The Shotgun Blog
« 20/20 segment on health care reform | Main | Everything New Is Old Again »
Tuesday, August 04, 2009
Supreme Court rules against Hutterite's religious freedoms
On July 24th, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled against some of Alberta's Hutterite communities, ensuring they will no longer be exempt from being required to have photographs on their drivers licenses.
The Hutterites believe that photographs are prohibited by the second commandment. While that belief would seem to fall under their constitutional right to freedom of religion, the ruling states that being exempt from having their photograph taken on religious grounds does not satisfy Section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which states that our rights and freedoms can be overridden if it can be "demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society." You can thank Trudeau for that one.
In his latest column written for the Western Standard, Pierre Lemieux examines the ruling and questions the need for photographs on government identification in the first place:
A drivers’ licencing system calls for adding photographs, which soon morph into a digital photo data base. What’s the next step? Biometric ID papers or RFID implants? Once you get into this logic, the end product will be a parent licencing system, a three-decade-old academic proposal based on the driver licencing model. The reason why no drivers’ licences should carry a picture is that we need to stop this drift – if we are too shy to question the whole system of licencing drivers.
Look at the big picture. The danger of official ID papers is that they allow the state to monitor individuals and, thus, to reduce the cost of enforcing and imposing growing regulation on them. Photographs on drivers’ licences (and on medicare cards) contributed much to the rise of government ID papers in Canada. When they bore no picture, they were less efficient. Blessed inefficiency!
Even the Supreme Court recognizes that requiring photo identification is a violation of the Hutterite's right to freedom of religion. The Hutterites originally came to Alberta because it offered them the freedom to practice their religion as they see fit. Not anymore apparently.
Not only is it disgraceful for the Alberta government to challenge the exemption, which to my knowledge has not created many problems in the past, it is also wrong that the Supreme Court thought that limiting their freedoms was justified, supposedly to protect identity theft.
Pierre Lemieux's full article can be found at westernstandard.ca
Posted by Jesse Kline on August 4, 2009 in Religion | Permalink
Comments
dp, you don't know a damn thing about their religion, oh did you watch a 60 minutes special?
Much like the much famed Amish, the Hutterites don't all shun all technology, even less than the Amish in many cases. And furthermore you assume all people of all religions believe the same thing. One may have a problem with a photo and another may not, and both may call themselves the same thing, and at their core, indeed both may be.
You sir are a bigot.
Posted by: Pete | 2009-08-04 8:15:36 PM
"demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society"
Yep, that section of the charter trumps anything else in there and is used all of the time to violate the terms of the charter.
Posted by: Scott Carnegie | 2009-08-04 9:10:33 PM
I see nothing wrong with requiring a license to operate a two-tonne murder machine. My objections would come if the licensing qualifications became onerous or exclusionary. In the event, there are few developed countries where a driver's license requires less effort to get than the U.S. or Canada.
Furthermore, although it would be nice if modern biometrics technology could offer Hutterites, Muslim women, and others who object to being photographed an acceptable alternative, such as biometric fingerprint data, the fact remains that having a photo on the documentation is still the best guarantee that the bearer is the rightful owner. Unless, of course, your distaste for officialdom goes so far as to encourage the use of phony IDs.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-08-04 9:10:48 PM
Personally I think the Supreme Court of Canada is guilty of duplicitous rulings. Muslim women may have their Driver's License or Passport photograph taken while they are in full burkha's.
It could be anybody under there so what's the point? Also certain religions are allowed to carry deadly weapons (knives) into schools and anywhere else in public, as part of their religion. So why can't I carry a deadly weapon in case I need it for self defense?
Oh that's right! I was born here in main stream society...God forbid I should have any rights, religious or otherwise.
This kind of crap is just our government's way of saying we'll do whatever the hell we want, when we want. Justice doesn't have to be the criteria...just "rule" for the sake of rule.
Get used to it, its only going to get worse.
Posted by: The original JC | 2009-08-04 9:14:42 PM
"Yep, that section of the charter trumps anything else in there and is used all of the time to violate the terms of the charter."
