Total misrepresentation on Eteraz's blog!

Earlier, I wrote about my horror at a court decision that said a Christian woman would be able to get a driver's license without having her picture taken, because she was against 'graven images.' I found out about this case on Eteraz's blog. You would think, based on what was written on the blog, that the court case was a recent one. Nope. After scouring the net for the case (not easy, given how there was no link to the decision on Eteraz's blog), I finally found the court decision. You can read it yourself. Quaring v. Peterson, 728 F.2d 1121 (8th Cir. 1984). That is right. This was decided in 1984. Let's examine 1984, shall we? This was three years before even a report came out that the WTC was a target for terrorist attacks. It was nine years prior to the 1993 bombing. It was 17 1/2 years prior to September 11, 2001. In short, this case was decided before terrorism was a concern, and the need for photo IDs was so especially significant. 1984 was also a year that computers were still not that widespread. Identity theft was only in the very beginning stages. Credit card fraud was still in its infancy. In short, all of the very real security needs for a photo ID driver's license were basically nonexistent in 1984. As such, the court case has since been distinguished and is not followed anymore. Eteraz would lead you to believe otherwise, that somehow this is a case of bigotry towards Muslims, as courts won't allow the veil, but will allow Christians to not have photo IDs. This is a complete misrepresentation of reality.