ChatterBank0 min ago
Muslim juror who refused to take veil off is ordered to stand down
http://www.dailymail....cial-expressions.html
I’ve just been watching a discussion about this on The Wright Stuff. Apparently this woman was wearing western clothing, but had her face covered. Was the judge right or wrong to dismiss her?
I’ve just been watching a discussion about this on The Wright Stuff. Apparently this woman was wearing western clothing, but had her face covered. Was the judge right or wrong to dismiss her?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Well lets hope their grasp of English is sufficient to understand what's happening in a court Sandy.
And I don't think they were asking her to dress to European standards were their? They were asking her to remove a facial concealment, which is a cultural thing, not a religious thing at the end of the day. They weren't telling her to wear a tracksuit with some knock off Uggs from the market!
And I don't think they were asking her to dress to European standards were their? They were asking her to remove a facial concealment, which is a cultural thing, not a religious thing at the end of the day. They weren't telling her to wear a tracksuit with some knock off Uggs from the market!
Oh! dear....I am confused.
AOG and many others, through threads have been, in my opinion. quite rightly questioning the dangers and the impact on society of Islamisation of the Western World. AOG and many of his supporters, were poured scorn upon, many in a vicious manner.
We have now had a taste of Islamisation of the legal system and most of today's posts seem to indicate that it is not acceptable.
We cannot have it both ways, accepting Islam into our society and then "kick it in the teeth" when we feel exploited.
It is now much to late to do anything about the multicultural effect, so in essence we had better accept it.
Should the judge have ordered her to stand down....NO...of course he shouldn't.
Would I as judge, asked her to stand down....YES....of course i would.
AOG and many others, through threads have been, in my opinion. quite rightly questioning the dangers and the impact on society of Islamisation of the Western World. AOG and many of his supporters, were poured scorn upon, many in a vicious manner.
We have now had a taste of Islamisation of the legal system and most of today's posts seem to indicate that it is not acceptable.
We cannot have it both ways, accepting Islam into our society and then "kick it in the teeth" when we feel exploited.
It is now much to late to do anything about the multicultural effect, so in essence we had better accept it.
Should the judge have ordered her to stand down....NO...of course he shouldn't.
Would I as judge, asked her to stand down....YES....of course i would.
sqad... i dont think anyone has really 'accepted islam' into our society at all ... it is the proposed measures that some trot to deal with it that people object to - the over the top, knee jerk reactions to it...
most are however happy to accept it as long as it sits side by side with the laws and ways of the land... and when it doesnt, as it often seems not to, they object
most are however happy to accept it as long as it sits side by side with the laws and ways of the land... and when it doesnt, as it often seems not to, they object
Reading the article it would appear that the judge considered that a view of facial expressions was desirable in this case.
The woman was invited to stand down and chose to do so. (Read quoted judges comments)
She was not barred from sitting on other cases where a view of facial expressions was not considered desirable or necessary.
Without knowing the reason that the judge considered facial expression to be relevant it is impossible to condemn the decision and, as it would appear that judges have the right to make the request, this incident is just sensationalism.
The woman was invited to stand down and chose to do so. (Read quoted judges comments)
She was not barred from sitting on other cases where a view of facial expressions was not considered desirable or necessary.
Without knowing the reason that the judge considered facial expression to be relevant it is impossible to condemn the decision and, as it would appear that judges have the right to make the request, this incident is just sensationalism.
I think the confusion is that many of us are accepting that muslim people become British and live as British-Muslims. Many do, and a collegue of mine and her husband are precisely that. They consider themselves good muslims but also value the benefits of a modern british identity and display none these (largely arabic not muslim per se) characteristics other than adherence to religious holidays, some dietary restrictions and no alcohol.
A quite separate issue is when cultural practices (again, more arabic than muslim per se) and completely alien to our society such as; concealing the face, female genital mutilation or sentences of death for people who exercise free expression are presented to us and our compliance expected.
We must (as the majority) must demand compliance with our standards on these fundamental issues not the other way around.
A quite separate issue is when cultural practices (again, more arabic than muslim per se) and completely alien to our society such as; concealing the face, female genital mutilation or sentences of death for people who exercise free expression are presented to us and our compliance expected.
We must (as the majority) must demand compliance with our standards on these fundamental issues not the other way around.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.