The problem is not the provision, but the frequency with which it is applied.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-08-04 9:21:00 PM
If this ruling keeps Daniel Tschetter from borrowing a driver's license, and killing another family, then it's all worthwhile.
Posted by: dp | 2009-08-04 9:41:36 PM
Muslim women may have their Driver's License or Passport photograph taken while they are in full burkha's.
Posted by: The original JC | 2009-08-04 9:14:42 PM
Thats complete and utter bullshit. The following link shows what is acceptable and not for passport photos. Do you make this stuff up on your own or is there a website that you get it from?
http://www.ppt.gc.ca/cdn/photos.aspx?lang=eng
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-08-04 10:01:24 PM
The following link shows what is acceptable and not for passport photos.
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-08-04 10:01:24 PM
How about driver's licenses kamrade? how do they fare?
Posted by: The original JC | 2009-08-04 10:10:20 PM
The following link shows what is acceptable and not for passport photos.
Posted by: The Stig | 2009-08-04 10:01:24 PM
And rather than address the entire thought...you nit pick. What a narrow minded little (statist) man you really are.
Posted by: The original JC | 2009-08-04 10:12:35 PM
Not many muslim women get drunk, and ram cement trucks into innocent children.
Posted by: dp | 2009-08-04 10:14:41 PM
This dp animal that says these bad things about
hutterites is so far out of wack,i wonder how
drugs he has in his system today,after all he
does work in the oilpatch.There are only 2 colonies fighting for no pictures,and he thinks
they are all the same. Living right beside 4
colonies i know better then to believe all these lies he is trying tell.They pay as much taxes as everybody else,and they can go to school as long as they want.they are not slave drivers,they do not marry cousins,and colonies i live close to all have pictures on their DL,and they all have passports,If you had a bad deal with 1 hutterite
do not think they are all the same.After living
beside them for 48 years i think i know better.Hopefully the people that know them know better as well.
Posted by: C Chapman | 2009-08-04 10:34:01 PM
Driving is a privilege rather than a right. The owner/controller of the road gets to determine who has a license and what the conditions are. All other arguments are pure nonsense.
Posted by: DML | 2009-08-04 10:44:22 PM
I would have to assume the same is true of Muslim women?
Posted by: Floyd Looney | 2009-08-04 10:50:20 PM
After reading all of the above comments I feel the need to point out a few facts (if you must argue please do so intelligently).
The first point is that is one is going to use Daniel Tschetter as an example it is important to note that he has not lived on a colony for years..so people who belong to the Brethren would not really consider him a hutterite.
Second point..I have taught at a hutterite colony. Typically students attend until they are 15 years of age but there are some very foreward thinking colonies in which students complete their GED. Hutterite colonies are advocates of literacy and encourage their children to be very literate and capable of mathematic calculations (which is more than what is encouraged by parents in some public schools. I also attended junior and senior high with a hutterite.
As for "knocking up his own daughter"?? DO you think that child sexual abuse is a crime that is limited to one group of people??? Sadly it is not.
As for taxes and income for hutterite people..they do not make money as individual people's, and if they do it is very minimal (for example selling a product such as socks or gloves specially made). They work for the good of their community...which is something that the outside world could also encourage.
Hutterites are like all people. All people have faults and characteristics that are not always liked by others. All people do things they should not and we have people who commint criminal offenses from all walks of life. You cannot intelligently take a group of thousands of people and stereotype them with certain negative characteristics.
Posted by: drylander | 2009-08-04 11:38:16 PM
"Driving is a privilege rather than a right."
Why do I need someone elses permission to drive?
"The owner/controller of the road gets to determine who has a license and what the conditions are."
Yep, and since government roads are "public property", the public already owns them.
Posted by: Scott Carnegie | 2009-08-04 11:41:30 PM
"Why do I need someone elses permission to drive?"
Let me answer a question with a question: Why do I need someone else's permission to slit your gullet if you smack up my fender?
