Issue date: 3/5/09 Section: Editorial/Opinion

It's hard for people to put themselves in another person's shoes, and maybe it would be the same for headwear.

Minnesota State Rep. Steve Gottwalt (R-St. Cloud) wants to pass a bill to ban any kind of headwear in a driver's license as a matter of public safety, according to a March 2 WCCO article.

Of course the Muslim community was not happy about this bill. Some Muslims have said they have a religious right to cover their heads, according to the article.

Gottwalt said this bill would make it easier for law enforcement to identify people, and it would make it fair for everyone.

According to the Federal Reserve Ban of Minneapolis, there are between 70,000 to 80,000 Muslims in Minnesota.

Unfortunately the true number is not available because it's very hard to collect demographic information about faith-based communities, the Web site stated, adding the estimates still reveal a significantly steady increase of the Muslim population.

I don't know what Gottwalt's reasons are behind this ban. I know he says it would be easier for law enforcement to identify people, but that would only be the case for caps or things that people use to cover themselves when they don't want to be seen or recognized.

Sunglasses are not allowed because they hide your eyes, I understand that; however, prescription glasses are allowed because is something that you wear everyday. A person's driver's license even has a space to put this kind of information.

My point is Muslim women wear headscarves every day.

A Muslim woman in the article, Suban Khalif, said they wear the headscarf nearly 24 hours because it is part of their religion, and taking it off - even for a few minutes - is a big deal.

This contradicts their beliefs. What ever happened to the First Amendment?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

The amendment clearly states Congress will make "no law" in regards to a religious practice.

The bill Gottwalt is trying to pass is breaking this amendment. A headscarf is part of a person's right to freely exercise their religion.

Yesterday, a woman in Oklahoma was allowed to get her picture taken wearing her headscarf, according to a March 3 NEWSOK.com article.

The article stated the woman wanted to renew her license in October, but the person taking her picture told her she had to remove her headscarf or move it past the hairline. The woman then contacted the Oklahoma chapter of the Council of American Islamic Relations, and they contacted the Department of Public Safety.

According to the Department of Public Safety, a head covering is permitted when taking the driver's license photo as long as it does not obstruct or obscure a full front view of a person's face from hairline to chin.

I just don't see the point of having this bill and I hope it doesn't pass.

Muslim women don't wear headscarves because they are hiding something from law enforcement.

Is Gottwalt afraid they could smuggle weapons of mass destruction underneath their headscarves? I personally believe it would be very difficult to do, not to mention that it would be heavy.

Gottwalt's bill would make exceptions for people with deformities or medical conditions that do require headwear.

In the article, Gottwalt said the bill would make it fair for everyone.

If this is the case, will he make nuns take off their habit as well when they are getting their picture taken?

Claudia Lozano is a senior print journalism major and editorial editor of The Spectator. "Breaking Boundaries" appears every Thursday.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools