Many European nations have been worried about the “Islamification” of their countries. While liberals will shout and scream “racism” and deny this to their death, you can’t ignore the trends. In fact one recent episode highlights this shocking trend, in which a Muslim woman refused to take her Hijab off during a public court case…funny enough however, the judge begged to differ.
One of the key reasons that nations of the past have fallen, was that they were divided amongst themselves. One needs to look no further than the Roman Empire to see this phenomena. They give citizenship out to everyone, which worked when times were great, but the second Barbarians began posing a threat to Roman security, things changed.
All of a sudden, these “citizens” ended up actually being more loyal to their own tribes than the Roman Empire…and unfortunately, this is a very eerie phenomena we’re seeing now in Western Civilization. Many members of the “religion of peace” claim to be citizens, but would rather see a caliphate in place than individual rights.
The Guardian reports:
A Victorian judge has banned a woman whose husband is facing terrorism charges from wearing a niqab in court, saying it posed a potential security risk.
The woman applied through her husband’s lawyers to wear the face veil, which she said was a “a fundamental way in which she observes her faith”, while sitting in the public gallery to support him through the six-week trial.
She said she had been permitted to wear the niqab during a committal hearing in the magistrates court and was willing to show her face to security guards manning the metal detector and weapons check at the court entrance to verify her identity.
But the supreme court judge Christopher Beale said the risk of a mistrial or other incident caused by “misbehaving” in the public gallery would be heightened if a person could not be instantly identified because their face was covered, and ruled that the risk outweighed the infringement upon the woman’s right to freedom of religious expression.
“Deterrence, identification and proof are all served by a requirement that spectators in the public gallery have their faces uncovered,” he said in a decision handed down on Monday.
Of course leftists have cried and shouted all day long about this, but the facts are simple. If we allow one Muslim woman to wear a hijab during a court case, we allow ALL MUSLIM WOMEN to wear hijabs during court cases. This will begin the process of eroding our laws and our culture.
Not to mention the fact that this makes it very easy for Muslim women to lie about their identities, and will make concealing weapons far easier. Lawyers for the woman argued that she wasn’t posing a security risk
“Australia is obviously a multicultural society and I agree that religious dress should be accommodated as much as possible, but the right of religious freedom and the right to participate in public life are not absolutes,” Beale said in his decision.
He said the Victorian charter of human rights recognised that rights “may be subject to limitations which can be ‘demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom’”.
Lawyers for the woman said there was an implied right of wear a veil when not giving evidence, citing a number of cases in Commonwealth countries.
Those cases generally concerned whether a person was able to wear religious facial coverings while giving evidence and did not contest a person’s right to wear religious attire when not on the stand. Among them is a ruling by the New South Wales court of appeal concerning a civil damages trial against NSW police, which upheld the trial judge’s ruling that the complainant could not wear her niqab while giving evidence.