Democrats Change 181 Year-Old Rule To Allow Ilhan Omar To Wear Hijab In The House

[Faun]

LOLOL

Good boy, avoiding the question was obviously your only way out.

Your question was so ******* stupid it deserves no reply. It was really, really, really ******* stupid!
It made no sense. It's literally nonsense. It's as dumb as saying the bible said nothing about painting pictures of Jesus suffering on the cross so therefore how can such a thing be religious.

It makes me feel 50% more stupid myself just because I've had to deal with this bullshit! "Your only way out"....I swear, that's extra special idiocy! And you brought it up again as if you had a real point! LOLOL your ass!

”Your question was so ******* stupid it deserves no reply. It was really, really, really ******* stupid!”

LOLOL

You’re such a ******* idiot. You claim that Moore was merely doing the same as Omar.

Omar is exercising her religion.

I ask you to explain how displaying a monument of the Ten Commandments is “exercising” his religion and you turn into a pussified bowl of jello.

 

[Taz]

No offense, but I don't accept anyone else's word for anything, ...

Can I tell your husband?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Hence, the rule change.

Except it was not changed for a Jew with generations of American-ness behind him, but for a newcomer.

Well, at least you're honest that your objection is hypocritical.

HOw it is it hypocritical to want newcomers to adopt to our ways, instead of the other way around?

What do you mean, “our ways?” They’re not “our ways,” they’re House ways and we are not members of the House. They make up their own rules and it’s customary for the House to change some rules at the start of a new session.

This one has stood for 181 years.


Till the black muslim female had a problem with it. Then everyone else has to change to accommodate her.

Sorry, but a rule does not become more or less valid simply on the basis of how long it's been around.

 

[OldLady]

The hijab is a sign of a woman’s submission to a man’s religion. Plus, she looks stupid.

Some men allege, women have to cover up, because there is not enough moral fortitude to go around.

Yes, Daniel, Muslim men have sex on the brain more than any religion I ever saw. Almost all their rules have to do with keeping their women from straying or from other men stealing them. lol

And in fact , most Muslim sects would forbid this woman from being a politician anyway. She's a Muslim when it's convenient for her, which isn't that unusual for religious people, but certainly takes away from the argument that this change HAD to be made so she didn't violate her religion, since her religion actually forbids her from serving anything except dinner anyway.

It's definitely a blend of culture and old religious laws. She was no doubt raised that it is the proper thing to do. It's like Rosie said, it wouldn't be lady-like to go around with her hair hanging out in public What our mama taught us can stick with us forever, ya know.

 

[bodecea]

Hanging up a plaque advertising your religion in a government space is not the same as abiding by a rule of your religion. There is no rule saying that every Christian will hang a religious plaque in their home or place of business. Pretty sure about that.

wearing the clothing of Medieval days in Arabia is not a religious
requirement of any religion. That clothing is a COSTUME

And who is it who gets to make that determination? Would you think having a Scot wearing a kilt is a costume?

In the USA it is a costume. It would not have been tolerated
as regular dress in my public High School for either students or
teachers. It might be considered a problem in Ireland for teachers
or students of policemen

That is incorrect. It is not a costume, it is cultural dress and MOST schools (those who don't have issues with different people) allow it. In fact, a male in a full dress kilt is awesome looking. Those schools that don't allow it are bit by bit being sued for discrimination based on cultural identity as they should be.

where? in England? ------that would make sense. In the USA in my very liberal public High School-----boys and men would not be allowed to wear a kilt to school-----even those named Scot MacDonald

No...hear. We've even had some Scottish-American Societies like SAMS (Scottish-American Military Society) offer lawyers for teenage boys told they cannot wear kilts to their proms. This is a sharp outfit:

 

[Desperado]

So then it would be ok for Republican Reps wear MAGA Caps, Fair is Fair

 

[Taz]

The hijab is a sign of a woman’s submission to a man’s religion. Plus, she looks stupid.

Some men allege, women have to cover up, because there is not enough moral fortitude to go around.

Yes, Daniel, Muslim men have sex on the brain more than any religion I ever saw. Almost all their rules have to do with keeping their women from straying or from other men stealing them. lol

And in fact , most Muslim sects would forbid this woman from being a politician anyway. She's a Muslim when it's convenient for her, which isn't that unusual for religious people, but certainly takes away from the argument that this change HAD to be made so she didn't violate her religion, since her religion actually forbids her from serving anything except dinner anyway.

