Crime NY City o pay $17.5M for forcing Muslim women to remove hijabs...

[Yorick]

Funny how in Iran women protest wearing this shit amid Morality Police arrest and murder of innocent females like Mahsa Amini.
But here in the states it is somehow a vaunted cloak of protection.
Self-loathing liberal apologist appeasers.

 

[Islam Imamate]

The sheer absurdity of photographing somebody for their mugshot wearing a mask is beyond belief but representative of the trend to redefine criminality where in criminals are now the “victims”.

The headscarf does not cover the face. From the article

The New York Police Department changed its policy in 2020 to allow people to leave on religious head coverings for arrest photographs if they are not obstructing their faces.

Funny how in Iran women protest wearing this shit amid Morality Police arrest and murder of innocent females like Mahsa Amini.
But here in the states it is somehow a vaunted cloak of protection.
Self-loathing liberal apologist appeasers.

So what is your preferred policy suggestion here?

 

[avenue94]

The sheer absurdity of photographing somebody for their mugshot wearing a mask is beyond belief but representative of the trend to redefine criminality where in criminals are now the “victims”.

I take it English is not your first language if you can't identify how a mask is different form a hijab?

lmao

"This exemption applies to all Americans, but is only useful to the extremely few Jews & Shieks that will ever be arrested, but mostly for Muslims who represent nine times their national population percentage within prisons."

And? I get it, you hate the constitution and the First Amendment. Because again, freedom of worship applies to all Americans, regardless of criminal status.

....by posting about a Jewish gang from decades ago? That's the most relevant subject you could find?

Meanwhile, you still think you're correct although I posted proof how Muslims represent nine times their national population percentage within prisons.

Relevant to today. Not decades ago.

You're ducking the question. What's the compelling state interest in requiring folks to take off a religious hair covering during police processing?

 

[fungi]

Funny how in Iran women protest wearing this shit amid Morality Police arrest and murder of innocent females like Mahsa Amini.
But here in the states it is somehow a vaunted cloak of protection.
Self-loathing liberal apologist appeasers.

They should be oppressed like in Iran/Afghanistan/etc., so they understand/value the benefits of civilized society where headdress or its absence is a free choice, not a crime.

 

[Islam Imamate]

And? I get it, you hate the constitution and the First Amendment. Because again, freedom of worship applies to all Americans, regardless of criminal status.

Like I said earlier people like that only believe in religious freedom as a way to benefit the in-group at the expense of the out-group but they'll be outraged if the out-group invokes those same rights

You're ducking the question. What's the compelling state interest in requiring folks to take off a religious hair covering during police processing?

Even if you address his points its clearly nonsensical and irrelevant. For one most of the Muslims in prisons converted after being incarcerated and are African Americans, not immigrants. And secondly and more obviously is that the vast, vast majority are men and so the exemption for the headscarf is irrelevant. Some posters will simply throw their talking points at a wall until something sticks.

 

[fungi]

So what is your preferred policy suggestion here?

Encourage them to relocate to Iran/Afghanistan/etc., so that they can enjoy the freedoms of sharia legal system.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Encourage them to relocate to Iran/Afghanistan/etc., so that they can enjoy the freedoms of sharia legal system.

Encourage how?

 

[avenue94]

Like I said earlier people like that only believe in religious freedom as a way to benefit the in-group at the expense of the out-group but they'll be outraged if the out-group invokes those same rights

It's not even a defense of Christianity for a lot of these folks, but just a very specific political interpretation of it that didn't exist 30 or 40 years ago.

Even if you address his points its clearly nonsensical and irrelevant. For one most of the Muslims in prisons converted after being incarcerated and are African Americans, not immigrants. And secondly and more obviously is that the vast, vast majority are men and so the exemption for the headscarf is irrelevant. Some posters will simply throw their talking points at a wall until something sticks.

It's funny because if your big bugaboos are Muslims and prisoners and extremism, the logical end of your worldview is that you should try to reduce the number of black people being imprisoned to avoid them being Muslimized and radicalized in the first place.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

And? I get it, you hate the constitution and the First Amendment. Because again, freedom of worship applies to all Americans, regardless of criminal status.

You're ducking the question. What's the compelling state interest in requiring folks to take off a religious hair covering during police processing?

Wow, that's your responses Avenue94?
Lets go ahead and skip to the part of our discussions that you've been destroyed on every aspect of your arguments, but you're so delusional you keep repeating the same talking points like "You actually hate the consitution!"

