Tuesday, April 13, 2010

Legal Jihad Exposed: Woman Suing Judge over Hijab-Ban Worried about Nude Pics


I really don't care if Muslim women send nude pictures to their boyfriends. But this is a little different. Raneen Albaghdady is suing a judge for making her take off her Hijab in court, as this supposedly interfered with her Islamic modesty. Now she's panicking because some cellphones stolen from her contain nude pictures, and she's worried that these pictures will end up on the internet.

Here's an idea. If you're really concerned about modesty, and you believe that a judge is violating your rights, then take it to court. But if modesty isn't really an issue for you and people are passing around your nude photos, no faking.

HEIGHTS — A Muslim woman who is suing a Wayne County judge for making her remove a religious scarf during a court proceeding says that several cell phones containing nude photos of her were stolen during a burglary at her house.

Raneen Albaghdady, 33, called police March 27 after she found her house in the 25000 block of Andover ransacked. Among the items taken were six cell phones that she told police had nude photos on them.

She said she suspected an ex-boyfriend was responsible for the break-in, and that she was worried he may post the photos on the Internet, because he previously had posted other pictures of her online, police said.

The incident could come into play as her lawsuit against 3rd Circuit Court Family Division Judge William Callahan moves forward.

Filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan in August, the suit alleges that Callahan denied Albaghdady’s religious freedom when he made her remove her hijab during a June name change hearing in his Detroit courtroom.

A hijab is an Islamic headdress worn by Muslim women that covers various parts of the head, neck, and face, according to the complaint.

At a press conference announcing the lawsuit held by the Council of American Islamic Relations Michigan chapter, a Muslim civil rights organization and co-plaintiff on the suit, a spokeswoman for the group described the significance of the hijab.

“It’s out of sheer modesty of appearance and dress and covering your beauty,” she said. “When one is accustomed to wearing the hijab, to a certain way of dress, to a certain way of acting, to have to then uncover, you almost feel revealed or definitely very vulnerable, but understandably so, humiliated and embarrassed.” Read More.

16 comments:

The Fat Man said...

Were do you start on this? I got nothing people. This is one of those moments where the comedy of the situation speaks for it self and we can only be the straight man.

The Berean Search said...

I guess she is only worried about exposing her neck and her hair and everything below the neck is fair game....

Nakdimon said...

Man, she was complaining that taking off the hijab makes her "vulnerable" and "humiliated" and thus the court should have granted her leniency by allowing her to wear her hijab. But let's turn this around. What if we were under sharia law and a woman would refuse to wear her hijab because she would feel "oppressed" and "humiliated" because of it. Would she have been granted leniency NOT to wear it?

I think we all know the answer to this one.

Nakdimon

Fernando said...

Why are muslim people so prone to lye? why do they live on a complete lie?

Jeff said...

Do we know whether the nude pictures might have come before a conversion or seriously religious period?

Miss California stupidly posed nude for her boyfriend. And then she got older and smarter (a bit) and more religious.

David Wood said...

Well, we know that she still had the pictures on her cell phone, and that people tend to replace cell phones fairly regularly. Seems that if she suddenly became devout (at least, say, by the time of her trial), she would have gotten rid of the pictures. (And I have some doubts about the religious sincerity of Miss California.)

hugh watt said...

Wow! If they had stolen her Hijab(s) that would have really left her exposed. Does she hang her Hijab(s) on the washing line, i wonder! Not that i'm that curious, no, really! I mean there's the black one. The green one. The Purple one, oh, the purple one.

shafsha said...

Nude Pics !

Modesty !

how does that work together , unless we call this hypocrisy ?!

The Fat Man said...

Hugh Watt came up with a good one. Why cant I?

The Fat Man said...

This is sad, but I got nothing. This is such great material and i can not come up with a single joke.

1. Muslim woman offended that she is ordered to take off her head gear in a court of law.

2. Muslim woman sues the judge because of this assault on her modesty.

3. Muslim womans house is broken into and several cell phones are stolen.

4. Muslim woman then admits publicly that there are nude pictures of her on the cell phone and that she thinks that her X boyfriend is the one who stole the cell phones.

6. Muslim woman is just to stupid to realize that this admission will greatly impact her case of SUING A JUDGE that is being heard by another fellow judge?

And I can not come up with a single joke?

Suzie Q said...

I think there might be a hi-jab pic in there on that cell phone that shows her being had. is that a ji-had when that happens??

hugh watt said...

Shafsha, you think this might be a matter of trying to hide her humiliation by turning it into a, 'i'm fighting for Islam on this one,' case? Or do you think it was just coincidental that the theft happened at the same time?

mkvine said...

