Taking the veil

[2luvmy]

If you were to attend a class or a meeting or have a conversation with the speaker having his/her back to you the whole time, I think it would make things a little difficult because you couldn't see his/her face. I would feel disconnected.

It is true that studies have shown that infants and children are more drawn to faces than any other objects.

She interviewed with the job without the veil. I am sure if she would have worn the veil, the issues would have been addressed up front. I am sorry I don't beleive that her convictions are so deep if she could have allowed herself to be seen without the covering for the purpose of an interview.

 

[Masterj]

Who said anything about reading lips?

See many surgeons ready for OR on the subway, do you?

And, please don't pull out the "things they don't know much about". I know quite a bit about Islam.

Who said I was responding to you? Why are you taking this so personal? I am very aware that you know quite a bit about Islam. However, it is very clear that some posters here do not know much of anything about Islam. I was referring to the comments about her being in "our" country and basically how she should give up her culture and beliefs if she is living here.

 

[Karole28]

Who said I was responding to you? Why are you taking this so personal? I am very aware that you know quite a bit about Islam. However, it is very clear that some posters here do not know much of anything about Islam. I was referring to the comments about her being in "our" country and basically how she should give up her culture and beliefs if she is living here.

I don't think this is about religious intolerance and I agree that to be accepted, the Muslim community is going to have to adapt to western law. This isn't about legislating what they can do when worshipping or when in their homes, this is about refusing to accept westernized social mores while demanding everyone accept your own under the guise of religious beliefs and being branded "intolerant" or God forbid "racist".

People have got to see some give and take here.

 

[wannabesleuthkk]

very interesting stuff on that that link for the SPLC. and what a healthy debate we have here. intersting points on all sides.
i totally agree that the teacher should not be wearing veil in classroom.
the children's education should supercede her rights in that setting. but we're treading on delicate ground as we get close to that fine line of determining when and where a person can fully excersise religious rights of expression. Like, 'you can wear your veil to the grocery store but ya can't here, here and here.'
very tricky stuff, huh?
Remember our rights are given to express our religion. A women wearing a veil in a store and someone thinking that is annoying as crap is different. Just because it may remind some of us of a religion that has some twisted individuals among them that attacked us on our soil, we can't try to make laws against our being offended at that particular religious expression. let's not keep lumping this lady in with all of "them". Overgeneralizations can be dangerous and misleading. We do NOT have the right to 'not be annoyed'. like If i'm wearing my 'smile Jesus loves you' t'shirt, that is not shoving my religion down your throat. don't like it, don't look. (ok here's a good place for someone to jump off and start a thread on whether religous symbols like nativy scenes should or should not be on public display on any gov owned property. me, don't mind. i dont think a menorra on the court house steps mean my gov't is trying to convert me to Judeaism. i haven't looked tho, there could already be a thread on that, someone post it to me if so.)
we should remain as tolerant to all religions as we can. the strife accomplishes nothing. well, back to work,
have a peaceful day everyone
kk

 

[Karole28]

very interesting stuff on that that link for the SPLC. and what a healthy debate we have here. intersting points on all sides.
i totally agree that the teacher should not be wearing veil in classroom.
the children's education should supercede her rights in that setting. but we're treading on delicate ground as we get close to that fine line of determining when and where a person can fully excersise religious rights of expression. Like, 'you can wear your veil to the grocery store but ya can't here, here and here.'
very tricky stuff, huh?
Remember our rights are given to express our religion. A women wearing a veil in a store and someone thinking that is annoying as crap is different. Just because it may remind some of us of a religion that has some twisted individuals among them that attacked us on our soil, we can't try to make laws against our being offended at that particular religious expression. let's not keep lumping this lady in with all of "them". Overgeneralizations can be dangerous and misleading. We do NOT have the right to 'not be annoyed'. like If i'm wearing my 'smile Jesus loves you' t'shirt, that is not shoving my religion down your throat. don't like it, don't look. (ok here's a good place for someone to jump off and start a thread on whether religous symbols like nativy scenes should or should not be on public display on any gov owned property. me, don't mind. i dont think a menorra on the court house steps mean my gov't is trying to convert me to Judeaism. i haven't looked tho, there could already be a thread on that, someone post it to me if so.)
we should remain as tolerant to all religions as we can. the strife accomplishes nothing. well, back to work,
have a peaceful day everyone
kk

Great input, thank you.

