Hmm, here's an interesting topic...

Last Dynasty Public Forum
Post Reply
Sparkie
Harvester
Harvester
Posts: 368
Joined: Sat Feb 15, 2003 11:29 pm
Location: Florida

Hmm, here's an interesting topic...

Post by Sparkie » Tue May 27, 2003 6:29 pm

Everyone can put their veils back on! :D

http://www.wftv.com/news/2227835/detail.html

What's this world coming to?
Are we there yet?

Sparkie al-Fireblaze, 120 OG mage
The Astounding Andy, 106 OG mage,

Lagmatic
Farmer
Farmer
Posts: 726
Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2003 7:40 am

Post by Lagmatic » Tue May 27, 2003 6:45 pm

She can keep as much religious freedom as she wants.

Neither the constitution or the bill of rights mentions drivers licenses. ;)

That said, they should find an alternate means of identifying people who don't want their photos listed.

My massachusetts license to carry has a photo and a fingerprint on it, for instance.

Of course, if they went to fingerprints, they could not longer use it as photo ID at other places, like banks and whatnot, and the banks would have every right to reject any attempt to use it.

Pee-Wee

Post by Pee-Wee » Tue May 27, 2003 6:55 pm

My thoughts...

The US constitution DOES grant you the right to religious freedom...

It does NOT, however, grant you the right to a drivers license. (Ok, so, it does grant you the right to interstate travle, so... WALK YOUR VEILD ASS to work.

And, on one more note... The US Constitution DOES grant you the right to GUNS!!! Oh yeah baby, and lots of em'. Oh yeah... FIREPOWER...

IG, I use a stick, IRL... I use, what the natives called, a... THUNDER stick. WHOYAH!

IRL, I pwn joo =) HAHAHAHA

We hold these truths to be self evident... otherwise, we blow your damned head off. :lol:

Hey... Hey... Hey... Ted Kennedy's CAR has killed more people than any/all of my guns. :lol:

LOOK OUT!!! Pee-Wee's ARMED!



(Please excuse the previous nonsense, I cut back on my medication).

BANG BANG BANG!!! Oh yeah baby... guns guns guns... gimme gimme gimme.

Guns don't kill people...

I DO!


:snipersmile: :2gunfire: :snipersmile: :2gunfire: :snipersmile: :2gunfire: :snipersmile: :2gunfire: :snipersmile: :2gunfire: :snipersmile: :2gunfire: :snipersmile: :2gunfire: :snipersmile: :2gunfire: :snipersmile: :2gunfire: :snipersmile: :2gunfire: :snipersmile: :2gunfire: :snipersmile: :2gunfire:

Pee-Wee

Post by Pee-Wee » Tue May 27, 2003 7:00 pm

-
Sorry... Sugar high...


I break for animals...

then shoot them, eat them, and wear their skins.

Mickie
Harvester
Harvester
Posts: 340
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2003 5:52 am
Contact:

Post by Mickie » Tue May 27, 2003 7:45 pm

so... WALK YOUR VEILD ASS to work
/me wipes Mountain Dew of the monitor.
Dammit peewee, your gonna make me short out my monitor and pee my pants.

:lol:

User avatar
stumpy wallace
Professional Farmer
Professional Farmer
Posts: 1012
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2003 7:21 pm
Location: under a rock screaming for mercy
Contact:

Post by stumpy wallace » Tue May 27, 2003 8:01 pm

lol i agree what is the world coming to

User avatar
Lucky Strike
Harvester
Harvester
Posts: 450
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:09 pm

Post by Lucky Strike » Wed May 28, 2003 2:26 am

This has been in the news for months now.

The problem is that our court system and the abuse thereof have really gotten out of hand.

When a person can get money for spilling coffee on themselves (uh, I didn't know it was hot ... its coffee, moron!!!) we need to take a look at how the system works.

Lagmatic
Farmer
Farmer
Posts: 726
Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2003 7:40 am

Post by Lagmatic » Wed May 28, 2003 5:18 am

Actually, people quote that mcdonalds coffee case as the epitome of ridiculous torts.

If you look up the case in Lexis/Nexis you'd be really surprised. the machine they were using was a sealed-unit set to the maximum temperature.

They were giving people coffee hot enough to cause instant contact third degree burns.

And mcdonalds has KNOWN this. They ended up showing 700 something cases of people they knew had been burned by their coffee.

You can read more about it here:
http://www.atlanet.org/ConsumerMediaRes ... ecase.aspx

User avatar
Lucky Strike
Harvester
Harvester
Posts: 450
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:09 pm

Post by Lucky Strike » Thu May 29, 2003 5:09 am

Lag, you do indeed have the facts right ... but I still don't agree with it.

I also don't agree with people getting hurt by guns and sueing the gun manufacturer. Or falling off a ladder and sueing the ladder manufacturer.

Enough is enough already.

Pee-Wee

Post by Pee-Wee » Fri Jun 06, 2003 8:05 pm

WOOT!

http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/06/06/flori ... index.html

Ok.. first...

WHY did it take 18 pages to come to this obvious conclusion?

Second...

THIS LADY IS FULL OF CRAPOLA! Anyone else see the EYE MAKEUP she's wearing? I'm sure Mohamad would LOVE to see that.... What a crock of excriment.

I like the little info on the side...

DRIVER'S ID RULES IN MUSLIM NATIONS

Saudi Arabia: Women aren't allowed to drive
Iran: Women wear a traditional chador, which does not cover the face.
Egypt: Women do not cover their face in I.D. pictures
United Arab Emirates: Women do not cover their face in I.D. pictures
Oman: Women do not cover their face in I.D. pictures
Kuwait: Women do not cover their face in I.D. pictures
Qatar: Women do not cover their face in I.D. pictures
Bahrain: Women do not cover their face in I.D. pictures
Jordan: Women can drive if their faces are covered but do not cover their face in I.D. pictures

Post Reply