 

[ShadowRun]

NY gonna NY this is the cost of the strength in diversity.

 

[avenue94]

Wow, that's your responses Avenue94?
Lets go ahead and skip to the part of our discussions that you've been destroyed on every aspect of your arguments, but you're so delusional you keep repeating the same talking points like "You actually hate the consitution!"

....Do you just not have a logical part of your brain?

The legal standard here is that the state needs to show a compelling interest and/or undue burden in respecting this religious right. If you can't elaborate on other of those two points, the state is in the wrong from the perspective of the First Amendment.

So again, what's the states interest in having men or women removing hair coverings for mug shots?

 

[fungi]

Encourage how?

Simple:

• Explain to them that the law is applicable to all, equally.
• Do not award them millions of $$, only because they claimed to have experienced shame due to having to take mugshots without headdress.
• And hold them in contempt of the court for frivolous lawsuits. And punish them accordingly.
• I.e. apply the law/rules to them, just like to everybody else. No preferential "religious excuse bullshit" treatment.

That will be enough. Those unsocial elements can't exist in a civilized society, they will either obey the law or choose to relocate.

 

[Chad R. Thundercock]

Imagine being a self-respecting woman and thinking this is empowering:

 

[avenue94]

NY gonna NY this is the cost of the strength in diversity.

More like the cost of the First Amendment, but don't let the basic facts of the matter stop you. Something tells me you and a lot of the folks in this thread bitching would be OK with a carveout for doctors who think prescribing contraception is against their religious beliefs.

 

[avenue94]

Explain to them that the law is applicable to all, equally.

Do you mean this law?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 

[Yorick]

First of all I’m not conversant nor would I choose to be in the cloaking policy of a medieval religion
that has no place in a modern world wherein rape victims are stoned to death for being “seductresses” at 12 years old.
If someone is arrested and the photograph is required takeoff your mask your scarf your fake mustache your fake beard your clown nose and your orange hair see what I did there and follow the fucking rules.

 

[ShadowRun]

More like the cost of the First Amendment, but don't let the basic facts of the matter stop you. Something tells me you and a lot of the folks in this thread bitching would be OK with a carveout for doctors who think prescribing contraception is against their religious beliefs.

They aren’t denied to practice their religion but I’m sure you’re good with the 17M. Heck I bet you did a victory dance when JT paid that terrorist all those millions too

 

[GearSolidMetal]

Do you just not have a logical part of your brain?

You have no credibility to judge what is logical.

So again, what's the states interest in having men or women removing hair coverings for mug shots?

Uniform processing of arrested persons means to identify their face via photography. AKA, 'taking a mugshot.'

I typically wear a hat, and if I'm arrested its guaranteed that hat is being taken off regardless of any claims of religious affiliation.

And before you say 'They still have to show their face.' Yes, and so would I. So why do they get to keep their head-coverings on while I have to take off my head covering off?

 

[fungi]

Do you mean this law?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Exercise of religion is not applicable to processing of criminals.

Once you commit a crime, you forfeit certain rights, for example, freedom of movement.
Taking a mugshot of an uncovered face, holding a criminal in a cell, etc. are part of the criminal processing procedure.

All this "religious exemption" excuse is just that, an excuse. And a loophole for criminals to abuse the law.

Just like stealing staff worth under $1000 in Cali and calling it "reparations". Yeah, keep enabling the criminals.

P.s. Imagine, I'm black and I invent a religion and claim that being in handcuffs is a sin in my religion, as it reminds blacks of slavery.

If a cop arrests me and cuffs me, BOOM!!!

LAWSUIT!!!

 

[Islam Imamate]

Simple:

• Explain to them that the law is applicable to all, equally.
• Do not award them millions of $$, only because they claimed to have experienced shame due to having to take mugshots without headdress.
• And hold them in contempt of the court for frivolous lawsuits. And punish them accordingly.
• I.e. apply the law/rules to them, just like to everybody else. No preferential "religious excuse bullshit" treatment.

That will be enough. Those unsocial elements can't exist in a civilized society, they will either obey the law or choose to relocate.

That's not what happened here though, these women were found not to have had the law which requires reasonable exemptions to have been offered to them. Hence their winning the court case.

I think your issue here is actually the opposite, you're upset that an out-group was given equal protection under the law.