Tough issue. I wonder how this works in more secure situations like banks, airplanes, etc.?

IMO.... If I was wearing a mask to the mall or in public here in Bridgewater, you can bet I'd be stopped and asked why........was she carrying a sign that read...."I'm a Muslim and it's legal for me to wear this mask in public"...?
OOoooopps.........sorry, should I appologize now ?

Ok, so she felt uncomfortable being there. What about if I got on a plane with a bunch of muslim men, and women wearing headgarbs, and I had felt uncomfortable?

I'D BE TOLD TO SUCK IT UP!!
Last time I checked..........WE'RE IN AMERICA!!!!

You know, Clayton Moore was stopped by a court order from wearing his mask in public because it hindered him from being identified if needed. Same thing.

Too bad, take the stupid thing off your head. I would not apologize. I can't walk into a store or mall with just my eyes visible for the public. Neither should she. You are offended by the big bad security guard telling you to remove your halloween mask? Suck it up lady, where your stupid head garb or whatever its called in your own third world country.

oops wear (not where)

Clayton Moore was stopped by a court order from wearing his Lone Ranger mask because it was a trademark issue. It had nothing to do with being identified.

I agree with Johnny. They come over here and expect us to change our way of living to accomodate them. If we keep letting them come here, in 20 yrs our way of life will be gone.

Wearing a Niqab by Muslim women in public has nothing to do with Muslim relgeion!
This tradition was created and enforced by men to hide women's faces in public. Regardless of beliefs, any of us in America need to obey common sense rules and regulations for the safety of all of us. I think the guard was right and simply doing his job.

Oh Trudy, you mean American the beautiful, but only for those people who look, think and act like you, right?

I wuold not like to live among people that hide their faces for any reason. Thieves could also disguise them as muslims and do what they want, without any body being able to recognize them. Religion is something that belongs to the inner self of any person, not something to be shown hypocritically in the outside.

This is priceless! Trudy up there is talking about religion and laws, etc. I want everyone to remember that the next time a conservative starts spouting off about some stupid law or another that they think is just peachy keen-with absolutely no regard to that same concept of separation between church and state. Hysterial bunch of hypocrites.

From a security perspective I can understand why they would want her to remove her facial veil. What is appropriate in a Muslim country is not always appropriate in the U.S. If we were in her country we would have to abide by their customs. Removing her facial covering is not a problem as long as she keeps the head covering on. There are many in Muslim countries that are Muslim and do not wear a veil. This is America so you go by the rules. It wasn't because of her beliefs that she got the attention,. It was because it hid her identity. In Malls there is a lot of theft. That is not accusing her specifically of wrong doing so I don't see the problem.

Wow! Lot of ignorance and lack of tolerance! I have friends from all colors and all faiths and we get along BEAUTIFULLY. For those Islamophobiacs, I suggest you actually go to their place of worship and see what kind of people they are. That's how I got rid of my fear. I fear my dog more than I do with "them".

the hijab is SECURITY RISK OF GREATES DANGER.aNY MALE OR FEMALE CAN WEAR ONE AND COMMIT ACTS OF TERROR.iT IS ABSURD TO COMPARE THE HIJAB TO THE CONSERVATIVE,MODEST DRESS OF ORTHODOX JEWS .ARE YOU PEOPLE SERIOUS?jUST BECAUSE AN AMISH OR A JEW DOESN'T DRESS IN PROVOCATIVE CLOTHING DOESN'T MEAN IT IS OUTLANDISH OR DANGEROUS.hOW CAN PEOPLE BE SO DENSE.? SECONDLY.THIS FORM OF COVERING FACE AND BODY IS AN INSULT TO AMERICAN CULTURE.IF THESE WOMEN ARE SO INTENT ON HIDING THEIR APPEARANCE. I HAVE TO WONDER WHY THEY ARE HERE.COULD THEY BE THE FIRST WAVE OF SUPPORTERS OF TERRORIST CELLS?THERE ARE MANY MUSLIMS WHO DO NOT COVER MORE THAN THEIR HAIR. SUCH EXTREMISM SMACKS OF SUPPORT FOR RADICAL ISLAM.WAKE UP. LOOK AT MALMO,SWEDEN AND LONDON,ENGLAND.DO YOU REALLY WANT NON MUSLIMS ATTACKED IN THE STREET?

