bank denies service for Muslim woman in Hijab
NEW YORK: A Muslim woman has allegedly been denied service in a bank in California for wearing an Islamic headscarf, prompting a civil rights group
to take up the issue with the US department of justice.
The Council for American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) asked the department to determine whether a California bank violated a Muslim woman's civil rights when it denied her service because of wearing a religiously-mandated 'hijab'.
The council quoted the woman as saying that she was denied service at a Navy Federal Credit Union in San Diego, California, despite telling bank officials that she wears her head scarf for religious reasons.
Responding to the charge, the bank told CAIR that “in the interest of security and safety for our members and employees - hats, hoods and sunglasses must be removed when entering the branch office.”
"Special consideration for cultural and religious garments is under the discretion of the branch management," it said, adding that it is making inquiries into the recent incident."
Under this "bizarre and discriminatory" policy, "no Muslim woman wearing a head scarf, no Sikh man wearing a turban, no Jewish man wearing a yarmulke, no cancer survivor wearing a scarf, no Amish woman wearing a bonnet, and no blind person wearing sunglasses may enter a Navy Federal Credit Union branch nationwide," said CAIR-San Diego public relations director Edgar Hopida.
"We call on the US department of justice to investigate this disturbing case and Navy Federal's apparently unconstitutional policy and to ensure that the religious rights of all customers are maintained."
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/US_bank_denies_Muslim_woman_service_f...
Don't see any discrimination. Company Policy towards everyone not just muslims.Live with it
Isn't it nice to see that Navy Federal Credit Discriminates against everyone equally. :)
it looks like you guys miss the point. You are focusing on the hijab only, and come to the conclusion that this discriminates muslims...
but the Bank policy states that any head covering unacceptable. "...no Muslim woman wearing a head scarf, no Sikh man wearing a turban, no Jewish man wearing a yarmulke, no cancer survivor wearing a scarf, no Amish woman wearing a bonnet, and no blind person wearing sunglasses may enter a Navy Federal Credit Union branch nationwide.
So, yes King Edshel, they most likely would ask “one of those guys with black hats to remove it“ as well...
There is no need to resent about hijab only.
*********************
“You become responsible forever for what you have tamed”. Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
You said - "I think we all have to remember though, these ladies cover for their own security and not because it is required by Islam, well not to that level."
IMO,it's only the religion and belief. It has nothing to do with security whatso ever. If security was the issue then what about other women?
Life is Beautiful...Indeed!
Again, things like baseball caps, niqab,sunglasses etc that can cover the face I can understand, however a yamakah (spelling), turban or hijab does not cover the face, Hell a yamakah barely covers the hair, the facial features are clearly visible. I dont' see a problem.
As a banker, security issues are a big concern for everyone in the organization. I believe I read recently that US banks (or some of them) had taken the position of refusing service to anyone who covered their head (including base ball caps) or face because of the increasing numbers of real criminals (not this lady obviously) who are trying to avoid the security cameras as they are committing a crime.
There has to be some common sense applied here and in similar situations - and customers should have been notified of the policy change well in advance.
Someone in the bank screwed up by making a blanket statement without also giving guidance to the branch manager and employees about what might be considered exceptions.
A tie is anything but fashion, amoud. It's more like a forced uniformity.
MD, you are comparing apples and oranges my friend. You are talking about fashion, and I wouldnt say it is the 'right' of a bank to refuse her. Amendment 1 of the constitution... the greatest and most integral part.
..And RP, no need to be juvenile, u can do better than that.
_____________________________________________________
"Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock - Will Rogers"
Amoud, nobody has the right to tell me what to wear. That's not my religion. It is my right to wear what I want. However, the "owner" of any premises has the right, too, to deny access for "smelly, poorly dressed bachelors", as you know. In any case it's your choice to go somewhere else.
In England I have been in the bank where ladies who are covered are served no problem at all.
