New Muslim congresswoman will seek to allow religious headwear in the House

nope, you still can visually tell who it is

it's kinda like Trump written response to Mueller's questions, no way to know if it's his responses or his lawyers

if you have 5 people next to each other all wearing black ski masks, it's not easy to tell them apart

 

There was actually a thing about DL photos with face coverings; big mess...

 

(excluding toupees and wigs)

 

PARTIZAN1 of

Ok Congress is not a house of worship.

 

More like a den of thieves..

 

If you are identified prior to sitting down by the Sargent at arms EVERYONE knows who you are

 

when I tune in to hear congress speak, I would like to see faces so I know who is speaking and see facial expressions

 

Your preferences are not compelling interest

 

maybe not to you, but most people would agree with me...

 

Again….the constitution is not decided on popularity

 

I also believe if one wants to drive they have to have a face photo and show the face to officers upon request

 

I agree. The compelling interest is public safety

 

again, the constitution does not say you can go into a court room or any government area with your face covered, anonymity is not a right in places like court rooms, ect...

in fact in some instances I would consider them a threat that needed to be neutralized immediately and then sorted out, if no one can see your hands or face, you may be considered a potential threat until confirmed otherwise

heck, you do not even have a second amendment right in a court room, try to take a gun to court and see where it gets you - same with taking on a airplane

 

In this case if they are cleared by the Sargent at arms and identified and have passed all the appropriate checks I do not see compelling interest

 

so people can see who is talking, see their facial expressions, ect.... plenty of reason not to allow people to hide their identity

I am 100% for allowing head scarfs and beanies, but not full face covering outfits

I would not even allow them into building with face coverings, even ski masks in the winter, remove them then you can enter - it's a security risk

 

So far the only reason you have given is it makes you uncomfortable. If they do not pose a threat per the Sargent at arms then your comfort is not compelling interest

 

I would not even allow them into building with face coverings, even ski masks in the winter, remove them then you can enter - it's a security risk

 

And after that Right Wing Crazytown. All Aboard the Insane Train, Fourth Reich coming fast.

 

Not if the sargent at arms....that is his job....says they are not a security risk

 

exactly, the far Christian right is more a threat to religious freedom then our Muslim leaders

"The Palin Principle – Bible trumps Constitution"

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/10/sarah-palin-american-law_n_569922.html

"Go back to what our founders and our founding documents meant — they’re quite clear — that we would create law based on the God of the bible and the ten commandments." - Palin

 

they do not verify every human that enters the building at the door

and if someone sneaks in, you would lose them and not be able to tell one from the other as they would all be anonymous

 

We may have to combat the liberals takeover of America.

And it won't be pretty.

 

I can tell you are already practicing your stone throwing.

 

The Sargent at arms identifies everyone on the floor of the chamber

 

I am not a Jewish, Christian or Muslim, no stone throwing in my beliefs

why would a good God ever tell people to stone people for working in the yard picking up sticks on a Sunday?