I'm sure the Muslims will try to rationalize their way out of this one by using some random hadith. They tend to try to save the face of Islam by any means necessary.

ned said...

I have no objection to hijab but it seems that for muslims it is designed to hide the beauty of women. Well if men are disciplined and can control their emotions then women may not need hijab at all. In muslim countries the problem exists but in the west men do not stare or tease women to that extent plus the laws are quite stringent to protect women and children. I beleive hijab is not designed to hide the beauty of women but to hide women from the lust of men. If you lust in ur heart you have committed adultery, according to Jesus's own Words. Those who put faith in Jesus as Saviour are empowered by Him to overcome the lusts of the world, Praise God.
The otherside of the story is that how much freedom muslims give to non muslims in muslim countries. why do they expect more and more relaxation in west where as in their own countries they treat non muslims like dirt. Recent blasphemy cases and convictions in Pakistan are an eye opener. I believe that women do not need hijab in west as no eyes is lusting after them except those who lust them even in their parent countries. It is the opinion of women who have first hand experience of living in west. Also there is an element of show off also involved in hijab, just to show that they are special and different and i can say a sense of pride too. If your heart is clean you do not need hijab.

mustafa_simple said...

"If you lust in ur heart you have committed adultery, according to Jesus's own Words. Those who put faith in Jesus as Saviour are empowered by Him to overcome the lusts of the world, Praise God"

In that case you must be assuming that all men should be castrated, or tormented in some way another to deter them from their most natural sensual feelings of lust and temptations. Otherwise I feel most men will fail if they simply relied on "empowerment" alone.

This is the problem I see with Christians, they presume the fault lies solely with the man, and not of mutual understanding.

Both men and women are to adorn and behave modestly, and also the conditions regarding their garments are in accordance with their nature.

Men are visually stimulated, and are particularly attracted to the physical aspect. Women do not have this attraction, or not of the same degree as men.

Also men are stronger and are the providers so in such an environment garments of that sought would not be practical at all.

Even in the most liberal of societies most normal men do not adorn skin tight clothing, skirts, or tight jeans...this sort of attire and dress code is bound to be provocative, and ANY normal man will be tempted to look with some level of lust. Unfortunately many women are naive to think men wont stare or feel tempted to have a glance, female KNOW full well that men will be staring at them.

The best way is to have a mutual understanding by keeping the gaze low and dressing modestly. Men grow the beard, don't wear skin tight clothing, or flashy colours, and women are not to wear tight provocative clothing and protect their beauty.

hugh watt said...

mustafa_simple said...
"If you lust in ur heart you have committed adultery, according to Jesus's own Words. Those who put faith in Jesus as Saviour are empowered by Him to overcome the lusts of the world, Praise God"
You say "Praise God!" You then find fault with what He teaches!

"In that case you must be assuming that all men should be castrated, or tormented in some way another to deter them from their most natural sensual feelings of lust and temptations. Otherwise I feel most men will fail if they simply relied on "empowerment" alone."
How are we "assuming" this?

"This is the problem I see with Christians, they presume the fault lies solely with the man, and not of mutual understanding."
Where do you get this from? This is the problem i see with Muslims; they "presume!"

"Men are visually stimulated, and are particularly attracted to the physical aspect. Women do not have this attraction, or not of the same degree as men."
Muhammad was "stimulated" by 6yr old Aisha when he was 51 and attracted to her physical aspect, though for a 6yr old i'm not sure if the attraction was of mutual degree.

"Also men are stronger and are the providers so in such an environment garments of that sought would not be practical at all."
Muhammad's followers were to be so strong he said, '4 wives for you. For me i'm not so strong i need more.'

"Even in the most liberal of societies most normal men do not adorn skin tight clothing, skirts, or tight jeans...this sort of attire and dress code is bound to be provocative, and ANY normal man will be tempted to look with some level of lust. Unfortunately many women are naive to think men wont stare or feel tempted to have a glance, female KNOW full well that men will be staring at them."
What was the name of the daughter-in-law that "normal" Muhammad stared and felt tempted to glance at? He did the adulterous thing and married her. Perhaps it was her fault. Didn't she "KNOW" normal Muhammad would "stare?"

"The best way is to have a mutual understanding by keeping the gaze low and dressing modestly. Men grow the beard, don't wear skin tight clothing, or flashy colours, and women are not to wear tight provocative clothing and protect their beauty."
Zaynab should have grown a beard to "deter" Muhammad! He should have kept his gaze low.