However, there have been cases where some nasty bastids who have commited crimes don the full lot to escape the law, so it can been seen I suppose as a threat to security.
I think we all have to remember though, these ladies cover for their own security and not because it is required by Islam, well not to that level.
I say that in this day and age, all faces should be visible. It is sadly a sign of times. We can I suppose, take it one further and go on about people covering their head for numerous reasons. I doubt that would be a problem,it is the fact the whole face cannot be seen that is worrying.
Yes, indeed, PM, a crime against fashion is tantamount to a crime against humanity.
Mandi
You could always wear a bow tie, with a pink stripe short sleeve shirt and some red color, bell bottom pants....
LMAO PM.... I needed that ... I just finished going through a very tedious and broken contract and needed a bit of a giggle.
____________________________________________________
"Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock - Will Rogers"
LifeisBeautiful you said:
IMHO this is a well accepted law in the US and the choice to avail of services is entirely upto the public just like the policies for running a place in entirely unto the institution.If the bank or the court has a policy based on the scarf or the turban compromises on the identity and can be used by the criminals- so be it. You like it or not.
I agree with you.
MD, are you part of some religion that actually requires you to not wear a tie? Are you being denied a constitutional right by having to wear a tie?
___________________________________________________
"Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock - Will Rogers"
I guess your question is for me:
The bank's policy - no Muslim woman wearing a head scarf, no Sikh man wearing a turban, no Jewish man wearing a yarmulke, no cancer survivor wearing a scarf, no Amish woman wearing a bonnet, and no blind person wearing sunglasses may enter a Navy Federal Credit Union branch nationwide.
Read these - http://www.pluralism.org/news/article.php?id=12665
http://www.us.marketgid.com/tnews/210663/i/5937/
and then this :
There is a common misconception that a precise dress code for women is spelled out in the Qur'an. In truth, however, no precise dress code for men or women is set out in the Qur'an. The Qur'an does give some guidelines as to how Muslim women should dress and behave in the 7th Century CE. Verse 33:59 mentions that believers "draw their cloaks close round them (when they go out)"and (024.031) "And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husband's fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers or their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their women, or the (female) slaves whom their right hands possess, or old male servants who lack vigour, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex; and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O ye Believers! turn ye all together towards God, that ye may attain Bliss." Various Islamic scholars have interpreted the meaning of hijab in different ways. The basic requirements are that when in the presence of someone of the opposite sex other than a "close family member" (Mahram), a woman should cover her body, and walk and dress in a way which does not draw sexual attention to her. All of this, of course, must be taken in the context of 7th Century dress and mannerisms. In Islamic sharia legal terminology, a mahram, mahrim or maharem is an unmarriageable kin with whom sexual intercourse would be considered incestuous, a punishable taboo. ...
Many non-Muslims and some Islamic reformers believe that hijab is unfair and oppressive. Critics point to family and community pressure on Western Muslim women as undermining the ideal of hijab as personal choice. Some feminists have argued that the veiling of women to bring them respect undermines the sexual and personal freedoms of all women, regardless of religion or culture. Others argue that it is against Islam, Allah, the Holy Qur'an and logic to assume that only women can be objects of desire; therefore, oppressive dress codes would apply to men and women equally
IMHO this is a well accepted law in the US and the choice to avail of services is entirely upto the public just like the policies for running a place in entirely unto the institution.If the bank or the court has a policy based on the scarf or the turban compromises on the identity and can be used by the criminals- so be it. You like it or not.
Life is Beautiful...Indeed!
There were discos in my town who required you to wear a tie. I didn't go there. There are banks who have other fees than others. I choose the one that suits me. So what is the fuss about?
How is stopping A CUSTOMER from wearing a scarf over their hair protecting money?
Redouane, hijab is perfectly acceptable in the US. As I said, we have laws protecting freedom of religion. It is only when those laws come into conflict with other laws, such as security regulations, that there are issues. One may be asked to remove niqab, for example, for a driver's license photo, but it is not an anti-hijab restriction. Again, let me be clear, hijab is perfectly acceptable in the US.