It's definitely a blend of culture and old religious laws. She was no doubt raised that it is the proper thing to do. It's like Rosie said, it wouldn't be lady-like to go around with her hair hanging out in public What our mama taught us can stick with us forever, ya know.

The problem is that mooslims think that women who don't cover up, never mind wear a bikini in public, are whores. You, your mother, my mother, my grandmother... all whores.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Changing the rules for an individual's personal convenience is NOT a privilege that Americans have. If it was, we basically wouldn't have any rules.

And good choice of the word "Privilege", because that is what we are seeing in the quest for "diversity" and "tolerance".


Some people get special treatment, with the rules being changed or just ignored for their convenience or benefit.

Great, let me know when you can come up with a compelling reason to deny a U.S. citizen their First Amendment rights.

Yeah, I have to wonder when accommodating the Constitutional rights of US citizens became "special treatment". I was pretty sure that was something that was supposed to be done for everyone.

Could a member of Congress carry a gun into a session of Congress?

The answer is no, rendering your argument that she has a Constitutional right to wear her hijjab as stupid as you are.

No, absolutely NO member of Congress - or staffer, or anyone else who isn't law enforcement - can carry a gun in the Capitol. What the **** that has to do with changing the dress code so she can wear her hijab is beyond anyone rational.

Seriously, between you and Eric, I have to wonder if the local mental hospital didn't just get a new computer in the dayroom or something.

Dude. He crushed you.

Dude, all that means is "He agreed with me, so it was OBVIOUSLY a win."

And I'm not a dude.

 

[irosie91]

wearing the clothing of Medieval days in Arabia is not a religious
requirement of any religion. That clothing is a COSTUME

And who is it who gets to make that determination? Would you think having a Scot wearing a kilt is a costume?

In the USA it is a costume. It would not have been tolerated
as regular dress in my public High School for either students or
teachers. It might be considered a problem in Ireland for teachers
or students of policemen

That is incorrect. It is not a costume, it is cultural dress and MOST schools (those who don't have issues with different people) allow it. In fact, a male in a full dress kilt is awesome looking. Those schools that don't allow it are bit by bit being sued for discrimination based on cultural identity as they should be.

where? in England? ------that would make sense. In the USA in my very liberal public High School-----boys and men would not be allowed to wear a kilt to school-----even those named Scot MacDonald

No...hear. We've even had some Scottish-American Societies like SAMS (Scottish-American Military Society) offer lawyers for teenage boys told they cannot wear kilts to their proms. This is a sharp outfit: View attachment 233105

IMHO----a kilt for DA PROM is fine-------just as good as the
traditional idiotic PENGUIN suit that the other boys have to
wear.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I'm sorry, what the hell is that supposed to mean, "Your [sic] in the US deal with it"? Did the US stop being a country that respects freedom of religious expression? Because I feel sure someone would have sent me a memo.

This is more than respecting religious expression. This is giving way to a the newcomer. We don't get to define our community anymore.

This is NOT more than respecting religious expression. The House of Representatives is a specific community. You and I actually are not part of that community, but these two new Representatives are. They have every right to request a reasonable accommodation for their First Amendment rights, just as you and I would in communities of which we are a part.

It wasn't considered reasonable for 181 years, but now suddenly a newcomer asks and we change the rules for her.


LIke I said. We don't get to define our community anymore.


That's the point.

When you get elected to the House, you can vote to change the rules.

No, I would not be able to. NO one would dare bring forth a motion to change them back. The PC mob would destroy them.

Not to mention they'd be opening themselves to all manner of legal issues.

 

[DandyDonovan]

The hijab is a sign of a woman’s submission to a man’s religion. Plus, she looks stupid.

Some men allege, women have to cover up, because there is not enough moral fortitude to go around.

Yes, Daniel, Muslim men have sex on the brain more than any religion I ever saw. Almost all their rules have to do with keeping their women from straying or from other men stealing them. lol

And in fact , most Muslim sects would forbid this woman from being a politician anyway. She's a Muslim when it's convenient for her, which isn't that unusual for religious people, but certainly takes away from the argument that this change HAD to be made so she didn't violate her religion, since her religion actually forbids her from serving anything except dinner anyway.

