Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 92

Thread: Michigan courts given leeway to force veil removal

  1. #21
    Professor
    OxymoronP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Heart in Brooklyn, body South of Dixie
    Last Seen
    08-23-10 @ 11:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    2,175

    Re: Michigan courts given leeway to force veil removal

    Sounds just about right, when in court you have to take of your Yankee hat but not your yamulka? Why is being in a religious cult respected so much more then being part of a sports cult?


    THE GREATEST FREEDOM IS THE FREEDOM TO OPPRESS OTHERS

  2. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Michigan courts given leeway to force veil removal

    Quote Originally Posted by Catz Part Deux View Post
    You're wrong. She was giving testimony in court. The judge has every right to remove a barrier between her testimony and the court. And, when asked to remove a veil, she demanded a female judge.

    That is an effect.
    The Judge does have that right, I agree, but her following procedure and taking legitimate steps to try to have it her way is in now way "an attempt by religious extremists to impose their will on the secular court system".

    Do we have any reason to believe this woman is anything other than a private citizen minding her own business? Did she go to the media or did the media find her out and sensationalize the issue?

    Jesus Crist woman pay attention. Just because I disagree with you that this is an issue of religious extremism does not mean I deny a judge control over the court room. That's a separate issue.
    Last edited by Jerry; 08-26-09 at 12:49 PM.

  3. #23
    Guru
    F107HyperSabr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Connecticut
    Last Seen
    10-21-10 @ 09:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,617

    Re: Michigan courts given leeway to force veil removal

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    ZOMG I'm trying force a new spelling on you!!!
    What's so new about that spelling!! Ve spell it that vey in the old country !!!
    I do not recall the Viet Cong asking me if I was a natural born or Naturalized American before they shot at me, they just shot at all of us f107HyperSabr

  4. #24
    Guru
    F107HyperSabr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Connecticut
    Last Seen
    10-21-10 @ 09:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,617

    Re: Michigan courts given leeway to force veil removal

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Ok, people want to stress out over a guy bringing a gun to a townhall event...I can see where their concern comes from...guns are made to kill...I think they're all a bunch of paranoid freaks, but I can see where they're coming from.

    How a vel threatens "public safety" in any way, especially in a court where the woman has already gon through security, is beyond my comprehension.

    It's a vel....it's just a vel...get over it.
    ok I got a liitle hyperbolic on the public safety bit. The issue of whether ether a judge has the right to ask that a witness be seen including the face is a valid issue and I beleive most of us would agree that the judge has the right to demand that in his court room.
    I do not recall the Viet Cong asking me if I was a natural born or Naturalized American before they shot at me, they just shot at all of us f107HyperSabr

  5. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Michigan courts given leeway to force veil removal

    Quote Originally Posted by F107HyperSabr View Post
    ok I got a liitle hyperbolic on the public safety bit. The issue of whether ether a judge has the right to ask that a witness be seen including the face is a valid issue and I beleive most of us would agree that the judge has the right to demand that in his court room.
    Of-course judge does. No disagreement there.

    But this is not the "public safety" issue you made it out to be, nor is it the "religious radicals are taking over our country" issue Catz made it out to be.

    This is about the media blowing a non-issue way out of proportion and you playing right into the hype.

  6. #26
    free market communist
    Gardener's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    09-30-17 @ 12:27 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    26,661

    Re: Michigan courts given leeway to force veil removal

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    , nor is it the "religious radicals are taking over our country" issue Catz made it out to be.

    .
    She said nothing about them taking over the country.

    It has more to do with moving the bar by demanding special accomidations. THis has proven a successful strategy in the U.K. where the accomidations have now become such that certain practices of Sharia law now receive the full support of the British legal system.

    This is a POLITICAL move aimed at exerting pressure upon our own legal system towards similar ends (althouth the position reached in the U.K. is by no means an endpoint).
    "you're better off on Stormfront discussing how evil brown men are taking innocent white flowers." Infinite Chaos

  7. #27
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Tiamat's better half
    Last Seen
    10-28-11 @ 01:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    15,998

    Re: Michigan courts given leeway to force veil removal

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Sounds to me like the court infringed upon her rights. The judge did not illustrate any compelling reason that she needed to remove the veil (I don't think "needing to see her demeanor and temperament" qualifies). It's different than, say, a driver's license photo IMO, where actually photographing a person's face is part of the established process and may be necessary for legal purposes.
    I don't think it's asking too much that folks show up in court both identifiable and recognizable. Eye contact a bonus.

  8. #28
    Shankmasta Killa
    TacticalEvilDan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Western NY and Geneva, CH
    Last Seen
    08-30-15 @ 04:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,444

    Re: Michigan courts given leeway to force veil removal

    I think a veil is entirely appropriate for a courtroom setting, especially since in the case of the woman in question, it is worn for the sake of modesty. Whether this modesty is religiously or secularly motivated is irrelevant.

    It is appropriate to ask someone to remove a veil for the purposes of identification (i.e. during an identification check) and safety (i.e. in the presence of moving machinery).
    I'm already gearing up for Finger Vote 2014.

    Just for reference, means my post was a giant steaming pile of sarcasm.

  9. #29
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Redneck Riviera
    Last Seen
    07-09-11 @ 06:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,728

    Re: Michigan courts given leeway to force veil removal

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Do we have any reason to believe this woman is anything other than a private citizen minding her own business? Did she go to the media or did the media find her out and sensationalize the issue?

    Jesus Crist woman pay attention. Just because I disagree with you that this is an issue of religious extremism does not mean I deny a judge control over the court room. That's a separate issue.
    I'm guessing it was her connection to CAIR that tipped me off.

    Jesus Crist, Jerry, pay attention.

  10. #30
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Redneck Riviera
    Last Seen
    07-09-11 @ 06:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,728

    Re: Michigan courts given leeway to force veil removal

    Quote Originally Posted by Gardener View Post
    It has more to do with moving the bar by demanding special accomidations. THis has proven a successful strategy in the U.K. where the accomidations have now become such that certain practices of Sharia law now receive the full support of the British legal system.

    This is a POLITICAL move aimed at exerting pressure upon our own legal system towards similar ends (althouth the position reached in the U.K. is by no means an endpoint).
    This is exactly right. I can always count on your to get the point on these types of subjects. Next up is a human rights commission that designates legitimate criticism of Islam as "hate speech." Special courts for women. Islamic judges that follow Islamic laws.

    It's all part of a larger plan to demand concessions that undermine fundamental secular principles in our system of justice. I don't support that from ANYONE: Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hippies or Islamics.

Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •