Muslim files lawsuit against Dearborn Heights for making her remove headscarf

[Coyote]

ask the muslim woman driving around on a suspended license "what's the big deal?"

law enforcement agency policy requires a head shot photo ID. nothing personal.

Two different things.

She's driving around on a suspended license - she pays the price.

She is not arguing against a photograph ID without the headscarf.

 

[Valerie]

The lawsuit, filed Thursday in federal court here, asks for the Dearborn Heights, Mich., Police Department to modify its present policy so a Muslim woman can wear her hijab during booking procedures.

 

[Coyote]

you are quoting the recounting of the events that day, not what she seeks as an end result of the suit...

What she seeks in the end is to wear the headscarf during booking procedures and under confinement. Not to have to remove it in the presence of male strangers.

 

[Valerie]

you are quoting the recounting of the events that day, not what she seeks as an end result of the suit...

What she seeks in the end is to wear the headscarf during booking procedures and under confinement. Not to have to remove it in the presence of male strangers.

that is what she said she sought that day, but in her law suit it does not mention gender...

 

[Valerie]

i don't even accept that she was harmed by having her headgear removed without the female officer.

she was not frisked... the law enforcement policy isn't discriminatory... what is the big deal?

show me the harm...

 

[Coyote]

i don't even accept that she was harmed by having her headgear removed without the female officer.

she was not frisked... the law enforcement policy isn't discriminatory... what is the big deal?

show me the harm...

Personally, I don't see harm. But I'm not religious. I do however respect the right of religious people to be able to follow their religion -within the laws of the land. And our Constitution does provide for that. In this particular case I don't see any reason why reasonable accommodation could not have been made as long as a proper ID photograph was accomplished.

 

[Pogo]

you are quoting the recounting of the events that day, not what she seeks as an end result of the suit...

That's an odd thing to post, since that's exactly what you did here just one post earlier:

ask the muslim woman driving around on a suspended license "what's the big deal?"

The status of her driver's license is entirely irrelevant to this point -- the question is whether she's being abused by being forced to show her head to extrafamilial men. Nothing about her driver's license changes that question.

 

[featherlite]

I thought all head gear had to be removed. A necklace is a lot different than a hijab which covers everything but your face. Its an identification pic, not a FB selfie. She was she was arrested and was being booked.
I can sympathize with her because she is use to always wearing it, but shes comparing it to the south & the civil rights era. lol that's a bit much isn't it?

 

[Pogo]

I thought all head gear had to be removed. A necklace is a lot different than a hijab which covers everything but your face. Its an identification pic, not a FB selfie. She was she was arrested and was being booked.
I can sympathize with her because she is use to always wearing it, but shes comparing it to the south & the civil rights era. lol that's a bit much isn't it?

Where does she say that?

 

[ninja007]

Why does the right hate the Constitution?

If indeed this violates the Constitution, then I've got no problem with her lawsuit.
The main problem I have is that it's just more evidence that immigrating Muslims do not intend to abide by the laws, customs, regulations, etc., of America.
They want us to bend our rules to their liking.

EXACTLY.

 

[Pogo]

Why does the right hate the Constitution?

If indeed this violates the Constitution, then I've got no problem with her lawsuit.
The main problem I have is that it's just more evidence that immigrating Muslims do not intend to abide by the laws, customs, regulations, etc., of America.
They want us to bend our rules to their liking.

EXACTLY.

"Exactly" huh?
OK I asked the OP before and I got crickets, maybe you can answer -- how exactly are immigrants (of any flavor) supposed to "abide by our customs"??

If there actually were such a concept we would never have had pierogies, pizza, hammantaschen, sushi, hummous, wienerschnitzel, borscht, cornbread, yam, curries, enchiladas, moussaka or moo goo gai pan -- just to name foods. Our language would be way skimpier than it is, and we'd have no jazz, blues or soul music (and therefore no rock music either). Cultural collision is the very spark of humanity.

Monoculturalists. You guys kill me.

 

[Katzndogz]

Why does the right hate the Constitution?

If indeed this violates the Constitution, then I've got no problem with her lawsuit.
The main problem I have is that it's just more evidence that immigrating Muslims do not intend to abide by the laws, customs, regulations, etc., of America.
They want us to bend our rules to their liking.

EXACTLY.

"Exactly" huh?
OK I asked the OP before and I got crickets, maybe you can answer -- how exactly are immigrants (of any flavor) supposed to "abide by our customs"??

If there actually were such a concept we would never have had pierogies, pizza, hammantaschen, sushi, hummous, wienerschnitzel, borscht, cornbread, yam, curries, enchiladas, moussaka or moo goo gai pan -- just to name foods. Our language would be way skimpier than it is, and we'd have no jazz, blues or soul music (and therefore no rock music either). Cultural collision is the very spark of humanity.