It's definitely a blend of culture and old religious laws. She was no doubt raised that it is the proper thing to do. It's like Rosie said, it wouldn't be lady-like to go around with her hair hanging out in public What our mama taught us can stick with us forever, ya know.

I mean I'm cool with it, I don't think it's something to get worked up about at all, but the fact remains she can't claim "my religion says I have to cover my head so change the rules" when her religion tells her she shouldn't be there in the first place........

Which is why I earlier was surprised that this was limited to religious head wear.

The truth is, this is yet another subject that is neither worth defending nor attacking.

 

[OldLady]

The hijab is a sign of a woman’s submission to a man’s religion. Plus, she looks stupid.

Some men allege, women have to cover up, because there is not enough moral fortitude to go around.

Yes, Daniel, Muslim men have sex on the brain more than any religion I ever saw. Almost all their rules have to do with keeping their women from straying or from other men stealing them. lol

And in fact , most Muslim sects would forbid this woman from being a politician anyway. She's a Muslim when it's convenient for her, which isn't that unusual for religious people, but certainly takes away from the argument that this change HAD to be made so she didn't violate her religion, since her religion actually forbids her from serving anything except dinner anyway.

It's definitely a blend of culture and old religious laws. She was no doubt raised that it is the proper thing to do. It's like Rosie said, it wouldn't be lady-like to go around with her hair hanging out in public What our mama taught us can stick with us forever, ya know.

The problem is that mooslims think that women who don't cover up, never mind wear a bikini in public, are whores. You, your mother, my mother, my grandmother... all whores.

It is how they were raised, I guess. But in this country, we got enough problems with American nonMuslim men who think all women are whores---or can be used/treated like one.

 

[DandyDonovan]

Great, let me know when you can come up with a compelling reason to deny a U.S. citizen their First Amendment rights.

Yeah, I have to wonder when accommodating the Constitutional rights of US citizens became "special treatment". I was pretty sure that was something that was supposed to be done for everyone.

Could a member of Congress carry a gun into a session of Congress?

The answer is no, rendering your argument that she has a Constitutional right to wear her hijjab as stupid as you are.

No, absolutely NO member of Congress - or staffer, or anyone else who isn't law enforcement - can carry a gun in the Capitol. What the **** that has to do with changing the dress code so she can wear her hijab is beyond anyone rational.

Seriously, between you and Eric, I have to wonder if the local mental hospital didn't just get a new computer in the dayroom or something.

Dude. He crushed you.

Dude, all that means is "He agreed with me, so it was OBVIOUSLY a win."

And I'm not a dude.

No, I crushed your "Congress can't restrict her RIGHT" argument to pieces by pointing out that Congress doesn't permit it's members to carry firearms into chambers. That you are an idiot and didn't understand that point is of little concern to me..

 

[bodecea]

The apparel concerned is not a requirement of the named religion. It is a symbol of the repression of women implicit in that religion.

This apparel:

is not a requirement of a certain religion. It is a symbol of torture and the repression of all those not of the same religion.

 

[irosie91]

Andy Warhol's gang in their "factory"-----made a wedding dress out of
toilet paper. How about a toilet paper swearing in ceremony costume-----male or female for THE HOUSE?

 

[bodecea]

Some men allege, women have to cover up, because there is not enough moral fortitude to go around.

Yes, Daniel, Muslim men have sex on the brain more than any religion I ever saw. Almost all their rules have to do with keeping their women from straying or from other men stealing them. lol

And in fact , most Muslim sects would forbid this woman from being a politician anyway. She's a Muslim when it's convenient for her, which isn't that unusual for religious people, but certainly takes away from the argument that this change HAD to be made so she didn't violate her religion, since her religion actually forbids her from serving anything except dinner anyway.

It's definitely a blend of culture and old religious laws. She was no doubt raised that it is the proper thing to do. It's like Rosie said, it wouldn't be lady-like to go around with her hair hanging out in public What our mama taught us can stick with us forever, ya know.

The problem is that mooslims think that women who don't cover up, never mind wear a bikini in public, are whores. You, your mother, my mother, my grandmother... all whores.

It is how they were raised, I guess. But in this country, we got enough problems with American nonMuslim men who think all women are whores---or can be used/treated like one.

Totally agree....and with the rise of INCEL-like groups that actually commit acts of terrorism.

