Texas clinic apologizes for telling Muslim doctor she can’t wear headscarf.
Islam News @ NYT- Pilgrim Non Grata in Mecca: After no journey to Mecca, learning about Islam from a seat in Washington.
- Swedish Artist Says Sketch of Prophet Aimed to Mock All Religions: A man who prosecutors say was the target of a murder plot says his caricature of the Prophet Muhammad was intended to poke fun at all sacred symbols.
- Nigerians Recount Night of Their Bloody Revenge: This week dozens of herdsmen slaughtered hundreds of people in a brutal act of sectarian retribution in Jos.
-
Would you like your own blog hosted at Talk Islam? Email the admin at "salaam at talk islam dot info" !
Talk Islam uses Wordpress MU and the Prologue theme by Automattic
DISCLAIMER: Please see the About Talk Islam page for fair use issues and our privacy policy.
DONATE: Talk Islam needs your support!
aziz 7:34 pm on November 2, 2009 Permalink |
Good. I saw the earlier thread on this, but with all due respect to Buzz it’s total crap to equate this case with something like demanding full face-veiling on drivers’ licenses. Thats what the jafisphere does and its akin to equating any religious observance with its most extreme form.
Wearing a head scarf in no way interferes with the duties of a physician and the whole defense that it was a “no hat policy” was transparently bogus from the beginning.
Buzz 7:44 pm on November 2, 2009 Permalink |
I made no such argument.
And these cases are almost always won, as I showed with people fired for bearing crosses, other forms of annoying and superficial proselytization and my personal favorite:
Dudes who sued Hooters for gender descrimination for not hiring males servers. Hooters has settled atleast two of those suits.
Hollow victories all. Congratulations to all you on the religious right who like to wear crosses and bear your religion on your sleeve and force it down the rest of your fellow citizens’ throats. Congrats on workin the system.
aziz 8:06 pm on November 2, 2009 Permalink |
you freely label this case as an example of “annoying and superficial prosletyzation”, which is indeed implicitly equating it to the drivers license case.
theres nothing superficial about her demand to be allowed to wear hijab in this instance.
Buzz 8:22 pm on November 2, 2009 Permalink |
How do you know? Why did she have to be so public and go to CAIR? Why couldn’t it have been handled privately?
What is total crap is that people feel the need to externalize their religion and spread it like a virus. There are verses in the Qur’an that attest to just this, people who make a show of their religion.
This is a step away from America an into something different and wretched. Strong arming employers into making PC accomodations is not a victory. It is a defeat for freedom.
If you get passed the damn hijab and look at all the other accomodations that have to be made as well, a wise person will realize where this fake diversity road leads.
Anyway, again, congrats to all the relgious conservatives out there. I am sure you will demand that I wear something stupid soon too.
Buzz 8:25 pm on November 2, 2009 Permalink
Beat the holiday rush, order yours now.
aziz 8:33 pm on November 2, 2009 Permalink
you’re full of fire on this, but you’re still not addressing the concrete details of the case which do distinguish it from other cases like the DL hijabi case; namely that there is no reason to forbid her from wearing a scarf because it does not interfere with her duties in any way.
Further, there is no imposition of her faith on anyone else, so your “you will demand I wear something stupid” comment is akin to the dhummies’ insistence that every muslim personally practicing their faith is somehow “imposing” Shari’a on everyone else. in no way does her wearing it impose anything on anyone else.
and you are being disingenous to link to the previous post about niqab. Since when is hijab equal to niqab?
Buzz 8:51 pm on November 2, 2009 Permalink
I already addressed the issue and never brought up DL practicality issues…ever!
To repeat: (let’s assume) as a private medical institution, I would like the opportunity to “Brand” my public face. I don’t want the doctors who work in our clinics to bear religious symbols while they are treating the public.
There may be a Jew who feels uncomfortable with a Muslim . There may be a Muslim who feels distrustfule of Christians. Etc etc etc etc etc………………….
Huh? You get it? Why does Walmart dictate a smock to be worn? Because they want the same message going out to all customers from all employees: “How can I help you the customer as a walmart employee.” Not a walmart evangelist of Jesus Christ the only true Savior and only true Salvation.
There are jobs that are not customer facing where a hijab would not disrupt the private company’s right to control image and make a profit.
Doctor in a clinic is not one one of them.
Dr. What’s her face should find a clinic who has a charter to front diversity (like Kaiser actively does) rather than making a nuisance of herself there.
And Ibrahim Hooper can still go eff himself. His actions will not help Muslims in the long run. Just alienate them.
Buzz 8:54 pm on November 2, 2009 Permalink
It is you who does not understand. We are talking about texas general public. They don’t know hijab, burqa, niqab, shinola
Buzz 8:59 pm on November 2, 2009 Permalink
religion is scary to alot of people. Islam is double scary.
I wouldn’t want a Hari Krishna checking me for hernias. Those people look crazy. Where does the line get drawn and not drawn arbitrarily?
Davis 10:59 am on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
There may be a white person uncomfortable with a black person, and vice versa. Does that mean that black employees shouldnt be hired because they’re black or white employees shouldn’t be hired because they’re white?
Buzz 11:56 am on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
This was addressed in the previous thread as well. Skin color, race is not something that can be put on and off. Culture can.