"Yep, and since government roads are "public property", the public already owns them."
The public owns fighter jets, too. Maybe we should let the kiddies try them out.
Scott, there is more to liberty than resenting being told what to do.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-08-05 12:19:11 AM
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Enjoy the rights of others that you have those rights to enjoy. Deny the rights of others the rights that you are denied.
Hutterites have the same rights you have. Who could prove differently in this egalitarian society?
Render unto Caesar those things that are Caesars' Leave the Hutterites to do what Hutterites do.
Posted by: Agha Ali Arkhan | 2009-08-05 12:30:16 AM
All this debate is nonsense. When someone enters a country they should realize there are certain rules that they must follow. For example, I'm not going to Saudi Arabia to open a bar or India to open up a steak house. There is a difference between freedom of religion and religious freedom to endager someone else's life. For example, I don't care if a Sikh wants to wear a turbin. But what right do they have to carry around a concealed weapon. What next, someone creates a religion where it's okay to carry around a rocket launcher. Don't laugh, L. Ron Hubbard managed to create a religion. And may I remind you that at one point in history, Christianity was a cult. Iuppiter and Juno were in charge of the world. And now more people worship money rather than any god. However they do manage to pay lip service to Him. Just look at the American Republican Party. I dare anyone to defend them from being hypocrites.
Posted by: Doug Gilchrist | 2009-08-05 8:12:00 AM
First, Doug, the traditional daggers of the Sikhs are not carried concealed, but in an ornamental metal scabbard at the waist, in plain sight. In fact, it was the court that indicated a preference that the kirpan be carried concealed instead of openly so as to avoid alarming nervous yuppies.
Second, a knife is a legitimate tool that every citizen ought to have the right to carry; it is not a weapon of mass destruction. For that matter, any suitably trained non-felon ought to be allowed a revolver.
Thirdly, it makes no sense to omit the non-Latin "J" in "Jupiter," yet include it in "Juno." As anyone familiar with the classics should know.
And fourthly, the Democrats are even worse hypocrites than the Republicans, because unlike the GOP, Democrats make a show of caring about the poor when in truth neither party does, except when currying votes. Republicans at least believe in a higher power, whereas Democrats, the liberal urban kind at any rate, are their own gods. You know all too well what I'm talking about.
By the way, the word is "turban," not "turbin."
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-08-05 9:01:22 AM
Lemieux makes some good arguments. Until I read them I thought what's the big deal about photo licenses, but he's right it's just another way for big brother to keep his eye on us.
Posted by: Farmer Joe | 2009-08-05 9:28:12 AM
Of course, a photo is needed, why else bother? Besides, if a photo is indeed required, it is (should be) required for everyone.
And of course a photo id is (should be) mandatory when voting.
Posted by: Johan i Kanada | 2009-08-05 10:09:03 AM
Wow - talk about mixed messages with respect to religious rights and freedoms in this country!
As far as I'm concerned, the photos aren't the most contentious issue where citizens' privacy is concerned. In the past, an individual's SIN was not linked to their driver's license...well that changed in 2004 or 2005. I was horrified to think that was actually the case so I did an experiment.
In the summer of 2004 or 2005 I went out to the mall without my credit cards and headed for a cell phone kiosk where I asked about cell phones, cell phone plans, etc.
When I expressed an interest in purchasing the phone the fellow told me I needed to produce a credit card before I could do so. When I told him I didn't have mine with me that day, he told me I could provide him with my driver's license.
I was a bit perplexed by this but gave him my driver's license....he actually pulled a credit report just by typing in my driver's license number.
Needless to say, I was completely shocked! Individuals really have no idea as to the extent that their privacy has been eroded and the kind of power and control the government has over us as a result of this practice.
People are sheeple...and unless they wake up out of their zombie-like trances, they will unknowingly become serfs to the government.