Mandi
What they are doing is very practical and the bank should actually be praised for being very clear in their approach. It's a BANK not a place to exhibit your religious subscription. If I had my money in the bank I would have gone and thanked the manager. The bank is not interferring in the public's religious affairs.It's just doing it's job - Protecting customer''s money. Why complain?
Life is Beautiful...Indeed!
Since the hijab is not allowed in an arab country TU....
so what would expect then from non arab and non muslim country
Gypsy, yes, a good example of competing laws/rights - public vs. private institutions. But in the US we don't have to accept ambiguity for too long. The Supreme Court will sort it out. One of the differences in living abroad for me has been in learning to accept the opacity in local laws.
Mandi
ha?................. agree with gypsy, hijab is no problem, but covering the whole face is. as in australia and New Zealand is illegal a muslim woman wearing those black thing that cover the whole face only eyes showing.
Everybody is right everybody is wrong, it depend where you stand
The problem in the US is that different laws apply for private and public businesses. This bank is private, and probably does, under state law, have the right to impose a dress code that a public/federal bank would not.
Yes, Amoud, you've hit the nail on the head (or is it the door with the head?) Why is it that we are so eager to proclaim and claim our "rights" when we are so quick to deny these rights to others? And I say "rights" in quotations marks because we DO have these rights in the US - we have the right of freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, etc. The only time these rights appear to be abridged is when they come into conflict with other rights and laws - that's where our Supreme Court enters into play. People may argue that human rights are "inalienable" and I would tend to agree, but frankly speaking, my dear ones, you don't have these rights unless your government gives them to you. You cannot talk about your "rights" until and unless you show me where and how you have been given these rights. (Of course, in your case, Amoud, you have been given the same rights as a Canadian.)
Mandi
You can wear a hijab in an American passport photo and all identification. The US constitution also states in amendment 1 that all people have the right to practise their religion. I find this particulary amusing because there is currently a thread about banning a website, but in the same amendment for religion it also states the freedom of the press and speech, and California signed this amendment.
___________________________________________________
"Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock - Will Rogers"
You can see someone's face clearly with hijab on, that's not the issue. Again I only see the issue if she was covering her face.
in Mumbai we are not allowed to access ATM with niqab or helmet
Thalib: i'm speechless!!!
Only God Can Judge Me
الله فقط يمكنه محاكمتي
I am you and you are me, if you love i love, if you suffer i suffer
أنا أنت, و أنت أنا, إذا أحببت نفسك أحببت نفسي, إذا عانيتَ عانيتُ
From a security point of view the face needs to be seen, hence removing say baseball caps or dark glasses.
In this particular banks case ,,,not good good policy.
her face then maybe, but if she is covering her hair ... I don't get the point ... that would be like asking one of those guys with black hats to remove it ...
Do not dwell in the past, do not dream of the future, concentrate the mind on the present moment. (Gautama Buddha)
Hmmm, I can understand that they might have issue if she were wearing niqab, but I don't see the problem with hijab.
well.. so it's not about "muslim women in hijab".. it's about covering/hiding your identity..the title of the thread is misleading and might cause the religious debates again. As a sample see thalib01's post.
This issue has nothing to do with the religion in general and muslims in particular. It is a security matter and you cannot blame them, it’s pretty much understandable.
*********************
“You become responsible forever for what you have tamed”. Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
Go to another bank..Why in the earth would you want to join a bank that has these kind of policies in the first place..
-----------------
HE WHO DARES WINS
"Responding to the charge, the bank told CAIR that “in the interest of security and safety for our members and employees - hats, hoods and sunglasses must be removed when entering the branch office.”"
One has to view it objectively!
"dgoodrebel will always be the rebellious good one"
there is always a positive side to everything, its good that people are jealous of muslims and the way muslims live.
good