Davis 1:42 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
This is not culture. This is someone’s philosophical or religious belief. You keep on talking about America and its values but know jack about what makes the American project different and successful in many ways. People’s beliefs/ideas are respected as long as they don’t inflict harm on other people or take away their property. Absent any reasonable explanation of how wearing a hijab makes her a bad employee in terms of her ability, she should be able to wear her hijab. If the customers refuse to get treated by her because she has one on , that is their issue. Ignorance should not be encouraged.
Buzz 2:19 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
You are forcing the private sector to fund your politics. That is not American. You can go to the public sector with your diversity project, no problem. When you step on the private sector, now you have really limited freedom.
It is a subtle issue and really not as black and white as you make it out to be. When you give one side carte blanche, you hurt the other side. When you are employed by someone, you willingly surrender some of your personal freedom to be a representative of that enterprise. That enterprise has a right to enforce limits on how its employees interact with the public.
Buzz 2:21 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
“Hello, Bank of America, this is Wendy, have you heard the Good News?”
Buzz 2:29 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
How far are you willing to go, Davis? Supposed I hired this guy and he shows up a week later with a new “philosophical or religious belief.”
Do I have to put the nimrod out on my floor to talk to my customers? AM I supposed to pretend it doesn’t affect my business?
abunoor 3:18 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
Davis, excellent points. I appreciate your comment.
Buzz 4:04 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
And by the way, Davis, headscarf is TOTALLY culture. It is not a dictate or requirement of Islam. It is simply a cultural interpretation. Some people hate that fact.
Buzz 4:05 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
Just like you can be a Christian without wearing a big phoney cross on your neck.
abunoor 4:16 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
Unless of course your employer tells you to wear the headscarf. Then you absolutely must do it. There can be nothing higher than the sacred obligation of the employer to do what his customers like and the employee to do what the employer likes. That is true piety. These people with their “religions” and all that, pay no attention to them.
Davis, I don’t know if you are Muslim or how much you know about Islam but the hijab is without any doubt a religious obligation in Islam.
Of course, as you also know since you seem to realize that this is not some new issue that Buzz just came up with, but something well established in employment and constitutional law in the US, the test has to whether a religious practice deserves protection is not whether Buzz or Abu Noor says it is one but whether it is a sincerely held religiously motivated practice of the person in question, which in this case it obviously is which is why the clinic has apologized.
Thank God that despite all the ignorance and small mindedness out there, there are many many Americans who are not like Buzz on this issue.
Buzz 4:18 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
Name calling, last refuge of the weak position.
Buzz 4:19 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
You want a caliphate anyway, Mr. Pro-American.
What a crock.
Buzz 4:27 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
Actually, I should thank Abu Noor instead of condemning him. You need these kinds of demonstration from ultra-conservatives to explain EXACTLY WHY you cannot mandate these things.
Abu Noor just condemned all Muslim women who choose not wear hijab. WELCOME TO AMERICA!!!
Buzz 4:30 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
And don’t think for a second that their weird obsession stops there. EVERYONE should be under some kind of conrtrol and wearing some kind of costume.
While there is nothing wrong with hijab, per se, with some personal choice for modesty, there is something seriously wrong with these people.
Muse 4:31 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
Buzz, your animosity towards hijab is baffling. I expected better from you.
Buzz 4:34 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
Maybe it is hard for hijab wearers to understand.
Buzz 4:34 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink
Ask someone who DOES NOT want to wear hijab but is Muslim. Maybe that will help.
null 7:02 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink
That would be me Buzz. Still baffling, but I don’t expect better from you. So there’s that.
Buzz 7:17 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink
Yeah, I know what to expect from you too null. But I am more interested in issues and less in personal judgements.
So there’s that…
abunoor 4:43 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
I didn’t condemn anyone Buzz. Nor did I call you any names.
Read more carefully.
Buzz 7:19 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink
Type more carefully or read what you write.
Dan 4:47 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
Sorry abunoor, but there is still no clear consensus on the validity of the hijab within many Muslim scholars.
That being said, I will support a woman’s right to wear it as it is her choice.
Buzz 4:50 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
To be clear Dan, so will I. In her private and public life, I completely support people’s freedom to do as they please if they do not affect others adversely.
And there in lies the problem. The employer has rights too. And they should be respected. The workplace is not a forum for religious expression.
Or not in my opinion.
Buzz 4:52 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
It can and should be tolerated (religious idols, talismans and other symbols) where it does not affect business.
Dan 4:57 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
For me, it’s okay as long as it does not interfere with the job. The niqaab, on the other hand, it should be banned 100%.
Buzz 5:26 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink
I don’t know if you are right or not on niqaab, impose on personal freedom or allow be laissez faire on something that could end up affecting a whole society. There are benefits and problems both ways.
It is weird how so much of Islamic politics hinges on a piece of cloth that should really just be a personal decision for women. Had it stayed that way, none of this would be a problem.
abunoor 4:57 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
Dan, I don’t see any reason for you to be sorry.
I don’t think the word you are looking for is “validity.” Perhaps you mean that there are scholars who do not feel hijab is obligatory. Of course it depends on what one means by scholars.
This issue is just about as universal as one gets in the world of Islamic fiqh, but of course like any issue it is possible there is some disagreement. Of course, the fact that someone out there disagrees with something is not a reason that it cannot be stated. Then we’d never say anything.
Muse 4:37 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
I know plenty of people like this – my own mother for example. Luckily none of them will agree with you here.
Buzz 4:47 pm on November 3, 2009 Permalink |
Please inform your nice mother that she is not meeting her religious obligations according to the usual suspects.