Beyond the veil: What happened after Rebekah Dawson refused to take her niqab off in court

[Efour]

I personally just feel you should respect the law and authority of the country you are in. For example, if I were to move to another country I would follow their law, and respect their judiciary system. What I wouldn't do, however, is try to instill British law in that country.

I feel this should be reflected regardless of religion or nationality.

Well no disrespect but thats BS,

Every silly little British girl that gets caught being a drug mule pleads sorry to home to get their criminal sentence reduced or conditions made better.

Death penalty for smuggling? No problem! I'm British (Irish whatever!) !

Devils advocate btw... i agree a countries laws should be respected above religious belief

 

[Josh]

I spoke to a Muslim prisoner on my last day of work, just a general chat, he was about 40, educated and it was his first time in prison for a non violent crime.

I asked him quite openly about Islam and somethings that I didn't understand, about the "killing infidels" and aspects of sharia law Islam wants to integrate into our laws.

Then he said that if Full Shria law was implemented in the UK he would take his family and leave. He attended Mosque every day, said all prayers, kept to the laws of his religion and made it his business never to bother anyone about religion. He said it was his to follow and not to put on others.

He also said that the militant aspect of Islam scared him. He said some of the religions elders were "caught in an almost cult like fantasy about killing every non muslim" - he himself was a respected elder from what I saw of him on the wings.

Generally a nice person, which is something I said very rarely in my time in the Prison Service.

Islam doesn't scare me, certain aspects of Sharia Law and Radical Islam do. And it's on the rise.

 

[Amp34]

We should give these animals the same freedom that religious minorities receive in Islamic countries, lets see how that would pan out.

Which ones? You mean the ones where Christians are allowed to drink and do various other things that the majority Muslims aren't, due to it not being against their religion?

 

[Amp34]

typical one rule for them another for us more like.

don't want to reveal your face? then don't come to a western country and stay in your middle east **** hole if you love it so much.

Good muslims surely want to live in a muslim country? anyway? not somewhere corrupt where alcohol and skin is everywhere


How do they even get into this country without revealing their face anyway? one rule for customs another for court? what about the bank? petrol station?

So why can't we wear a motorbike helmet or a balaclava? but they can wear a veil? makes perfect sense

No wonder the radicals think they can force sharia law

I assume you mean immigration...?

In which case they would go to a side room and a female member of immigration staff would check they are who they say they are...

your referring to her being a brit? does not change my opinion one iota.


if you don't like what the majority of this country are behind then maybe go to one that suits your silly religion more?

the laws of this land should trump any religious belief.

don't wan to show your face in court? tough **** then don't end up in a position that will lead to court?

You mean the laws of the land, founded on Christian beliefs? A secular legal system would mean we need to scrap most laws in this country and start again.

It's great, you spout anti extremism yet from your posts you sound like you are very close to becoming the christian version of what you are fighting against, but then thats generally what bigots are, extremists...

 

[Amp34]

I personally just feel you should respect the law and authority of the country you are in. For example, if I were to move to another country I would follow their law, and respect their judiciary system. What I wouldn't do, however, is try to instill British law in that country.

I feel this should be reflected regardless of religion or nationality.

Perhaps they are just getting us back for the tens of thousands of Christian missionaries they have had to (and are still having to in some places) deal with?

 

[shadow_boxer]

Personally I've got no issue with her wearing the veil in court to be honest. There's no pandering to religious beliefs but just decency and respect for a fellow human being and their faith. If she wants to testify or take the witness box then yes it does need to be removed as facial expression is a key part of communication particularly in a court for judge and jury. I see arknor has come out of his hole again...

 

[Hitman_Leon]

What I don't understand is why 'moderate' muslims show so much anger against measures taken or proposed to try and control the hard-line muslims they say that they cannot identify with.

 

[Xordium]

What I don't understand is why 'moderate' muslims show so much anger against measures taken or proposed to try and control the hard-line muslims they say that they cannot identify with.

Do you have proof this is happening? Do you have proof that the measures solely target hard-line Muslims and not moderate?

 

[Meridian]

What I don't understand is why 'moderate' muslims show so much anger against measures taken or proposed to try and control the hard-line muslims they say that they cannot identify with.

