Muslim Headscarf banned in court

Durry

House Member
May 18, 2010
4,709
286
83
Canada
Muslim woman banned from wearing headscarf in court

A German judge has banned a Syrian woman from appearing in court without removing her headscarf, claiming “religiously-motivated” attire is prohibited.

Najat Abokal, a lawyer representing the woman, said the order was made for divorce proceedings in the district court in Luckenwalde, Brandenberg.

She said the letter warned of legal action against the woman if she does not comply, but also ordered her to appear in person to present her case against her husband.

Ms Abokal has accused the judge of acting “unconstitutionally”, the Tagesspiegel newspaper reported, saying she would contest the order amid fierce debate over Islamic dress in Germany.

One of her colleagues confirmed the information to The Independent but said no further comment could be given while the case continued.

A spokesperson for the district court in Luckenwalde said they could not comment, saying the judge was responsible for conduct within the courtroom.

The German parliament has voted in favour of a partial ban on the burqa and other Islamic veils that cover the face, while existing “neutrality” laws can be used to forbid the wearing of any religious or political symbols by some judicial officials.

But the restrictions do not apply to witnesses, claimants, victims or any other participants in legal proceedings, while a 2006 ruling by the Federal Constitutional Court found a judge had no right to throw out a spectator for wearing a headscarf..

Klaus F Gärditz, an law professor at Bonn's Friedrich-Wilhelms University, described the letter as an attempt to “humiliate” the woman that violates freedom of religion.

He accused the judge of “pursuing provincial racism and sexism under the pretext of following legal procedures”, noting that only women were affected by such orders in an article for the Legal Tribune Online.

The case comes amid intense debate over Islamic veils in Germany, where a law to partially ban the burqa – but not the hijab (headscarf) - has not yet come into force.

Angela Merkel announced her support for the move in December, saying full-face veils were “not acceptable in Germany” and calling them to be banned “wherever it is legally possible”.

Some right-wing politicians have called for a full ban on the burqa in public, which has been imposed in France and Belgium, but ministers have said a blanked prohibition would violate the country’s constitution.

Concerns about integration have also risen following the arrival of more than a million asylum seekers, who are mainly from Syria and other countries in the Middle East.

A poll carried last year showed that 81 per cent of Germans supported a ban on the burqa within public institutions.

Dutch MPs voted for a similar prohibition in the Netherlands last year, covering public transport, education, healthcare and government buildings and punishing any infractions with fines.

Support for bans on full-face veils has been growing across Europe since France became the first country to implement such a law in 2011, followed by countries including Belgium and Bulgaria, with partial bans being imposed in Austria and parts of Spain, Italy and Switzerland.

Attempts to ban female employees from wearing headscarves and veils have sparked several legal cases, which have so far seen the European Court of Human Rights and European Court of Justice support national prohibitions.

In the U.K., an estate agent is suing her former employer at a tribunal after she was allegedly told to remove her black hijab because it had “terrorist affiliations”.

Muslim woman banned from wearing headscarf in court
 

Durry

House Member
May 18, 2010
4,709
286
83
Canada
Europe is getting tired of this headscarf crap.

" Support for bans on full-face veils has been growing across Europe since France became the first country to implement such a law in 2011, followed by countries including Belgium and Bulgaria, with partial bans being imposed in Austria and parts of Spain, Italy and Switzerland.""
 

White_Unifier

Senate Member
Feb 21, 2017
7,300
2
36

Durry

House Member
May 18, 2010
4,709
286
83
Canada
When you think about it, you realize how utterly stupid someone has to be to believe that covering up your hair is going to provide you with some religious guidance.

How uttley stupid can anyone be,,,, only a Muslim could believe this kind of crap.
 

Dixie Cup

Senate Member
Sep 16, 2006
6,049
3,835
113
Edmonton
Quite frankly, wearing a scarf on the head doesn't bother me; it's the Niqab and/or burka that I strongly feel should be banned everywhere, especially in court rooms, swearing in ceremonies, drivers' licenses etc. etc. As long as I can see a face, I could care a less what they have on their heads.


I find it amazing that the lefties feel so strongly about allowing women to wear the Niqab or Burka - just confirms to me that the Muslim men who promote and insist women must wear them have no self control whatsoever!!


JMHO
 

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
193
63
Nakusp, BC
It wasn't that long ago that north American Catholic women had to wear head scarfs in church and many women wore head scarfs everywhere. So, some eastern cultures still wear them. They wouldn't be that far behind us if we would stop bombing there countries back into the stone age. It wasn't that long ago (the fifties) that women were to be seen and not heard, (the 30s) couldn't vote or hold political positions. Conservatives have really short attention spans, particularly when it come to their bigotry.

Ya,Ya! Wally. Fukk you too.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
When you think about it, you realize how utterly stupid someone has to be to believe that covering up your hair is going to provide you with some religious guidance.

How uttley stupid can anyone be,,,, only a Muslim could believe this kind of crap.


Still getting shyte wrong, I see. You really should see if you could, at least, borrow a brain before posting.
 

Dixie Cup

Senate Member
Sep 16, 2006
6,049
3,835
113
Edmonton
It wasn't that long ago that north American Catholic women had to wear head scarfs in church and many women wore head scarfs everywhere. So, some eastern cultures still wear them. They wouldn't be that far behind us if we would stop bombing there countries back into the stone age. It wasn't that long ago (the fifties) that women were to be seen and not heard, (the 30s) couldn't vote or hold political positions. Conservatives have really short attention spans, particularly when it come to their bigotry.

Ya,Ya! Wally. Fukk you too.



Hate to tell you but I'm a conservative but I don't take offense to your comment. See, I have tough skin LOL. Just because one doesn't agree with you doesn't necessarily make you a "conservative" nor a "Lefty" as opinions may not be relevant to either.