I have no problem with anyone wearing anything they want anywhere. This includes anything that covers your face. It makes me uncomfortable, and I won't stay around anyone I'm not comfortable with anyway, so it's moot.
But, don't stand around and wonder what's wrong when people don't want to spend time with you. They don't have to like it, but that's the whole point. You can't legislate social acceptance.

However, if you work for me, or for a government who I fund, I demand that you adhere to all laws applicable.

 

[reb]

<On the other hand I sure have days I would love to hide my face behind a veil. Even a paper bag would do.>..... LOL!!!

2luvmy.. what?? she went for the interview w/o the veil?? wow, that says a mouthful. so, now that a man saw her-- god forbid, if so now she'll have to be stoned to death.
so, she wasn't even born in an opporessive middle eastern country, but in wales?? i'm sorry but i *really* have no sympathy for her now. she decided to start covering herself 8 years ago and wants to live and work among western society,, and wonders what the problem is??

in this climate of terrorism,, IMO, wearing ANY type of black mask over your face IS a bad and tasteless idea, reigion or not. you would think ALL muslims (who don't support terrorism) would want to make it easier- NOT harder- to be accepted by the west, don't you think? and the ones who are extremist enough to cover their entire faces/bodies-- DO they support terrorism....?? hhhmmm... we can't tell, can we?? there needs to be some kind of clear line here that people can recognize.
also, don't know about you guys, but i want to be able to see if someone has a bomb strapped to their torso. no way would i want my kids going to a school where the teachers looked like terrorists who were ready to blow the school up at any time

i would also argue that not only people, but children in a classroom especially, have the right to be able to see a teacher's face, not only to hear them & see their expressions, but to keep their interest. i could see a child's mind easily wandering (or an adults' for that matter),, when they are staring at a black faceless hood with no facial features to connect to.

also the surgeon's mask is a bad analogy... so i'll spell this out. do surgeons teach classes to children, or take ID photos, or conduct meetings or seminars, or do business at the bank, or ride the bus, or go to starbuck's, wearing the mask???? NO!! and does the mask cover their entire face and head?? NO. do surgeons have connections with extremists and terrorist groups that hate and systematically target the west.. and doing their best to infiltrate it and want to murder millions of people (which includes you and me??) NOOOOOOOO. if they take their mask off, are they likely to be killed by for it? heck no.

organizations have dress codes FOR A REASON-- perhaps now schools should state UP FRONT what their dress codes are- and that includes covering one's head & face, and if someone can't hack it, they don't have to work there.

bottom line is,, there are- and SHOULD be-- limits to peoples' "freedom of expression/religion" etc. the freedoms of the individual (or group) are not endless, when they infringe upon the the whole. ESPECIALLY now in the age of terrorism. we westerners started this whole "free to be you and me" stuff... and we have this 'western guilt' thing that makes us feel we have to accept everything and everybody. and in the end it's going to be our own undoing... trust me.

 

[windovervocalcords]

I don't think this is about religious intolerance and I agree that to be accepted, the Muslim community is going to have to adapt to western law. This isn't about legislating what they can do when worshipping or when in their homes, this is about refusing to accept westernized social mores while demanding everyone accept your own under the guise of religious beliefs and being branded "intolerant" or God forbid "racist".

People have got to see some give and take here.

It is about cultural acceptance, in this case, modesty.
"Aishah Azmi insisted she had always been willing to remove the veil in front of children at Headfield Church of England junior school in Dewsbury, West Yorkshire - but would not do so while male colleagues were present."


This Islamic tradition is very strange to us, but this custom is not strange to Muslims.

There have been other cases-Sikh's for example, who wear turbans and who work in hospitals or schools. Similar things happened. These are religious/cultural garbs and they tend to make us uncomfortable. I do know children who found Catholic nuns habits frightening too.

Veils "push the envelope" big time. And its the same issue. It is bias. But that does not mean it is mean spirited bias.

 

[Karole28]

It is about cultural acceptance. Rather than religious intolerance. This Islamic tradition is very strange to us, but is not strange to Muslims.

There have been other cases-Sikh's for example, who wear turbans and who work in hospitals or schools. Similar things happened. These are religious/cultural garbs.

It "pushes the envelope" big time. And its the same issue. It is bias. But that does not mean it is mean spirited bias.

Wearing a turban is not the same as covering your identity. I work with quite a few Sikhs and they are lovely people. And, yes they wear turbans. (usually color coordinated with their shirts, cute actually)

I don't have a problem with that. Why would you think that I do?

