Keep us "Dar al-Harb"

Mich. judges get discretion after Muslim veil flap
By DAVID EGGERT, Associated Press Writer
LANSING, Mich. – The Michigan Supreme Court on Wednesday voted to give judges authority over how witnesses dress in court after a Muslim woman refused to remove her veil while testifying in a small claims case.

A statewide court rule letting judges regulate the appearance of witnesses — such as asking them to remove face coverings — was approved by a 5-2 vote. The dissenters said there should be an exception for people whose clothing is dictated by their religion.

Justices heard last month from a Muslim woman who sued because her small claims case was dismissed when she refused to remove her veil.

Hamtramck District Judge Paul Paruk told Ginnnah Muhammad he needed to see her face to judge her truthfulness. The 45-year-old from Detroit kept her niqab on during the 2006 hearing.

Some Muslim leaders interpret the Quran to require that women wear a headscarf, veil or burqa in the presence of a man who is not their husband or close relative.
...
Muhammad originally went to court to contest a $3,000 charge from a rental-car company to repair a vehicle that she said thieves had broken into. The ACLU said Muhammad did not want to speak with the media Wednesday.

Here, here for the Michigan Supreme Court. This is along the same line as states not allowing head coverings on IDs (please what would be the point?), or the secretary that was wrongly fired because she ate a BLT.

The judge in this case needed to observe the plaintiff while she was on the stand in order to make a judgment about her truthfulness. We are not in Iran, we are not under the oppresive Sharia Law.

Under Christianity there may be fringe groups that still disrespect women by not allowing them freedom, but that's why they're fringe. Unfortunately, many mohammedans still "kill women with kindness". Think Taming of the Shrew, coddling women so much that their will is broken and their freedom stomped. Where are the bra burning feminist activists?

Islam has many different interpretations. I won't venture to guess what percentage are peaceful and freedom-loving.

Here's the problem with Islam in a free society:
It is not only a religion, it's a political, economic and religious system. As in Christianity, the main tenets govern a believer's relationship with his Creator and his fellow man - The Golden Rule and Ten Commandments. In Islam, apart from the religious aspect and relationships is Sharia Law which includes politics, economics, contracts, family issues, sexuality, hygiene and many social issues (including wearing burqas).

Mohammedans' belief system may hinder their ability to be free in our society and rubs against the freedoms of individuals. Do we allow polygamy as well? Disallowing polygamy is a prohibition of Islamic belief.

We as a nation, in order to secure a free and individualist society, must resist the creeping in of Sharia Law under the guise of "religious freedom". While one can argue that forcing a woman to take a burqa off is "prohibiting the free exercise" of religion, I put forth this: When a religion greatly abridges the freedoms of women in the name of "decency", then it fails to be a religion. But it becomes a system of law that spits upon the Declaration of Independence and the whole point of our founding, and works to subvert.

It is up to the freedom-loving mohammedans in this country to combat viral Islam that segregates itself from American society.

Look up "Dar al-Harb"

PS. Watching the Rockies game and Helton hitting a walk-off homerun in the bottom of the ninth...15 wins out of 16 games, woo hoo!!