 

[Montrovant]

Roy Moore is not and was not forbidden to express his religious faith. He was forbidden from having a multi-ton granite monument placed and kept on display in a courthouse. No one told him he could not wear any Christian clothing or jewelry that I've ever heard of, which would be what would need to have happened for his situation to be directly comparable to Omar's. Either that, or Omar would have to have had some sort of Islamic monument put on display in the House and then refused to have it removed despite an order from a federal judge.

I suspect you know this and refuse to admit it.

I know that a slab of stone is not the same as a head scarf, except in the respect that they are both symbols of religious devotion and I have only stated this about fifty times by now. How many more times should I state this?
The idea that Roy Moore would have to directly mimic or closely mirror Omar's hijab (like wearing a bloody crown of thorns
or something similarly ridiculous) in order to have an argument of disparate treatment for Moore and Omar is just
fallacious b.s.! It's nonsense and I can't get past the feeling that so many people are just literal simplistic thinkers and they can't possibly wrap their minds around a concept that compares two seemingly different things that are really the same in principle.

The two situations are different in principle as well as specifics. One involves an individual wearing an item on their person. The other involves a monument which becomes part of a government building.

If nothing else, think of this: when Omar leaves, the hijab leaves with her. When Moore left the building, the monument remained. It was part of the courthouse at all times. Omar's hijab is never part of the House building, it is specific to her.

 

[bodecea]

Yeah, I have to wonder when accommodating the Constitutional rights of US citizens became "special treatment". I was pretty sure that was something that was supposed to be done for everyone.

Could a member of Congress carry a gun into a session of Congress?

The answer is no, rendering your argument that she has a Constitutional right to wear her hijjab as stupid as you are.

No, absolutely NO member of Congress - or staffer, or anyone else who isn't law enforcement - can carry a gun in the Capitol. What the **** that has to do with changing the dress code so she can wear her hijab is beyond anyone rational.

Seriously, between you and Eric, I have to wonder if the local mental hospital didn't just get a new computer in the dayroom or something.

Dude. He crushed you.

Dude, all that means is "He agreed with me, so it was OBVIOUSLY a win."

And I'm not a dude.

No, I crushed your "Congress can't restrict her RIGHT" argument to pieces by pointing out that Congress doesn't permit it's members to carry firearms into chambers. That you are an idiot and didn't understand that point is of little concern to me..

It used to allow it....before the Civil War. But maybe you should petition them to allow it again. Might be an excellent idea, particularly for all the new women members considering the history of sexual harassment and assault with these politicians.

 

[DandyDonovan]

The apparel concerned is not a requirement of the named religion. It is a symbol of the repression of women implicit in that religion.

This apparel:

is not a requirement of a certain religion. It is a symbol of torture and the repression of all those not of the same religion.

LOL that you don't understand that the basis of Muslim women being required to wear head coverings is the repression of women is both hilarious and sad.

Or, and this is far more likely, you understand this you just don't care because liberals are to defend Islam at all costs.

 

[OldLady]

The hijab is a sign of a woman’s submission to a man’s religion. Plus, she looks stupid.

Some men allege, women have to cover up, because there is not enough moral fortitude to go around.

Yes, Daniel, Muslim men have sex on the brain more than any religion I ever saw. Almost all their rules have to do with keeping their women from straying or from other men stealing them. lol

And in fact , most Muslim sects would forbid this woman from being a politician anyway. She's a Muslim when it's convenient for her, which isn't that unusual for religious people, but certainly takes away from the argument that this change HAD to be made so she didn't violate her religion, since her religion actually forbids her from serving anything except dinner anyway.

It's definitely a blend of culture and old religious laws. She was no doubt raised that it is the proper thing to do. It's like Rosie said, it wouldn't be lady-like to go around with her hair hanging out in public What our mama taught us can stick with us forever, ya know.

I mean I'm cool with it, I don't think it's something to get worked up about at all, but the fact remains she can't claim "my religion says I have to cover my head so change the rules" when her religion tells her she shouldn't be there in the first place........

Which is why I earlier was surprised that this was limited to religious head wear.

The truth is, this is yet another subject that is neither worth defending nor attacking.

You make it sound as if she is picking and choosing which parts of her religion to (conveniently) follow, and that is being unfair to her, imo. You don't know what her "religion" tells her by having read excerpts from the Koran anymore than you can discern how a Methodist in 2018 will live based on reading the Bible.