• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ga. Judge Jails Muslim Woman Over Head Scarf

SgtRock

Cancel Cancel Culture and Woke Supremacy
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
7,025
Reaction score
2,896
Location
Deep in the Heart of Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Source: New York Times
Date: Dec 17, 2008


http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2008/12/17/us/AP-Muslim-Headscarf-Arrest.html?_r=2

In America it is disrespectful to wear a hat or head covering in a courtroom.

The real question posed by this story is whether American law or Islamic law must give way when the two conflict.

You know what they say " when in Rome do as the Romans do" if its against your religion then stay the hell out of Rome.
 
Last edited:
It doesn't seem like that big of a deal to me for someone to have a scarf on their head in court. It's clearly important to her. I'm not sure why such a ridiculous fuss has to be made over a scarf.
 

It isn't Islamic law - it's American law, as in the free exercise of religion. Security, however, is very important as well, and modesty (the driving principle behind Islamic hijab) is no excuse to bypass security. If necessary, she can be searched in private, as with airport security. If she feels that her religious expression is important enough to go to jail for, she has every right to go to jail for ignoring American laws in favor of fervor
 
SWM said:
It doesn't seem like that big of a deal to me for someone to have a scarf on their head in court. It's clearly important to her. I'm not sure why such a ridiculous fuss has to be made over a scarf.
Click to expand...

Because this is America not Saudi Arabia. We remove our head gear before entering a courtroom. Its a matter of respect. Respect for the judge and respect for our traditions.
 
Well people have smuggled things into courtrooms before in much less than a head scarf.

I agree with the original poster. When secular US law collides with religious law, religious law must give way.

Mark my words. This will have long term ramifications.
 
SWM said:
It doesn't seem like that big of a deal to me for someone to have a scarf on their head in court. It's clearly important to her. I'm not sure why such a ridiculous fuss has to be made over a scarf.
Click to expand...

The courthouse has regulations prohibiting the wearing of headgear. If she feels that this is unnecessary or unjust in some way she has every right to attempt to get the policy changed. She does not have the right to ignore the regulation for personal reasons, whatever they be
 
And married Orthodox Jewish women who follow Halakha, and wear wigs?
Are they forced to remove them upon entering the courtroom?
Should they just "stay the hell out of Rome" too, since their religion mandates that they never appear in public after their wedding day without a head covering?
 
SgtRock said:
Because this is America not Saudi Arabia. We remove our head gear before entering a courtroom. Its a matter of respect. Respect for the judge and respect for our traditions.
Click to expand...

I think the freedom to exercise religion overrides a silly and generally unspoken rule of respect. I wasn't even aware of the no hat/head covering rule.

To me this just sounds like a guy on a power trip wanting to be a jerk. I'm sure that Muslim women in the past have been able to wear a hijab in court with no problem.
 
Last edited:
I'm surprised by the jail term, frankly. A $50 fine and being escorted out of the courthouse would have done nicely. But again, if laws do not apply equally, then they become discriminatory. Either everyone can wear a head covering in court... or nobody can.

I'm also reminded about the Muslim woman who sued some state... Florida, I think... because they wouldn't take her drivers license photo while she wore a burka that covered her entire face! The court upheld the state. She didn't get her license.
 
Last edited:

A wig is not considered an article of clothing.
Apples and oranges.
 

Although it is a sign of respect, it is more for security reasons.
 
Blackdog said:
A wig is not considered an article of clothing.
Apples and oranges.
Click to expand...


You are using my avatar. I was here first. Replace it at once, or I shall report you for avatar theft in the first degree!




:mrgreen:
 
Last edited:
Valentine's husband, Omar Hall, said his wife was accompanying her nephew to a traffic citation hearing when officials stopped her at the metal detector and told her she would not be allowed in the courtroom with the head scarf, known as a hijab.
Click to expand...

I'm glad to see our people in Ga. are on the look out for such high level criminals. Traffic citation? Dirka! Dirka! Mohammed! Stop Sign! Boom.
 

