Comments on: Mich.: Witnesses May Have To Remove Veil

In Wake Of Muslim Woman's Lawsuit, State Gives Judges Discretion In Requiring Testifiers To Show Their Faces

[mswolfestock]

Shhh - be quiet for a minute . . . . .. There! There it is!! That sound - it's the sound of our Founding Fathers rolling in their graves.

They're rolling in their graves because in Michigan there is no separation of church and state any more, and I don't mean the Christian church, either.

I guess if we wait another couple of months everybody will be wearing burquas up there. And they'll have to pray a million times a day, and you won't be able to eat pork, and you won't be able to drink alcohol, etc, etc.

WAKE UP, AMERICAN PATRIOTS IN MICHIGAN!!!! THE REST OF THE COUNTRY IS WATCHING AND WE ARE MAD AS *H*E*L*L* ABOUT THIS. GET UP OFF YOUR BACKSIDES AND TAKE BACK YOUR STATE FOR THE GOOD OF THE REST OF THE COUNTRY.

[SusanStoHelit]

Another illiterate. Go read the story.

One person in a burqua doesn't change what the entire state is. If they had that type of superpower, we'd all be wearing them. One woman refused to remove the veil, lost her court case, and appealed it all the way to the Supremes - lost all the way.

So it's clearly established that while you have the right to wear a burqua if you like - you must remove it for testimony, drivers license photos and other times it is necessary. What - would you expel a group because you don't like their clothes? Back in the 60's, it was scandalous clothing that showed too much skin, now the same type of old farts want to ban people for showing too little skin.

[obomba1]

If you go to another country you have to obey their rules no matter your religion. The veil should be removed. I'll go one step further and say there should be no veils allowed in the U.S. Or dirty turbans for that matter.

[TheMasses0003]

TV advertisements for the Ghihad Technical School of Terrorism and Extremism.
--------------------------
I'm not sure those classes would sell better then medical assisting or HVAC. There's more money in the latter - and you get to live too.

[1avery]

Does anyone else agree with me that Separation of Church and State comes should come into play here?

[mswolfestock]

It looks to me like we now have only 49 states that belong to the United States of America. They might as well re-name Michigan Mohandas Al El Gaziz, or maybe Yemen on the Great Lakes. I suppose the next step will be honor killings every other Thursday, and then there will be TV advertisements for the Ghihad Technical School of Terrorism and Extremism.

They can have Michigan for all I care, but I hope the rest of us are learning from this. I'd just as soon throw them all out - send them back where they belong. WE JUST DON'T NEED THESE NASTY PEOPLE HERE, TELLING REAL AMERICANS WHAT TO DO IN THEIR OWN COURTROOMS AND COUNTRY.

dragyn30 said it best:
I am getting sick of these people coming here and insisting we change our laws for them - guess what folks WE WERE HERE FIRST!!! If you do not like our laws go back where you came from, do not bring your problems here!

[SusanStoHelit]

Are you illiterate, or just plain ignorant? The judges all the way through ruled she had to remove the veil, and she lost her court case for refusal to do so. Nice try at creating a false impression though.

[Yeah-Me]

My vote is... he's just plain ignorant.

[sdemaggie]

How did such a trivial, ridiculous matter make it to the Supreme Court? Remove the veil, this is the US not some third world back water where woman are chattle.

[SusanStoHelit]

It's good that it did - this makes it the law throughout the land, no defendant can now say that the judge is violating their rights by telling a witness to remove the veil for testimony.

[ephd]

Something else to consider, we know from social psychology that people have an easier time engaging in anti-social behavior when their identities are hidden. Lots of research has demonstrated that hiding behind a hood removed many social inhibitions. Thus, perhaps the witness would have an easier time lying if his or her face is hidden and he or she had an agenda for lying in a particular case. This puts the defendant at a disadvantage (in cases where witness is for the prosecution).

Now, the question becomes whether this "hidden identity" phenomenon would apply in a court case where the witness' name is known. Not exactly anonymous and so may be more of a sense of responsibility and a link between them and their actions. So this may not be a real issue. However, more research is necessary rather than a knee jerk liberal pandering.

[SusanStoHelit]

Because they are a religion. If you read their book - a good religion - although the many stone age tribes where the religion took hold have modified it into something barbaric (the Burqua is nowhere in Islam). However, considering what you can lay at Christianity's feet - in the past, and even today in places where Christianity is the religion of choice of a stone age barbaric tribe of people.

Fortunately for Christianity - you don't get to judge what is a real religion and not by the acts of a few individuals.

[SusanStoHelit]

They don't need to assimilate - we are not the Borg, absolute conformity is not required. They do need to adjust, live by our laws, and that may cause some compromises like this one - she can wear the burqua if she likes, all the time - except for a drivers license photo, testifying in court, other similar situations where it is essential to see her face.

[dragyn30]

I normally have great respect or religious beliefs and practice, but this has nothing to do with that.

No only does showing their face allow for the courts to see the expressions but also for positive identification that she is indeed who she says she is. I agree that they should be required to remove face covering for legal forms of identification such as a driver's license o passport without full face ID how do you know they eyes you're looking at is the same person in the photo. This way they can be positively identified. Even Nuns remove their wimple (head covering) for official identification.

I am getting sick of these people coming here and insisting we change our laws for them - guess what folks WE WERE HERE FIRST!!! If you do not like our laws go back where you came from, do not bring your problems here!

[Yeah-Me]

Actually... not quite... the American Indians were here first before we took over their land.

Just saying, is all...

[brady51h-2009]

Passports, Driver licenses, Court testimony,and Police stops should all require temporary removal of face covering and ID should show face with no covering. How else will people be properly identified? They have their rules in their country and we have ours. We have to obey their rules when in their country so they must obey our rules in this country.

[toooldtovote]

If they're not unveiled, How do we know if they're the right witness? When we go to their country, we honor their customs. In America, they should honor ours.

[hamiltongrad]

did David Letterman "stage" his comments as a major publicity stunt, to get attention away from NBC new Tonight Show ? Just asking. Sure got alot of publicity. Is he laughing all the way to the ratings bank ?

[drsuz]

In the United States, we have the right to face our accusers. If they are allowed to keep their face cover, HOW do we know the person behind the veil IS who they say she is when all they can see are eyes? And those who served on a jury know, facial expressions during a trial say alot. The ACLU should just stay out of this.
Also, if it is fair for a Muslim woman to keep her face covered, then those who rob a establishment or a person with a mask on should NEVER have to remove it and the authorites would have to just believe they are who they say they are.

[budfrank1]

Well said.

[OLEANDER_]

"exception for people whose clothing is dictated by their religion"

if you have taken it upon yourself to live here, you have to follow the laws of the OUR land.

The accused has the right to FACE his accuser.

[zonkzilla]

The US Constitution demands that any accused be allowed to see the accuser and that of course would also apply to civil court.
Can you imagine the chaos if people were allowed to go to court with their faces hidden due to "religion"? It is not allowed, period. The US Supreme Court would definitely rule people in court cannot hide their faces so why the waste of money?

[dwilson59]

Your correct the evil car rental company

[8razman]

Why is this even in question? Remove the veil or leave. Simple as that.

[ralpherus]

except- way more than any halloween costume, those outfits are frightening! How about they go live where freaks like them live? What is it that makes them want to be around civilized people while refusing to be civilized?