The Two Way Street

Politics for a New Generation

Hijab Contraversy

5 Comments

A muslim woman was asked to remove her hijab, or traditional head scarf, by her bank, in order to be served. When she explained that ist was religious apparrel and she wouldn’t take it off, she was asked to move to a seperate room to be identified. When this occurance repeated itself she left the bank. Her bank defended its policy, saying that it would be acceptable to ask someone who wouldn’t take off his or her headwear to be identified in another room. He never specified religious clothing. The woman’s response was that her scarf didn’t cover her face, only her hair.

This sort of degenerate behavior by banks captures the very essence, though diluted, of  McCarthyism: the persecution of a group of people in the name of security. It is one’s fist ammendment right to freely practive one’s religion, and the hijab is a part of Islam. Therefore, the rules of these banks which fail to disclude religious headwear violate the constitution. 62%  of people felt that this sort of law was fair. How is it that the vast majority of americans believe in violating the religious freedoms we hold so dear? I fear for our future is such a fact is true.

Advertisements

Author: Julia

I'm a seventeen-year-old college student at Simon's Rock of Bard in Western Mass. I'm a writer and an aspiring journalist.

5 thoughts on “Hijab Contraversy

  1. oh, and next time, comment on the specific post, not at the bottom of the page.

  2. See, he may have been exercising his right to free speech, but he could well have saved it until later, when he could have told this to reporters. By shouting his thoughts out in the middle of the speech, he broke the sacred decorum of the joint session of congress, thus opening doors for democrats the next time a republican is doing the same. if we, as a nation, choose to continue down this path, we may very well loose grip of the very idea of civility. the method of communication, not the idea, is what Wilson should be reprimanded for, and I will continue to stand by my conclusions.

  3. Wilson should not be punished for his outburst at Obama’s speech. He thought Obama was lying and exercised his freedom of speech. Too many people are too in love with Obama and he had the balls to stand up and voice his opinion, however brief it may have been.

  4. I’m sorry for the typo!!! thanks for catching that!!! however, you may have been harsh. As a three year old I was challenged at spelling (maybe i still am). I couldn’t spell potato until I was five. But hey, I still beat Dan Quayle by 40 years!

  5. It’s spelled “Controversy”, not “contraversy”. Anyone over 3 knows that.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s