And, again. It's not strange to me. I'm one of the few people I know right now who isn't fasting.

This isn't about the strangeness of a furren folk. You discredit everyone with that assumption.

We understand the religious aspect. We understand that these women want to hide their identity while in public. What we don't do, is accept it.

If a man in a ski mask came to your door, would you be more or less likely to offer him assistance as a man without one?

Who is being unacceptable of whom, here?

 

[close_enough]

Here is a picture of Aishah Azmi and how she appears in the classroom in front of children:

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/...l+woman+loses+discrimination+claim/article.do

She did not attend her interview for the job dressed in this manner.

A week ago, during a BBC interview she was asked directly whether she wore the veil at her interview. She hesitated and then replied: "Do I have to answer all the questions?"

When pressed again, she admitted she had not worn the veil but insisted she did not realise she was going to be interviewed by a male.

"I was caught unawares," she said.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6068408.stm

much more background in the link directly above.

when looking at this picture, if this woman was teaching a class that i was in, i'd find the way she looks to be very distracting......IMO, i think her excuse for not wearing the veil during the interview is BS.....

 

[Mira]

ok, lets look at this as a lifestyle choice.

if i got a job teaching children, and wore normal clothing to the interview, but...hey, my lifestyle is nudism, (which i am not LOL) so i go to teach naked.

or, i go to the interview dressed in a nice suit, but im a 'halter and daisy dukes' kinda girl (which im not LOL) so i go to class in my attire of choice.

or, im a male (which im not) and i go to the interview dressed in a nice mens suit, but my lifestyle choice is to wear womens clothes.

would *I* have the right to sue for my lifestyle choice? doubt it LOL

 

[windovervocalcords]

Wearing a turban is not the same as covering your identity. I work with quite a few Sikhs and they are lovely people. And, yes they wear turbans. (usually color coordinated with their shirts, cute actually)

I don't have a problem with that. Why would you think that I do?

And, again. It's not strange to me. I'm one of the few people I know right now who isn't fasting.

This isn't about the strangeness of a furren folk. You discredit everyone with that assumption.

We understand the religious aspect. We understand that these women want to hide their identity while in public. What we don't do, is accept it.

If a man in a ski mask came to your door, would you be more or less likely to offer him assistance as a man without one?

Who is being unacceptable of whom, here?

This is a silly argument.

A guy in a ski mask?

Sikh's are very acceptable now. In the past, they were discriminated against for their attire.

Personally, I find veils a bit creepy. But, some days I wish I had one. The point is whether we have willingness to understand cultural and religious differences and their implications.

Right now, all we have to do is say the word "muslim" and its like "boo". A knee jerk aversion reaction.

 

[close_enough]

IF she was veiled when she was hired, she should not be fired because of it. however, if she 'got religion' AFTER she was hired, the students/school has a case.

i do wonder if the difficulty in understanding the teacher was language or the veil.

ETA: apparently she misled the school. unless she actually lived in the school, she had to have removed the veil inside the school. (she had to travel there, veiled against males.)
after seeing the picture of her, i would guess that 11 year olds would be distracted by someone dressed as a ninja LOL. if a student came to school dressed this way he/she would at least be talked to about the innappropriateness of their dress, i would think?

it also said that she was wearing jeans and wedge shoes. iirc moslem women are not 'allowed' to wear pants, either...

i think she misled the school also....

 

[Karole28]

This is a silly argument.

A guy in a ski mask?

Sikh's are very acceptable now. In the past, they were discriminated against for their attire.

Personally, I find veils a bit creepy. But, some days I wish I had one. The point is whether we have willingness to understand cultural and religious differences and their implications.

Right now, all we have to do is say the word "muslim" and its like "boo". A knee jerk aversion reaction.

Yes, a guy in a ski mask. People wear them, I hear. What does it matter of the face is covered by a full length piece of fabric, or a head sized one?

Who is being insulting here?? Sikhs are en vogue and that's the only reason we accept them now? Kinda like purse sized (Paris) dogs?
I don't know when you're thinking about, but Sikhs are as accepted as any other religion I'm aware of.

And, I don't know who you're hanging around with who has an adverse reaction to the word Muslim, perhaps you should seek (sikh? heh) better company.

 

[Nova]

And, I don't know who you're hanging around with who has an adverse reaction to the word Muslim, perhaps you should seek (sikh? heh) better company.