Posted by: libertybelle | 2009-08-05 11:31:34 AM
dp, you have no idea what you are talking about. For example, you say that Hutterites are only allowed to get a grade 8 education. You are full of it because where I live in Manitoba there are twelve Hutterite colonies nearby. I have attended high school graduations at many of them. I have worked with the colonies in MB and AB for twelve years, and many of their members, male and female are completing college and university degrees now. Grow up and get your facts straight before you spew your venom.
Posted by: john | 2009-08-05 11:35:12 AM
"Second, a knife is a legitimate tool that every citizen ought to have the right to carry; it is not a weapon of mass destruction. For that matter, any suitably trained non-felon ought to be allowed a revolver."
"I see nothing wrong with requiring a license to operate a two-tonne murder machine."
Interesting. I mostly agree with your first statement (well sortof). We have a right to defend ourselves. So why a license to operate an automobile? Do you believe licenses lead to safer driving?
Posted by: Charles | 2009-08-05 12:23:36 PM
@Shane"Thirdly, it makes no sense to omit the non-Latin "J" in "Jupiter," yet include it in "Juno." As anyone familiar with the classics should know.
The six cases of Jupiter in classical Latin are Iupiter, Jovis, Jovi, Jovem, Iupiter, Jove. So when you open your mouth, you constantly spout magnus turdus taurus.
@Shane"And fourthly, the Democrats are even worse hypocrites than the Republicans, because unlike the GOP, Democrats make a show of caring about the poor when in truth neither party does, except when currying votes. Republicans at least believe in a higher power, whereas Democrats, the liberal urban kind at any rate, are their own gods. You know all too well what I'm talking about."
Yeah, and GOP supporters always show how intelligent they are. I just love Sarah Palin Supporters. The vile media just takes her words and records them. How awful.
Posted by: Doug Gilchrist | 2009-08-06 7:25:36 AM
Re:"Section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which states that our rights and freedoms can be overridden if it can be "demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society."
We do not live in a " free and democratic society."
The so-called, "Charter of Rights" was imposed by the political elites of the day under Trudeau. The ordinary citizen did not get to vote on this document they are ruled by.
How to Corrupt, Pervert, and Subvert a Country “Legally”
By Stephen J. Gray
“…the Charter was a ruse. Trudeau wanted to consolidate power in the Supreme Court of Canada and weaken Parliament.” [1]
Read more at: http://graysinfo.blogspot.com
Posted by: Stephen J. Gray | 2009-08-08 6:41:30 PM
Stephen, how true, but it is amazing how many have no understanding of this fact, or the fact that we were more free prior to Trudeau's charter under the BNAA and English Common Law.
Posted by: Alain | 2009-08-08 7:56:38 PM
Wow, all my comments were deleted! I'm the only one on here, who's had any interaction with hutterites, and my opinions are dismissed, vilified, and ridiculed.
Ignorance is bliss.
Posted by: dp | 2009-08-08 11:18:44 PM
Wow, all my comments were deleted! I'm the only one on here, who's had any interaction with hutterites, and my opinions are dismissed, vilified, and ridiculed.
None of the above were intended. Your comments were hateful and imposed negative stereotypes on an entire group of people. Provocative discussion is encouraged, but hate speech will not be tolerated.
Posted by: Jesse Kline | 2009-08-09 3:48:02 PM
Hello, Fallow Men,
I am a Hutterite that has not had any photogragh taken of me because the Bible teaches me not to.
But Where is that at? It is even in the ten commendments, if you miss it I am very sorry. We the Hutterites have studied the bible all of our lives, our ansestors have been perscuted, because they have pointed out where the Goverment has done wrong, Or you the people. You should start with reading the bible every day, so you will some day find it.
And you may also meanwhile come out to a colony and I would show you around.
Thou Shalt Make or Have NO Images.
Pray to Thou God.
Posted by: Benjamin Wurtz | 2009-09-16 10:46:43 AM
Into the wine already Benjamin?
Posted by: dp | 2009-09-16 3:57:54 PM
That is what they asked Paul in the bilble!!!
Posted by: Benjamin Wurtz | 2009-09-28 4:28:05 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.