[Newsbot]

Title: Should a Red Deer man be allowed to wear his Oilers cap in his driver's licence photo'
Category: Misc CDN
Posted By: Hyack
Date: 2016-03-11 14:39:56
Canadian

[andyt]

Yes. Either no head coverings for anybody, or head coverings for anybody.

[BeaverFever]

This guy is an idiot. It's like saying healthy people should get wheelchairs because cripples get wheelchairs

[herbie]

Yeah he's beyond an idiot. More so as it's a baseball cap. He probably has a Bolo bat in his back pocket too.
After 30 years in the boonies I still want to slap the hat off the fucking boors wearing them in the dining room and shove their muddy boots up their arse.

[andyt]

You can get a wheelchair if you want. And the pc term is differently abled.

It's not like saying that at all. It's saying if there is no security or identification concern if somebody wants to wear a turban or niqab for religious reasons, then there's no security or identification concern for somebody wearing an oiler's cap.

[Strutz]

I don't really care one way or the other. As long as their face is visible and recognizable for id purposes, that should be the main concern. I suspect they will say no though.

However, if it is decided that he can wear it then they will have to allow anyone to wear their favorite hat that they wear all the time for their license photo.

[herbie]

"Indoor shoes" and jackboots are both footwear too.
Andy trying to tell argue a baseball cap and a turban are the "same thing"?
Not arguing over hiding their face. Unless they prefer to do a DNA swab at every roadblock...

















same thing"?

[andyt]

herbie herbie:

"Indoor shoes" and jackboots are both footwear too.
Andy trying to tell argue a baseball cap and a turban are the "same thing"?
Not arguing over hiding their face. Unless they prefer to do a DNA swab at every roadblock...






"

Not sure what tell argue means, but my point is that if head gear is allowed for religious reasons, it can't be a security or identification issue. So one head covering is as good as another.

As for DNA swabs, Alberta thankfully came to their senses and don't allow the burka.

[BeaverFever]

andyt andyt:

You can get a wheelchair if you want. And the pc term is differently abled.

It's not like saying that at all. It's saying if there is no security or identification concern if somebody wants to wear a turban or niqab for religious reasons, then there's no security or identification concern for somebody wearing an oiler's cap.

No that's oversimplification. Obviously it's easier to identify someone not wearing a hat, which is why that is the rule. But it doesn't make it impossible to the point of hardship where people with needs can't be accommodated.

[herbie]

I listened to the guy interviewed on the radio, he was basing his 'argument' on the same bullshit arguments used 35 years ago, unwilling to distinguish a fashion accessory from religious gear on the false argument they were the same thing.
The moron went on to defend that retard who wants to wear a colander on his head for his DL picture as it is 'religious gear'.
Honest to God being asked to remove your hat might be a minor annoyance to him but it isn't like a violation of rights or an offense to any deeply held beliefs! Let the guy shell out the dough and hope some sensible Judge will say fuck off get outa my court.
BTW almost all the guys I know that always wear a baseball hat have hair like andyt's avatar... is that why they wear it all the time? Or is it that why their hair got like that?

[PublicAnimalNo9]

herbie herbie:

I listened to the guy interviewed on the radio, he was basing his 'argument' on the same bullshit arguments used 35 years ago, unwilling to distinguish a fashion accessory from religious gear on the false argument they were the same thing.

"Religious gear" That's funny because it's NOT religious gear. The burkha is not a religious raiment. The niqab is not a religious raiment. Neither are hijabs but at least they're not a symbol of oppression.
In fact, the Egyptian government is moving to ban burkhas and face coverings in public areas and govt buildings.
Jordan has some incredibly smart looking fashions for women. The clothing is modest but still quite feminine. I don't know if they banned burkhas and niqabs in Jordan but ya sure don't see whole lotta Jordanian women wearing tents or having to cover their faces in public.

[martin14]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

herbie herbie:

I listened to the guy interviewed on the radio, he was basing his 'argument' on the same bullshit arguments used 35 years ago, unwilling to distinguish a fashion accessory from religious gear on the false argument they were the same thing.

"Religious gear" That's funny because it's NOT religious gear. The burkha is not a religious raiment. The niqab is not a religious raiment. Neither are hijabs but at least they're not a symbol of oppression.
In fact, the Egyptian government is moving to ban burkhas and face coverings in public areas and govt buildings.
Jordan has some incredibly smart looking fashions for women. The clothing is modest but still quite feminine. I don't know if they banned burkhas and niqabs in Jordan but ya sure don't see whole lotta Jordanian women wearing tents or having to cover their faces in public.

Oh, stop bringing facts into an emotional lefty hypocritical double standard meltdown.

[sandorski]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

herbie herbie:

I listened to the guy interviewed on the radio, he was basing his 'argument' on the same bullshit arguments used 35 years ago, unwilling to distinguish a fashion accessory from religious gear on the false argument they were the same thing.

"Religious gear" That's funny because it's NOT religious gear. The burkha is not a religious raiment. The niqab is not a religious raiment. Neither are hijabs but at least they're not a symbol of oppression.
In fact, the Egyptian government is moving to ban burkhas and face coverings in public areas and govt buildings.
Jordan has some incredibly smart looking fashions for women. The clothing is modest but still quite feminine. I don't know if they banned burkhas and niqabs in Jordan but ya sure don't see whole lotta Jordanian women wearing tents or having to cover their faces in public.

How do you make this determination? Even amongst Christian Sects there are some that have head scarves for women.

[BRAH]

Face painters should be allowed.

[andyt]

sandorski sandorski:

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

herbie herbie:

I listened to the guy interviewed on the radio, he was basing his 'argument' on the same bullshit arguments used 35 years ago, unwilling to distinguish a fashion accessory from religious gear on the false argument they were the same thing.

"Religious gear" That's funny because it's NOT religious gear. The burkha is not a religious raiment. The niqab is not a religious raiment. Neither are hijabs but at least they're not a symbol of oppression.
In fact, the Egyptian government is moving to ban burkhas and face coverings in public areas and govt buildings.
Jordan has some incredibly smart looking fashions for women. The clothing is modest but still quite feminine. I don't know if they banned burkhas and niqabs in Jordan but ya sure don't see whole lotta Jordanian women wearing tents or having to cover their faces in public.

How do you make this determination? Even amongst Christian Sects there are some that have head scarves for women.

You can rave on about hijabs, but you'll never get the Sikh men to take off their turbans, that for sure is a religious requirement. Burkas/niqabs aren't allowed anyway. So I still say good for the goose, good for the gander. Allow head coverings that don't obscure the face for all.