Woman Challenges Oklahoma's "Mark of the Beast" Driver's License

The Left have been (mis)using the First Amendment’s religious freedom clause against Christians and conservatives for some time now. Now, our side is fighting back by invoking that same Constitutional right.
Charlie Butts reports for OneNewsNow, Sept 28, 2011, that the conservative Rutherford Institute has filed a suit to challenge Oklahoma’s biometric photo requirement for drivers’ licenses.
The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Kaye Beach, who refused the required biometric photograph when she applied for renewal of her driver’s license in March, and asked instead that she be allowed to use a low-resolution photograph for her license, based on religious grounds. Although Beach met all the other requirements for renewing her license, the Oklahoma Department of Public Safety (DPS) refused her request, insisting that state law does not provide alternatives or exemptions to the digitalized photos.
So a lawsuit has been filed against the Oklahoma Department of Public Safety for not accommodating Beach’s religious beliefs and for violating the Oklahoma Religious Freedom Act.
John Whitehead, founder of The Rutherford Institute, explains:
“The biometric photographs digitalize your face and then put all your information … into a central computer which goes worldwide, which means it’s like a facial scan, which means wherever you go, that becomes sort of your ID card. Beach believes that’s the mark of the beast in the Book of Revelation.”
Whitehead points out the effects of the DPS denying Beach’s — or any of us’ — request go beyond her capability to drive.
“Because she will not get this type of biometric photograph on her driver’s license, she cannot get prescription medicines, use her debit card, rent a hotel, obtain a post office box, or drive a car. The argument here, as most people know in the Book of Revelation, is that the mark of the beast won’t let you buy, sell or move in society.”
Atoorneys with Echols & Associates are working with the Rutherford Institute in its defense of Beach’s right to religious freedom.
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
error0
 

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Joan
Editor

This is interesting! I wonder if every state has biometric photographs? I hope she succeeds in her lawsuit. Her argument is amazing with regard to the Book of Revelation! Thank you, Dr. Eowyn, for telling us about this issue.

IvaluTheWord
Guest
IvaluTheWord

If her belief is that way, so be it. Then she should fight for her “religious” freedom. IMO, this particular photo process, is, to me, not what I derive as what Revelation is speaking of w/relation to the “mark”. Rev. is a very complex book to understand and some people derive different conclusions to the varying occurances/prophecies as both literal and symbolic, or one or the other, or preterist (happening in the time it was written) or futurist (still to come) or even draw parallels of time and occurance etc.etc… And some take things out of context and/or go to… Read more »

kim segar
Guest
kim segar

If people would just realize how taking the word of G-d in literal form instead of making a symbol of it and then to see how all HIS word is truth , not forget scriptures that bring the whole picture together. For those who think this is not the time of the L-rd’s return then they need to go back and read all the word, as HE tells us what was, will be and there is Nothing new under the sun. We KNOW this is the time. How..one reason is Israel became a nation in 1948 and that is the… Read more »