New Muslim congresswoman will seek to allow religious headwear in the House

Don't make me put you on ignore!!!

 

no they wouldn't colleges has asked Christians not to wear their crucifix outside the shirts they claim it makes non Christians uncomfortable and Jew were banned from wearing a Yakama working at Anne Franks museum and another from wearing his in court

 

Left Wing Guy: "All Religions Ought to be Equal"
Right Wing Guy: "Saying All Religions Ought to be Equal is a War on My Religion"

...simmer down now

 

a hijab is not a religious statement. why do we have to limit expression only to religuous statements? then please define a religious statement. if we are going to allow hats in congress, why not flip flops and tank tops?

 

Regarding the highlighted. That's how it was portrayed on Breitbart and the Daily Mail but as usual, the full story seems to be a little more complicated than that.

The Anne Frank House has a policy of being religiously neutral and is reluctant to allow the display of any religious symbols. A new employee turned up at work on his first day wearing a yarmulke and was told that this ran contrary to their general rules of religious neutrality. He was told that he could request to wear one and that in the meantime, he could wear a baseball cap to cover his yarmulke. His request was granted, though it does seem to have taken a considerable amount of time. In other words:

• An organisation had a specific policy regarding employee attire
• An employee wanted an exception to that policy
• That exception took some time to grant
• In the meantime a compromise was found until the exception was granted

Regarding the banning of wearing a yarmulke in court. This seems to be a reference to a 1996 case in Texas - hardly a hotbed of liberalism. The judge who ordered the removal of the witness' yarmulke was Pat Lykos, who has stood for public office as a Republican.

 

So you are comparing flip flops and tank tops to a head covering worn by Muslim women?

Multiculturalism and diversity of religious belief are constitutional in the US. And if only people would remove their blinders of fear and hatred, there would be a recognition that it only makes the country stronger.

 

I have no problems with it. But would allowing Muslim head gear in the House of Representatives, a government building, be akin for our government to be endorsing the Muslim faith over others? The SCOTUS has ruled all Christian symbols and practices removed from all government buildings as it constitutes a government endorsement of that particular religion. I expect some law suits.

I also have no problem with Christian symbols or any other religious symbol or headgear in any government building.

 

Darn! Well, I'm easy. But no Jet helmets, please.

 

why does it always have to come down to hatred? how about simple decorum? the congress has rules that say you don’t wear hats or anything on your head. so you don’t.

so yes, MAGA hats and flip flops. what a great looking congress we will have! lh, hijabs too!

 

no what I'm doing is pointing out the epidemic of the blatant hypocrisy and double standard of the left the conduction liberals have no concept of

 

Fair enough...I don't know that it comes down to hatred. So please, explain to me - if not hatred - why some Americans oppose devout Muslims (note, I didn't not say devout Radical Islamics). When the rules of Congress were implemented, there were no Muslim representatives. It stated that members should not wear hats out of respect. Head covering, for religious reasons, is not 'wearing a hat'. And it does not show disrespect. Did the framers of the country intend to exclude people other than Christians to participate in the government of the country?

 

There are more similarities than differences between the U.S. and the U.K.

 

You might be trying to, but you haven't succeeded.

 

If the constant outrage could just be dialed back to like a 9.5, that would be progress...

 

^ Seriously not getting it.

 

No - the rule is outdated & has to go.

 

That's Jets.

 

Soon the Senate, Congress and the Supreme Court will look like a Walmart.

 

mass shooin

Hell no as there has not been mass shootings of children in their schools of late in the UK or at music events or night clubs or...............

 

Could be. I would still wager there would be lawsuits resulting in the end to a SCOTUS ruling.

 

I don't think so.

I think the rule will just be changed to permit head stuff.

 

funny how Congress forgot the rule when it was addressed by the pope:

 

your right because liberals have no concept and understanding of hypocrisy and double standard its beyond their comprehension

 

so then you agree that all religious symbols should be allowed to remain or placed in public buildings and land like the ten commandments at schools and court houses or crosses at public parks and federal land?

 

because like good sheep you are more then willing to trade your freedoms and liberties for a little security
now you are giving up freedom of speech so people wont have hurt feelings
so what more will you be willing to give up to achieve your socialist authoritarian utopia?