Culture Clash: Diversity vs. Security Rules

December 21, 2008

Author: Moni Basu

Source: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

http://www.ajc.com/services/content/printedition/2008/12/21/hijab.html

Lisa Valentine shed her Baptist beliefs 11 years ago and adopted a faith she felt wholly served her: Islam.

She was no longer Lisa, but Miedah. She studied the Quran and donned a head covering, or hijab, because Islam mandates modesty for women.

She had not uncovered her head in a public place, in front of men she did not know —- until Tuesday, when she was taken to jail and forced to take off the pants, blouse and printed green and beige scarf she was wearing in exchange for a prison jumpsuit.

Douglasville Municipal Court Judge Keith Rollins had held Valentine in contempt of court after she refused to remove her scarf outside his courtroom, then uttered an expletive.

The incident attracted the attention of civil liberties groups and reignited debate on religious rights vs. security, an issue that took center stage after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

Many followers of several religions wear head coverings, including Islam, Sikhism and Judaism.

“In light of Georgia’s growing religious diversity, we urge the court system to thoroughly examine this issue and develop uniform standards on religious accommodation in the courtroom,” the Anti-Defamation League said in a letter to Georgia Supreme Court Justice Leah Sears.

The Douglasville incident was not the first in Georgia.

Last year, Aniisa Karim, a Muslim, was barred from a Valdosta court unless she took off her scarf. In Lawrenceville, Jasmeen Singh Nanda, a Sikh, was told he could not address his traffic violation in court until he removed his turban.

Rabbi Binyomin Friedman of Congregation Ariel in Dunwoody said he has been asked to remove his kipa, a skullcap also known as a yarmulke, when entering a courtroom.

While Orthodox Jewish men wear kipas because of custom, women cover their heads as a matter of decency. For those women to uncover their heads, Friedman said, would be equivalent to disrobing.

“It would be embarrassing to be exposed like that,” he said. “We always try to respect and defer to government agencies unless they’re asking us to violate traditions.”

Disputes over religious attire have sprung up across the nation, not just in courts of law but on basketball courts and even at swimming pools, where athletes insisted on meeting religious requirements.