Cheryl Bormann, counsel for defendant Walid bin Attash, attended the arraignment Saturday dressed in a hijab, apparently because her client insisted on it. She further requested that the court order other women to follow that example so that the defendants do not have to avert their eyes "for fear of committing a sin under their faith."Looking at a woman is a sin, helping people fly airplanes into buildings is not. Got it.
Well in a way it makes sense. But my argument is "i'm not dressing up for YOUR religion. MY rights say I don't have to."
ReplyDeleteScott: "But my argument is 'i'm not dressing up for YOUR religion. MY rights say I don't have to.'"
ReplyDeleteThis reminds me of a story about mutual cross-cultural differences of opinion in India when it was a British colony. Some Indian natives are complaining that the British have outlawed Sati.
Napier, the British Governor and/or Commander-in-Chief of this part of India replies: "Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs."
-Mark Roulo
the thing is, we're to respect the customs of any country we travel to. but we are not to respect the customs of a country when we have a tourist from that country. in other words, if this trial was in an islamic country, ya then the women should dress appropriately as per the country's customs. but, as this trial is not in an islamic country and customs do not require it, i get the feeling that this lawyer is making this act purely out of trying to make a good name for herself, trying to appear appealing to future clients. just my feeling.
ReplyDelete