Yes, this applies to everyone including the insecure bald guy who always wears a cap in public, or the Sikh who always wears a turbin in public.
 

Maybe they do have to remove them. Do you have any evidence to the contrary or are you just inventing your own hypothetical situation, assuming how it would play out, and presenting it as a valid argument?
 
DiAnna said:
You are using my avatar. I was here first. Replace it at once, or I shall report you for avatar theft in the first degree!




:mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Yes maam!
 
Blackdog said:
Although it is a sign of respect, it is more for security reasons.
Click to expand...

I think the respect thing is generally a crock of ****. In general I think that respect should be earned. Authority or name title doesn't make me automatically respect someone.

I can understand the security thing, though. I think that she could have been easily checked and then been allowed to wear it.
 

I remember that, what the hell was she thinking. Whats the point of a drivers license photo if you cannot see the face?
 
SgtRock said:
Because this is America not Saudi Arabia. We remove our head gear before entering a courtroom. Its a matter of respect. Respect for the judge and respect for our traditions.
Click to expand...

Well, it's a war of symbolism anyway you cut it. It's absurd for either party to get pissy about it, though I would in honesty be more sympathetic towards the woman as that's a matter of spirituality. Playing it out in my head, if I were the judge it would depend on the attitude of the individual.

"Ma'am, please remove your scarf."
"With your permission your honor, I would prefer to keep my scarf on, as my religion dictates that I do so in public places."
"Aight, whatev."

Seriously, not that big of a deal. The woman's not corrupting the foundation of traditional American values by having a scarf on her head. On the other hand, if she said.

"**** you, old man, you don't know me. I'm wearing mah damn scarf."

That's a different matter. I don't know. I guess I hate America and love terrorism, what can I say.
 
Last edited:
SgtRock said:
I remember that, what the hell was she thinking. Whats the point of a drivers license photo if you cannot see the face?
Click to expand...



What do you mean that isn't me officer? It looks just like me!
 
SgtRock said:
Yes, this applies to everyone including the insecure bald guy who always wears a cap in public, or the Sikh who always wears a turbin in public.
Click to expand...

SALDEF - Sikh American Legal Defense & Education Fund - The new name of SMART


Don't you look foolish now.
 

Next time you go to court. Wear a hat. When the bailiff tells you to remove it tell him no, you must first earn my respect and see what happens.
 
dclxvinoise said:
I think the respect thing is generally a crock of ****. In general I think that respect should be earned. Authority or name title doesn't make me automatically respect someone.
Click to expand...

I disagree only because I have seen the chaos it creates. You don't have to respect the person, but respect for the office makes sense.

dclxvinoise said:
I can understand the security thing, though. I think that she could have been easily checked and then been allowed to wear it.
Click to expand...

Maybe, I tend to go by the laws of the court being an x-LEO.
 
dclxvinoise said:
I think the freedom to exercise religion overrides a silly and generally unspoken rule of respect. I wasn't even aware of the no hat/head covering rule.
Click to expand...

If it was about "respect", I doubt it would apply to women.
Even within my lifetime (and I'm not very old) women have traditionally worn hats indoors at formal functions. When I was a little girl, most of the older ladies in my church wore hats to mass. It was considered perfectly proper.
Nancy Reagan wore a hat at many important government functions and presidential addresses, including on election night.
I don't believe any first lady since the 80s has routinely worn hats indoors, but prior to Reagan, all First Ladies did; Jackie O had a matching pillbox hat for just about every suit she owned. Gloves, too.
It's never been considered polite, on the other hand, for men to wear hats indoors. Although they routinely wore them outdoors until the late 1950s/ early 60s. And some very old men still do.

These things may be passe now, but it certainly could not be considered a matter of "respect" that women be forced to doff their hats inside, even in a courtroom (which is surely no more holy than church, and requires no greater propriety than one's husband's inaugural address).
This is Georgia, it's the deep south. I'm sure they're aware of the custom of ladies wearing hats. In Georgia, they probably only stopped doing it, like, week before last. :roll:

It is not a matter of "respect".
I assume it is a safety precaution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…