MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus:         Newsletters 
Saturday, December 20, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 30.0° F  Light Snow
Collapse Photo Bar

Religious Extremism?

If it's news, but not politics, then it goes here.

Postby Michael Patrick » Thu Mar 22, 2007 2:51 pm

Chuck_Schick wrote: You do realize not all Mennonites share identical mores, right?


I know quite a bit about Mennonites. I'm married to one... :wink:

I agree, the reporting was dumb. Posting the story here was even dumber. I mean, what is the story anyway? That someone has decided NOT to sue the government because they disagree with a law?
Michael Patrick
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3969
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 8:56 am
Location: Around here somewhere

Postby Chuck_Schick » Thu Mar 22, 2007 3:00 pm

Michael Patrick wrote:
Chuck_Schick wrote: You do realize not all Mennonites share identical mores, right?
I agree, the reporting was dumb. Posting the story here was even dumber.

Amen, man. Every time I step in one of the Trollerator's spittle puddles I wanna kick myself.

Let's make a deal: You kick my ass, I'll kick yours.

"Just kick my ass, okay? Kick this ass for a man, that's all."

</fufkin>

p.s. Didn't mean to offend you or your better half, MP. For the record, I have no beef with people's spiritual beliefs as long as they don't try to cram 'em down my throat. I'll admit, I get a little out of line poking fun of the devout sometimes (though I have taken my share of shit for being a heathen).
Chuck_Schick
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 10385
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2001 4:41 pm
Location: back atcha

Postby TheMilitant » Fri Mar 23, 2007 11:55 am

Henry Vilas wrote:So what does a Mennonite's Arkansas driver's license look like? Just a blank space where the picture normally goes or maybe a pencil stetch of the license holder?

Just curious.


It is actually your SS card.
TheMilitant
Member
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2006 12:28 pm
Location: The Eastside of Things..

Postby Marvell » Fri Mar 23, 2007 11:59 am

Chuck_Schick wrote:I have taken my share of shit for being a heathen.


Try being a blasphemer some time. It's a lonely gig.
Marvell
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6989
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 11:28 pm
Location: At one with time and space

Postby Henry Vilas » Fri Mar 23, 2007 12:16 pm

TheMilitant wrote:
Henry Vilas wrote:So what does a Mennonite's Arkansas driver's license look like? Just a blank space where the picture normally goes or maybe a pencil stetch of the license holder?

Just curious.


It is actually your SS card.

Huh?
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 20274
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Postby Mike S. » Fri Mar 23, 2007 1:39 pm

The Mennonites are right. Other people may not be as stubborn, or as courageous, but they are correct on their Scripture and they are correct in standing up for their rights.

If you look over the Bible you might notice that one of the ten commandments specifically prohibits worshipping graven images. There's no commandment against driving. Now you can say that the commandment isn't talking about that kind of thing, but there's where you run afoul of history. In fact the Babylonians whose customs the Israelites rejected had a custom of creating fancy engraved "names" sanctified by the priests, which were in essence identification cards from the first millennium B.C. So it's easy for me to believe that rejecting these identity cards is a big part of what that commandment is all about. And the early Christians preferred to be thrown to the lions rather than bow in respect to a little statue of their Roman ruler - they took this thing seriously.

Now you can say that that's tough luck and "driving is a privilege". But that is a Big Lie, repeated a million times but still not true. If driving were truly a privilege, it could be restricted to whites only - just as you people want it restricted to non-Mennonites. It could be auctioned off to the highest bidder for resale and you'd have to buy the right to drive at the market price, if you could afford it. There may not be a specific constitutional amendment for driving, but there is a requirement that people be treated equally and fairly under the law. The constitution itself says that something doesn't have to be listed as an amendment in order to be a right (tenth amendment).

Lastly I should say that it sounds like the state has not even tried to present an alternative here that might pass Mennonite restrictions. There are plenty of biometric face-reading gadgets - they could issue licenses with the photographic data recorded as a series of numbers, maybe even an entire .jpg file, just written out in ASCII. They could store the numeric data remotely and send a simulated picture generated on the fly directly to whatever device officers use to view offenders' photos normally. They could even try to hit the Mennonites with the administrative costs for using this option. But there is no such effort - only arrogance.
Mike S.
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1358
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 6:34 pm

Postby TheBookPolice » Fri Mar 23, 2007 2:01 pm

Oh for the love of god, Mike. We're not talking about anything sanctified or blessed or worshipped. It's a portrait. You have no clue as to the exact meaning of one of the ten commandments; it is the peak of arrogance on your part if you think you do.

And really, try harder to not acknowledge that some of the Mennonites don't have a problem with the photo ID. Some do, sure, but some don't. That means it's not an ironclad, carved in stone rule of the faith.

I think the Christian missionaries in Japan held the ten commandments in pretty high regard, but it was a torture worse than death for them when the Japanese made them trample copper engravings of Jesus' face as an act of forced apostasy. So how do you explain that? Cowardice? Weakness?

Only the Mennonites are right? Jesus.
TheBookPolice
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 8413
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 1:09 pm
Location: The mystical Far East

Postby Prof. Wagstaff » Fri Mar 23, 2007 2:32 pm

Mike S. wrote:Now you can say that that's tough luck and "driving is a privilege". But that is a Big Lie, repeated a million times but still not true.

It is 100% true.
Driving isn't a privelege? Then why do you need a license in the first place? Is it not illegal to drive without one? Then what the fuck are talking about? You have to qualify for a license. There are requirements which you must meet. You have to be 16. You must present valid identification when you apply. You have to be in the U.S. legally. You also have to be willing to have your freakin' picture pasted on the damn thing. Why? Because the State, unlike your idiotic assertions above, most definitely, absolutely, without even a glimmer of a doubt, has the power to set rules and limits related to the issuing of licenses. Heck, issuing such licenses is one of the fucking reasons we have a state. I know you would prefer anarchy, but your world would be a nightmare: "As far as you know I'm a doctor and I can kill as many wild animals on your property that I want and then serve'em up at my unregulated roadside pub where I also make moonshine and import deadly toxins for resale."

Mike S. wrote: If driving were truly a privilege, it could be restricted to whites only - just as you people want it restricted to non-Mennonites.

Come on! Just as the law says you need a license to drive a car, the law says that you may not discriminate on the grounds of race or religion. Those two rules don't somehow cancel each other out, no matter what idiotic claim you're making today.

Look:
The law requires a photo on your driver's license.
Some Mennonites don't want their picture on their license.
Any Mennonite willing to have their picture on their ID is good to go just as any non-Mennonite who refuses to have their picture taken for whatever reason will have to go without.
To recap: People who choose not to meet the requirements are denied licenses, but the requirement is not, as you would portray it, that you are not a Mennonite, it's that you are willing to allow your picture to be used for {insert diabolical music here} the purposes of identification.

Imagine this scenario: An Orthodox Jew applies for a job which he knows requires him to work on Saturdays. He is told repeatedly throughout the interview he will have to work Saturdays and he says nothing, ultimately being hired. As he's leaving the interview he says, "by the way, I can't work Saturdays, as commanded by my Lord." Is it religious discrimination to fire him? After all, he can't meet the requirements of the job because of his religion. If you say it is, then you're also saying that ANY job which requires someone to work on Saturday (or Sunday for that matter) is now in violation of your ridiculous standards. How could it not be?
Prof. Wagstaff
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 9047
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2002 6:35 pm

Previous

Return to Headlines

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR
Created with flickr badge.

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar