gattaca Posted July 26, 2015 Posted July 26, 2015 I don't understand this is medical profession where social skills and talking to people is at most important. Patients prefer to talk someone without a burqa than one wearing it. Do Muslim woman use burqa while treating patients ? Profession trumps religion here at least. Doesn't all religions preach serving humanity is best thing ? Also this is not specific to Muslims but all religions be it Sikhs and Christians. I am also very surprised woman still want to be in burqa. Isnt the whole point of burqa is hiding someones identity. Dont they like empowerment after the education they got?
The Outsider Posted July 26, 2015 Posted July 26, 2015 Sikhs are being forced to remove the Kada. So its not all hunky dory for them either. The basis for preferential treatment for Sikhs in attire is based on some previous policy as well as Supreme Court judgments. For example, in the military non-Sikhs cannot sport long beards or wear turbans. The Supreme Court has ruled that the turban is an essential part of Sikhism unlike the beard or the burqa in Islam. I think it is reasonable to expect ears to be exposed in exams. Isn't it stupid for the Supreme Court to decide on what is essential for a religion and what is not? I can devise my own religion tomorrow defining new essentials with a following of a grand total of one person. I agree it's reasonable to expect ears to be exposed in an exam, but a hijab can be done with ears exposed as well because the essence is covering the head and hair. However, reading the OP it doesn't look like exposed ears were laid down as the condition, rather absence of hijab was.
Malcolm Merlyn Posted July 26, 2015 Posted July 26, 2015 Isn't it stupid for the Supreme Court to decide on what is essential for a religion and what is not? I can devise my own religion tomorrow defining new essentials with a following of a grand total of one person. I agree it's reasonable to expect ears to be exposed in an exam, but a hijab can be done with ears exposed as well because the essence is covering the head and hair. However, reading the OP it doesn't look like exposed ears were laid down as the condition, rather absence of hijab was. Rules are rules for every one.If someone has a problem they can skip the exam. Have you ever given any thought to the 6lac students who had to give the exams again because others cheated?why should they suffer again because some people need special dispensation for his religion? You can devise your own religion,the law of the land and the courts arent inclined to make exceptions for you.
The Outsider Posted July 26, 2015 Posted July 26, 2015 Rules are rules for every one.If someone has a problem they can skip the exam. The rules aren't the same for everyone. For Sikhs, patka is being allowed because it doesn't cover ears, but for Muslims hijab isn't allowed at all regardless ears are covered or not. Or for that matter the Christian nun who wasn't allowed to sit in the exam. Did the invigilators give her the option of keeping her ear exposed as they did to Sikhs?
Malcolm Merlyn Posted July 26, 2015 Posted July 26, 2015 The rules aren't the same for everyone. For Sikhs' date=' patka is being allowed because it doesn't cover ears, but for Muslims hijab isn't allowed at all regardless ears are covered or not. Or for that matter the Christian nun who wasn't allowed to sit in the exam. Did the invigilators give her the option of keeping her ear exposed as they did to Sikhs?[/quote'] I suggest you read the requirements of Hijab.There are limits on what can be exposed in hijab.Then we can carry on this argument.
amiret Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 I don't understand this is medical profession where social skills and talking to people is at most important. Patients prefer to talk someone without a burqa than one wearing it. Do Muslim woman use burqa while treating patients ? Profession trumps religion here at least. Doesn't all religions preach serving humanity is best thing ? Also this is not specific to Muslims but all religions be it Sikhs and Christians. I am also very surprised woman still want to be in burqa. Isnt the whole point of burqa is hiding someones identity. Dont they like empowerment after the education they got? Completely agree. The burqa is a tool of female oppression and the oppressed have been brainwashed into thinking it is necessary . However the rules should be same for everybody ; a Sikh who wears a Patka or a man who wears a baseball cap.
seedhi Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 Isn't it stupid for the Supreme Court to decide on what is essential for a religion and what is not? I can devise my own religion tomorrow defining new essentials with a following of a grand total of one person.Are you kidding me? The nitty gritty of various religions have been gone into by the Supreme Court, the Legislature etc several times. Karnataka recently banned specific kinds of rituals in temples which did not harm anyone and were voluntarily carried out be devotees. Can you imagine that happening in the US? As for you starting a new religion - you will be categorized as a Hindu (mostly) for legal purposes. And your caste (if you are a Hindu) shall remain an integral part of your identity officially even if your "religion" does not allow it. On a related note, all atheists/agnostics in India are classified as Hindus, artificially blowing up the percentage of Hindus. See, India's Constitution is not secular (and it rightly did not have that term in the Preamble until the 1970s). If you are a Sikh you get concessions in wearing the turban, beard, a Muslim can have multiple wives and swift divorces without (till recently) supporting the divorced wife later, and as with Christians, can also run educational institutions which are exempt from laws like RTE. A Hindu gets some tax concessions and dietary restrictions thrown into Constitution (cow protection as Directive Principles of State Policy!). I am not even going into the question of reservations. My point is that if you look at the totality of the laws that govern India, not by a long stretch can you claim that the current dress code problem is unusual, or even malicious. These arise naturally out of the basic design flaws in the Constitution and the laws that governs us. I agree it's reasonable to expect ears to be exposed in an exam, but a hijab can be done with ears exposed as well because the essence is covering the head and hair. However, reading the OP it doesn't look like exposed ears were laid down as the condition, rather absence of hijab was.I have never in my entire life seen a hijab which exposes the ears. Do you have any pictures of such a hijab? I guess if a woman turned up in such a hijab she might have been allowed.
amiret Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 You can devise your own religion,the law of the land and the courts arent inclined to make exceptions for you. and the point being made is not about seeking exceptions on the basis of religion But what is stated under Article 14 of the constitution. The candidate wearing a baseball cap should be treated the same as a Sikh wearing a Patka.
adi B Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 Good decision by the SC ,to hell with religion restrictions and BS .make your career first then if you have time think about religion.a 18-19 year old student need to think beyond religion and kattarpanti
Precambrian Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 Yep, agree that Sikhs shouldn't have got benefit for wearing the turban.
Texan Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 Isn't it stupid for the Supreme Court to decide on what is essential for a religion and what is not? I can devise my own religion tomorrow defining new essentials with a following of a grand total of one person. I agree it's reasonable to expect ears to be exposed in an exam, but a hijab can be done with ears exposed as well because the essence is covering the head and hair. However, reading the OP it doesn't look like exposed ears were laid down as the condition, rather absence of hijab was. Isn't your second statement a contradiction of your first? If you devise your own religion and you get a competitive advantage because of that in an exam, you don't even want the Supreme Court of the country to regulate it? By the way, I have never ever seen a hijab where ears are exposed. Did a quick Google Image search to cross check and been scrolling for the last 5 minutes and yet to see an image of a hijab in which I can see the woman's ears. Do you happen to design custom "ear-open" hijabs?
Precambrian Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 Isn't your second statement a contradiction of your first? If you devise your own religion and you get a competitive advantage because of that in an exam, you don't even want the Supreme Court of the country to regulate it? By the way, I have never ever seen a hijab where ears are exposed. Did a quick Google Image search to cross check and been scrolling for the last 5 minutes and yet to see an image of a hijab in which I can see the woman's ears. Do you happen to design custom "ear-open" hijabs? http://www.al-islam.org/hijab-muslim-womens-dress-islamic-or-cultural-sayyid-muhammad-rizvi/common-questions-about-hijab-and Question : A vast majority of Muslim women who observe hijab are used to keeping their chins and a small part of the under chin exposed while they cover the neck. Is this permissible? And how big an area of the face can women expose; are the ears included in that? Answer : The ears are not part of the face, therefore it is obligatory to cover them. As for the part of the chin and the under chin that is seen when putting on the common head scarf, it is to be considered as part of the face and, therefore, can be exposed.
Recommended Posts