Monoculturalists. You guys kill me.

Which laws do any of those things break? That's where the line is.

 

[Esmeralda]

i don't even accept that she was harmed by having her headgear removed without the female officer.

she was not frisked... the law enforcement policy isn't discriminatory... what is the big deal?

show me the harm...

It is offensive to her. I don't think it is illegal to ask her to remove it, but it is offensive to her way of seeing things. I think the problem would have been avoided if they simply used females to work with her when her head was uncovered. A little consideration and respect goes a long way and doesn't hurt anyone.

 

[dannyboys]

So the ******* sand monkey ***** has very serious convictions about how she must present herself in public b/c it comes down to following her religion. If the ***** is so ******* 'religious' what was she doing driving a car BREAKING THE ******* LAW?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Or maybe she thought it was OK b/c she was on her way to murder some innocent 'non-believers'. THAT would have made it OK according to the Koran.

 

[Roadrunner]

She is being booked for a crime. She loses her religious rights until shes in her cell. Just like I couldn't demand a bible during booking.

American and other Western women have to conform to Muslim dress codes and sensibilities, they should have to here.

In this society, masking and covering women is not acceptable; I am offended every time I see a covered up Muslim woman going around like some sort of inferior subhuman.

 

[dannyboys]

Except what you continue to miss here is that, if we go by the article (and the OP is clearly not reliable, so we have to), this is not a religion issue. It's a gender issue.

Why didn't the cops simply provide a female officer per her request?

You sure do keep moving the goalposts, don't you?

What you are missing is that this is just an obvious attempt by Islamists to move this country more towards that spot they have already moved Britain by eroding an essential liberal principle when it comes to the separation of Church and state.

Why do you hate liberalism so much that you support its antithesis so thoroughly?

There's no "moving goalposts" on my part. I quoted the article.
I asked above, what if the police insisted on strip-searching her? By a male officer?

You on the other hand danced around the question without addressing it -- why didn't they have a female officer take the shot as requested? Don't they normally supply a female officer for a female search, for the same reason?

I know, I know what you're gonna say..... "but... but... Moooooooooooooslims!"

"What if"? The "what if" didn't happen cock sucker.
The ******* sand monkey was BREAKING THE ******* LAW!!!! Then she has the gall to complain her 'religious' convictions were being impinged upon. Give us all a ******* break!

 

[Roadrunner]

i don't even accept that she was harmed by having her headgear removed without the female officer.

she was not frisked... the law enforcement policy isn't discriminatory... what is the big deal?

show me the harm...

It is offensive to her. I don't think it is illegal to ask her to remove it, but it is offensive to her way of seeing things. I think the problem would have been avoided if they simply used females to work with her when her head was uncovered. A little consideration and respect goes a long way and doesn't hurt anyone.

When in Rome, do as the Romans do!

Works BOTH ways.

Denigrating garb that assigns women a sub-human role should be illegal in the GOUSA.

 

[dannyboys]

I think you are confused.

I think anyone who chooses to travel to France or Saudi Arabia is subject to the laws of those countries- and violates local customs at their own risk. None of those places are the United States- and none of them have our fantastic, amazing Bill of Rights.

When people come here from France or Saudi Arabia they have the same rights as all Americans have- that is one of the wonderful things about the United States- and they are subject to the same laws too. And no one in the United States is obligated to do something here just because it is a local custom.

We are better than other countries in that way.

I am hardly confused.

I would reserve that for those in this thread lobbying to have her NOT have to follow the same laws as everybody else by way of preparing herself for the photo because she believes her religion trumps that bill of rights.

You got it wrong.

The issue isn't what she takes off FOR THE PHOTO - it's who sees her without it and takes the photo.

So she needs to file a lawsuit prohibiting anyone other than a female to ever see the photos right?
If she cared about obeying her religious convictions why was she driving illegally? But the Koran says a 'true-believer' can do anything including murder to adhere to what the ******* pedophile in the sky tells them to.
So maybe she was on her way to blow up a bus full of schoolkids. That would have made what she was doing just fine.

 

[dannyboys]

And I know ten times more about Muslim women than any of youl.

I've had sex with Muslim women. Have you?

No thanks. The thought of banging a forty-something hairy sweaty virgin with a 'box' that stinks like rotten cheese does not appeal. You can have my share.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

It is offensive to her. I don't think it is illegal to ask her to remove it, but it is offensive to her way of seeing things. I think the problem would have been avoided if they simply used females to work with her when her head was uncovered. A little consideration and respect goes a long way and doesn't hurt anyone.

Respect?

You mean like respecting the country in which a person lives instead of making extremely aggressive demands that it change its nature to accommodate your every Neanderthal way and attacking the legal system in order to subvert it -- that kind of respect??

Yeah, it is sadly lacking by this knuckle dragging Islamist.