Just sayin...


Dix
 

Twin_Moose

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 17, 2017
21,979
6,102
113
Twin Moose Creek
The face covering has no place in the modern world, it was first used to hide the beauty of one's wife so that the ruling parties of the day wouldn't steal their wives to be apart of their harem.

Hiding Your Assets: The Surprising Origin of the Burka & Niqab

The practice of*acquiring beautiful wives of others by*the Muslim ruling class, following*Muhammad's example as he*had*acquired Zainab, the wife of his son-in-law (Zayd), had*forced Muslims to introduce all-covering veils in order to conceal their women from the prying eyes of the predatory Islamic authorities, assumes the author....

It is commonly believed that Islamic dress code for women, and most especially garments like the burka and the niqab (from Afghanistan and Arabia respectively), are about female modesty and the avoidance, on the part of male observers, of lustful passions.
Certainly such garments are an extremely effective means of hiding the attractions of the female form. However, it has – rightly – been pointed out that nowhere in Islamic law is the complete hiding of the face and body required. Beyond a few admonitions to 'modesty', there are in fact very few specific recommendations either in the Qu’ran or any other Islamic scriptures about how a woman should dress.
For this reason, it has recently been suggested that the burka and the niqab have nothing to do with Islam, and are simply local customs that have achieved the status of religious practice. Yet, this is a spurious argument. There is no reason to believe that anything like the burka or the niqab were worn in pre-Islamic Afghanistan or pre-Islamic Arabia. And so these garments can only be understood within the context of Islam and Islamic culture.

But if such dress is not necessarily sanctioned by Islamic law, where did it come from?
In order to understand this, we need to take a broad look at Islam and the culture it fostered. As soon as we do this, the truth about the burka/niqab emerges from its cover; and it is a truth of the most disturbing kind.
When early Islam emerged from the Arabian Peninsula, it emerged as a warlike conquering creed. Most of the conquered peoples, to begin with, were Christians; though there were many Jews among the subdued. The followers of both religions were permitted to continue to practice their faiths on condition that they paid a special tax, or jizya, to the Muslim conquerors.
At the beginning, when the vast majority of the population of the Middle East remained Christian and Jewish, this tax amounted to a fabulous sum for the government of the Caliphate. In such circumstances, it will be obvious that it was financially advantageous to have Christians and Jews as subjects, not convert then. Muslims were exempt from this kind of taxation. So lucrative was the jizya that Muslim rulers did not, in most cases, actually want Christians to convert. Christian conversions meant loss in revenue. Bat Ye’or comments:
“Baladhuri related that when Iraq fell to the Arab conquerors, the soldiers wanted to ‘share out’ the region of Sawad between themselves. The caliph Umar b. al-Khattab permitted them to divide the booty, but decreed that the land and the camels should be left to the local farmers so as to provide for the Muslims: ‘If you divide them among those present, there will be nothing left for those who come after them.’ And Ali, the Prophet’s son-in-law said of the non-Muslim peasants of Sawad, ‘Leave them to be a source of revenue and aid for the Muslims.’” (Bat Ye’or, The Dhimmi, 1985, p. 68).

But the Caliphs and Sultans did not stop at plundering their subjects’ material wealth: They were able and willing to take much more. Right from the beginning, Muhammad, the first “Commander of the Faithful”, did not baulk at acquiring women from his friends and relatives. At least two of Muhammad’s wives were requisitioned: one from a close friend and one from his son-in-law. The Caliphs, of course, were not slow to copy the example set by the Prophet, and throughout Muslim history Caliphs and Sultans regularly took wives from their subjects. Even if these women were already married, it made little or no difference. Islamic rules on divorce, which required a man simply to say three times “I divorce thee” to his wife, meant that any objecting husband could be easily compelled to pronounce the required phrase. The threat of torture and death was normally enough to persuade the recalcitrant spouse.
Given such a culture of predatory authority, it is little wonder that men in Islamic lands began to conceal their wives under shrouds. This new style could of course be excused as a pious exercise in modesty; but the real reason, in most cases, was identical to that which produced the drab, windowless exteriors of Muslim homes: Hiding your assets
.
 

Durry

House Member
May 18, 2010
4,709
286
83
Canada
Head coverings to signify that you belong to a particular religion has no place in the business world either.

When I walk into a store and I'm approached by a clerk with a head covering, I tell them that I am offended when someone comes up to me and puts their religion in my face, I ask them not to offend me as I am not offending them.

All business should be religion free.
 

selfsame

Time Out
Jul 13, 2015
3,491
0
36
I surprise of these people: why do they oppose any God's command? it is only to the hurt of your own selves .. why do you prefer the exposure rather than the covering ? .. certainly you are in extreme error and following your own desires rather than any logic.
 

Murphy

Executive Branch Member
Apr 12, 2013
8,181
0
36
Ontario
No, the court has ruled that hiding your face is not allowed. God did not command that women cover their faces, Muslim men did. Men, not God.

You follow no logic, only the hate and the devil's commands to you.
 

White_Unifier

Senate Member
Feb 21, 2017
7,300
2
36
Head coverings to signify that you belong to a particular religion has no place in the business world either.

When I walk into a store and I'm approached by a clerk with a head covering, I tell them that I am offended when someone comes up to me and puts their religion in my face, I ask them not to offend me as I am not offending them.

All business should be religion free.

Check out the local night clubs. You should find a general lack of religion there at least.
 

selfsame

Time Out
Jul 13, 2015
3,491
0
36
No, the court has ruled that hiding your face is not allowed. God did not command that women cover their faces, Muslim men did. Men, not God.

You follow no logic, only the hate and the devil's commands to you.

You don't understand the alphabet of God's religion in the Torah and the Quran .. only you know your stubbornness and the word "no"