picture on a drivers license in which you are obscured from head to toe? One wonders if it was a big joke or was the person really THAT damaged?

I always love this argument that we’re going to be bred out by christians. As has been noted in so many other topics, they’ve become so scared of exposing their children to other world views (evolution, islam, gays) because they fear that it will wreck the faith of their children. Either the faith is slowly weakening allowing secularism to spread easier (we don’t need genetics to convince people of logic) or they’ll become an isolated group and fall prey to the standard weaknesses of isolated breeding populations (inbreeding, smaller population size). either way, I don’t see this as natural selection working against non-believers. Its just a survival mechanism, Religious folk have more children, much like mosquittos, due to the fact that so few will survive as a Religious person until adulthood.

(PS: Religious folk breed more than secular agnostic/atheist/non-practisers. Natural selection is getting rid of the group that isn’t breeding faster than the group that’s dying having bred.)

I couldn’t care less if moslem women covered themselves up like that, except that my potential mates in this area are quite few due to most girls’ strong religious believes.

Hospitals should be secular, as well as countries(to hell with G W B for his “Atheists shouldn’t be seen as US citizens”) and if any religious people have a problem with it, let them buy 3ed party gowns which are accepted at the hospital, if they want to waste their money, let them. Hopefully natural selection soon rids of us of all those freaks and we can start truely embracing the feature.

Agony

I agree with agnostic about the “when in rome” part, but the question is where to draw the line with it.

When it comes to this kind of thing, I don’t care when the parents do it (they know the risks), but with situations like the one with Jehovah’s Witnesses mentioned above, I can’t help but fear for the children of these people. Their life is in someone else’s hands, and that person has put their life on the line for what? If you put your own life at risk for something like that, fine, but when you start risking people who may not know or be able to help themselves, then there is a serious problem. I feel nothing but support for the doctors who “lose” those identity cards. And if I would have to let people die in order to be granted passage into heaven, I think I would choose life.

On the other hand, a good point was raised in the article and by Gasmonso about the limits of political correctness. Just where do we draw the line? It comes down to a clash of interests, in which case I would logically say that “when in Rome”…

However, it does come down to the people, and if they are more comfortable with one choice over another then so be it. My less tolerant half would argue that the gowns need not be so damned covered up… if anything to allow better visual diagnosis.

But I ramble. There is no answer to this problem, only compromises which leave neither party satisfied and start a whole host of other issues.