Posted on 06/19/2009 10:02:59 PM PDT by Steelfish
At the very least if you are bringing an action against someone or if you are testifying for the prosecution, yes you must show your face. BTW, I think Judges have had much to say about how we dress in their courtrooms throughout US history.
Applying for a driver’s license assumes the intent to actually drive. How about that headgear? What’s the peripheral vision? Is she going to be using the mesh to cover her eyes? Somehow I think that driving while wearing naqib is more dangerous than driving while texting. Face it: the whole point of this kind of garb is concealment.
That is my take. And even in civil cases, you claim might well be dismissed. If you testify for the side dragging someoen into court, plaintif or prosecution, the defense gets to demand to see your face.
There is such a thing as a truthful demeanor; it is more than mere appearance.
This dhimmi handwringing has been going on for years and isn’t it about time to end it?
No. Sorry. People living in the Unites States and engaging with any governmental authority or process within this country must fully identify themselves during the course of that engagement which includes revealing and not obscuring the face.
What is so hard about that.
Michigan - our first Sharia state, how special.
If she wants to be devout, shouldn’t she toss out her own testimony - assuming she doesn’t have a second woman to back her up?
cultural jihad bump
Religious Freedom has never been absolute. Normally, if it doesn’t impinge upon the rights of others it is tolerated. You have a right to “Face” your accuser, if your accuser prevents that, then they lose their status of accuser.
You have a right to make personal sacrifices but you do not have the right to make others sacrifice their rights.
Take for example dietry requirements. Muslims and Jews do not eat or touch anything made from the pig. They have a right to exclude businesses that serve or prepare pork when dining out or applying for a job. They do not have a right to demand a pork free environment from those business.
Two things you'll never see the American Criminal Lovers Union supporting is Christians and the Second Amendment. But oh, how they love the muslims and anyone else who is anti-American.
Niqabs are not religious . They are not required by any religion to be considered devout .
Niqabs are a fashion statement.
See any sand storms blowing round Michigan lately?
When someone covers their face , for me , they cease to exist . Unless they're in a blizzard, a sand storm or they're holding a gun.
Who the hell do these phuking ragheads think they are? If they want the country to change its 200+ yr old traditions, tell them to go back to their lovely countries of origin.
(disregarding a Bench Trial)
That's an old Lawyer's Trick. Its like un-ringing a Bell. It can't be done. Once a question is asked an answered that's it. A judge can order the jury to disregard it all he wants, it's too late, the Bell was rung. The jury will remember it, and use it in deliberations, even subconsciously and nor realize they are.
As to wearing Niqabs -- NO. That violates the Constitution.
One has The Right to face their accuser.
I'm not a lawyer, but I've played one in court.
I don’t see any good reason why they need to do as they do, but if you have one, let me know.
Perhaps you don't realize it, but the way people look around and fidget, their manner of speaking and intonation, their reaction when faced with an inconsistency in their story, all provide additional clues and context for what they're saying. Demeanor and appearance on the stand is only one of many factors a fact-finder may take into consideration.
A great example might be to compare an in-person conversation to communications via e-mail or on a web site such as FR. Why do you think people sometimes feel compelled to include a "sarcasm tag" in their posts? Because unless you write carefully and deliberately, you stand a good chance of being misunderstood. I think that's one of the first things people pick up on when they're new to Internet communications.
How do you dress for a job interview? Appearances matter.
How do you dress after you get the job? Certainly not with as much precision and dedication. Basically it's an art of deception. I don't see why this factor should be allowed to affect the sentence on an accused.
Appearances can be deceptive. Most often, it is.
As to wearing Niqabs -- NO. That violates the Constitution. One has The Right to face their accuser.
*********************
Agreed. Excellent post, btw.
If you would like to be added or dropped from the Michigan ping list, please freepmail me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.