The veil of truth works against Muslim woman

AP/Washington Times:

A Muslim woman whose small-claims court case was dismissed after she refused to remove her veil has sued the judge, saying her religious and civil rights were violated.
Ginnnah Muhammad, 42, of Detroit, says in the lawsuit filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Detroit that Judge Paul Paruk's request to remove her veil, and his decision to dismiss her case when she didn't, were unconstitutional based on her First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion.
The suit against Judge Paruk also cites a federal civil rights law in asserting that Miss Muhammad was denied access to the courts because of her religion.
Miss Muhammad wore a niqab -- a scarf and veil that covers her head and face, leaving only the eyes visible -- during the October hearing in Hamtramck, a city near Detroit.
She was contesting a $2,750 charge from a rental-car company to repair a vehicle that she said thieves had entered. Judge Paruk told her he needed to see her face to judge her truthfulness and gave her a choice: Take off the veil while testifying or have the case dismissed. She kept it on.
Enterprise Rent-A-Car Co. then filed a claim seeking a judgment of $2,000 against Miss Muhammad. A hearing is set for April 18 before Judge Paruk in Hamtramck's district court.
Miss Muhammad's attorney, Nabih Ayad, said that she unsuccessfully sought to get a different judge to hear the case and that she and her client plan to ask him to remove himself from the case.
...
The veil is clearly not required by the Muslim religion and only a few weirdos suggest that it might be. Religious practices have always been limited by the courts. For example, no one would suggest that Mayan human sacrifice should be permitted. Nor are Christian Scientist permitted to deny medical care to their children. There is no rational reason to permit veils to be worn by witnesses at a trial. The finder of fact must look at not only what is said but the demeanor of the witness. This is just another frivolous lawsuit by Muslims trying to undermine the American culture.

Comments

  1. "The veil is clearly not required by the Muslim religion and only a few weirdos suggest that it might be."

    The only person who can say what is or is not required by a person's religion is that person herself. That is what freedom of religion is all about. Anything else leads to very serious problems: Who would determine what is required by a religion? The government? Government appointed religious leaders? Government approved religious definitions? Should the government decide which form of Islam is valid Shiite or Sunni?

    If this woman can prove she wears a veil regularly, that is among strongest proof you can ask for that her religion requires it.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Bin Laden's concern about Zarqawi's remains