Perhaps because such measure seldom actually make that discrimination, but instead tar all Muslims with the same brush? Not to mention that they usually come attached to a "if your not with us you are against us" clause. If some lunatic Christian (say) shoots an abortion doctor, no-one expects all Christians to condemn the group responsible. So why do we expect this if Muslims when one of them commits a crime? Why do they not get the usual presumption of innocence: if they didn't do it, why should they be forced to condemn it in others?

 

[Dis86]

Perhaps because such measure seldom actually make that discrimination, but instead tar all Muslims with the same brush? Not to mention that they usually come attached to a "if your not with us you are against us" clause. If some lunatic Christian (say) shoots an abortion doctor, no-one expects all Christians to condemn the group responsible. So why do we expect this if Muslims when one of them commits a crime? Why do they not get the usual presumption of innocence: if they didn't do it, why should they be forced to condemn it in others?

When did we last have some fundamentalist nutjob christian in this country go and kill someone in the name of their religion?

Now when did we last have a fundamentalist nutjob muslim do it? Now how many of those instances have we had in the last ten years?

That's why there's the difference.

 

[MikeTheNative]

I find it pretty funny the people claiming that radical Muslims are going to take over the country. Muslims are a staggering 5% of the population and the majority hate the radicals as much as you lot. I'm don't think that Sharia law is coming soon.

 

[John Paddy]

I actually agree with Arknor on some of his comments. Also i dont know about England but i would presume its similar to Ireland, Christian Country with Christian leaders. 1000's of years of christian history, i cannot see the people of Ireland or this country implementing Sharia law without an uprising.

Having sharia law for muslims is fine but try to enforce this on Christian people and your gonna get a whole lot of trouble. Infact trying to enforce it on anybody that does not want it and your going to get trouble, it will never happen in Eire i can tell you that.

 

[MooMoo444]

Having sharia law for muslims is fine

Is it though? It just creates awkward situations where wife gets beaten for breaking sharia law, she goes to police. It's best if people just abide by our own laws rather than bringing their b̶a̶c̶k̶w̶a̶r̶d̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶r̶e̶t̶a̶r̶d̶e̶d̶ laws with them.

 

[dowie]

That is fine but in court we testify with our faces uncovered. We should not pander to minorities.

We haven't in that instance - she didn't testify and would have been required to remove it had she testified.

 

[Tummy]

well if they are in favour of muslim laws go to a muslim country?
a volunteer caretaker took a group of Portuguese people on a tour around a mosque something most of the good muslims of the mosque were fine with.
her brother then beats the guy up because he doesn't agree with then having their faces uncovered (how tolerant a muslim he is)

her sister is then stupid enough to try and intimidate the poor caretaker...

Great Muslims those 2 a real credit to Allah and exactly the type of people we want in this country.


Now the guy I cycle past on a daily basis at the local park that always waves and asks how I'm doing is a good muslim who tries to fit in with the country he lives in and shows respect for people not of his faith.

I would happily live next door to this guy no probs, but if he started whining the country should change to suit his religious beliefs I'd tell him straight religion is BS made up during the stupid ages to keep peasants in check

Ignoring the rest of the mouth foaming drivel you post.

Does this mean, me, as I'm a 'Brit' (whatever that means) and if I'm in favour of say, American culture or Danish culture you'd 'send' me over to live in America or Denmark? .

 

[D.P.]

I personally just feel you should respect the law and authority of the country you are in. For example, if I were to move to another country I would follow their law, and respect their judiciary system. What I wouldn't do, however, is try to instill British law in that country.

I feel this should be reflected regardless of religion or nationality.

And for a vast majority of people that is exactly what happens.

 

[Theophany]

With a name like Paddy and wearing a balaclava you'd probably be ambushed by the SAS. But then again you could claim it's performance art.

This is fantastic.

 

[D.P.]

That is fine but in court we testify with our faces uncovered. We should not pander to minorities.

No one has pandered to a minority in this case, as was explicitly described, if the need to testify arose then the veil would be required to be removed. Which is perfectly reasonable.

 

[xbenjiiman]

All it'll boil down to eventually is another Bradford Riot somewhere.

This city needs nuking.

 

[Burnsy2023]

No one has pandered to a minority in this case, as was explicitly described, if the need to testify arose then the veil would be required to be removed. Which is perfectly reasonable.

Personally I think this is a good position to have. I do think that this is where the line is drawn though, I think it's important to see someone's face when they give evidence in court to a jury.