I assume she was merely reading this thread and others like it.

Personally, I have mixed feelings on this subject. Some Muslims have argued that while the Qu'ran calls for women to cover their heads (just as the Bible does in some circumstances), the complete veil is more of a cultural tradition than a religious one.

 

[windovervocalcords]

I assume she was merely reading this thread and others like it.

Personally, I have mixed feelings on this subject. Some Muslims have argued that while the Qu'ran calls for women to cover their heads (just as the Bible does in some circumstances), the complete veil is more of a cultural tradition than a religious one.

Me too, Nova.

Mixed feelings. Overwhelmingly when I traveled in Asia it was unnerving.

At the same time, I would be willing to try and understand what's going on with the veils thing from the perspective of different people who are Muslim and who wear them or who are Muslim and don't.

 

[beakiebean]

Religions are interpreted differently by different people. Look at all the denominations of Christianity-Baptists, Presbyterians, Methodists, Catholics, Seventh Day Adventists, Amish, Jehovah's Witnesses, Pentacostals, and on and on. There are versions of Christianity that interpret the Bible in ways I find repugnant.

Same thing with Islam-it's interpreted different ways by different followers. Some believe the head should be covered at all times, some only during religious services, and some not at all. Just like the Bible the Quran can be interpreted a number of way.

People in history have twisted the Bible to justify murder, war, and rape. People have done the same with the Quran. Having extremists in a religion isn't exclusive to Islam or any religion.

There are terrible Christians, terrible Jew, terrible Muslims, terrible people of every faith. That doesn't mean that every person of that religion is terrible.

 

[Floh]

Remember 9/11? Britain has 7/7 and there has been found a connection between this lady and one of the 7/7 bombers in London.

Muslim teacher in veil row's link to 7/7 bomber

The Muslim teacher suspended for refusing to work without her veil is connected to a hardline mosque where the ringleader of the July 7 bombers worshipped, it has emerged.
The family of classroom assistant Aishah Azmi, 24, plays a key role at the fundamentalist Markazi mosque in Dewsbury, West Yorkshire - which was attended by suicide bomber Mohammed Sidique Khan.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=411748&in_page_id=1770


I now take you back to Beslan in Russia and the school where Islamic fundamentalists killed 344 civilians, 186 of them children and wounded hundreds more:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beslan_school_hostage_crisis


couldn't happen in Britain?

about the mosque she attends:


The mosque is run by Tablighi Jamaat, a radical Islamic movement believed by intelligence agencies to be a fertile source for recruiting young extremists.

Two months ago, Tablighi emerged as a link between several of the men arrested over the plot to use liquid bombs to blow up transatlantic airliners.

Richard Reid, the jailed shoebomber who tried to blow up a flight to America, also attended mosques run by the group.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=411748&in_page_id=1770

please read the whole article when considering whether this lady's attitude to the veil is simply a matter religious freedom or something which could lead to a terrifying end.

 

[reb]

HAH,, bingo.

sometimes, just because you're paranoid,, doesn't mean they're NOT really out to get you.

 

[Karole28]

I assume she was merely reading this thread and others like it.

Personally, I have mixed feelings on this subject. Some Muslims have argued that while the Qu'ran calls for women to cover their heads (just as the Bible does in some circumstances), the complete veil is more of a cultural tradition than a religious one.

The only aspect of this entire argument that regards religion is the use of it to force an entire culture to accept a practice that they consider risky.

The Jews wear a yarmulka, nobody has a problem with this. It doesn't hide their identity.

Again, if the women who believe this archaic practice should be adhered to want to be able to work in the public sector (or get driver's licenses) they need to understand that they will be asked to remove it.

American Indians eat peyote in their religious practices. They are still not allowed to drive on public roads while under it's influence. Snake handlers aren't allowed to carry them on buses, et al. Again, that's beside the point.

 

[Nova]

Karole, I did NOT say that anyone objecting to a schoolteacher wearing a full veil in class is somehow biased against Islam. But if you read some of the posts (particularly in the first page or so), the bias of some is plain. What I said was that windovervocalchords' concern didn't arise from nothing.

Personally, I think there is a valid security issue AND a valid pedagogical issue. Moreover, I'm not fond of a custom that clearly degrades women - whether or not the woman in this case minds being degraded.

But before I jump to a full-fledged anti-veil position, I have to examine my own beliefs and biases to make sure I'm not just condemning something because it is foreign to me.