I don't remember the article saying that she was American. There should be no apology given unless the guard was innapropriate in some manner. What is so difficult about saying 'Sorry lady, but you need to uncover your face or shop somewhere else?" It's that easy. " As much as we would love to take you money, we need to see who it is coming from." What is ashame is we would not apologize to a black youth with a hoodie, so why her?

An disturbing incident that happened to me a few days ago. I was in a CVS drug store, when I accidently bumped into someone behind me, I immediately apologized, and turn to see who is was, I was shocked to see a person in a fully covered burka. What cause me to shake, was the voice was from a man. I thought only women wore burka's? My feeling National security should ban these garments.

Shuddup you infidels

@ Bill to shay .! We must continue to remind EVERYONE REGARDLESS were they were born or what beliefs they practice .THIS IS AMERICAN and because of the HIGH THREAT of attacks at any time and any place , We must question every possible thought of attack in any way by any one .....at any time .There are rules , glide lines .and precautionary measures EVERY AMERICAN must be aware of to STOP any and all new Methods of KILLING Americans Because there finding all different way to attack us .Using all kind of people ,Men Women , Children .. to commit this acts on us ..This was no Dough an SECURITY concern / Issue .and NO apology should have be given or any I'm sorry s render ... AMERICA ..........LOVE IT , RESPECT IT , OBEY IT , LIVE IN IT OUR WAY ..........OR LEAVE IT .......

If you go to casinos, federal buildings,airports, or anywhere facial recognition software is used they are not allowed to wear it so why is the mall different these are all public places

I don't think the guard should apologize.......... being able to see someones face is a matter of security. Nothing in the Muslim religion requires wearing the hideous Niqab. This is purely a result of the fanatic fundamentalist male dominated Islamic brainwashing.....it is disgusting, and has nothing to do with religion. Pure mysoginistic brainwashing. Incompatible with western civilization.

i am a former prison chaplain. i had to work with inmates with all faiths or no faiths. i supervised over 200 volunteers religious and non-religious. i was responsible for their training, not the training officer. security came first over everything. my job was to see that every inmate's right to worship was honored. that's why some pastors can't serve as chaplains. however, security is first even when a wicken worshipper wanted tarot cards and cermonial knife. i think they gave him the cards but told him he could only have a cardboard cutout of a knife.

this country was founded on religious freedom and some great points on both sides are made here. but if i went into a mall and stated that a similiar garb was part of my religion as a male i would be stopped and ordered to remove it for security reasons. convenience stores are having to do this with hoodies and students (of all colors). it has to do with cameras and security. a mall has to be safe, just as a convenience store. new religions are created each day - many being cultic. but i claim it to be a part of my religion then it is a part of my religion but would not be acceptible in most places of business. it appears i am hiding my identity and planning a crime or something. which is more important the rights of one to dress according to their religous beliefs, other beliefs (such as nudists - the other extreme) or thousands of people at a mall being free to shop in safety and a sense of security?

The guard should not have been forced to apologize. I agree with Lanne that first of all, this type of clothing is sexist in the extreme, these women are brainwashed and in our political correctness we have conveniently forgotten who exactly flew airplanes into building...and they sure weren't Italian nuns. What's next...will there be an apology when it comes time for a driver's license or passport photo ID & they'll insist upon wearing this abomination for their photo??? COMMON SENSE HERE FOLKS!

Possibly the guard was trying to convey two messages: 1. For security purposes, we require positive and unobstructed identification of citizens faces, 2. Your are in America now, comply with the program and be subjected to the same voyeuristic aspects of all our other losses of freedom. Besides, when it comes to burkas and veils, the real objection to them, is that it raises the bar for the freedom of all other American women to shake off the shackles of existing at the precarious will of tyrants, but that comes at a prices, as does everything... Imagine what happens to these women if they try not wearing their veil or burka, or in our regular American case- not wear the "right" (sexist) fashion, what happen to them when they get home? or in school? or on the street? The veil/burka wearers will most likely be beaten, and we do need to understand that this is exactly what is happening to them in the privacy of their homes, right here in America. Their American counterparts just get bullied into complying with mindless programing of endless voyeurism and consumerism, complete with republicans up their private-parts. For that matter, the sooner all of congress goes back to being the farmers they were meant to be, the sooner immigration issues will subside, with women finally accessing equitable political representation thereafter.

REALLY?!?!?!?! Call Homeland Security!!!

1. Security Guard (almost no training) Security Officer (almost equal in training as most Law Enforcement Officers). 2. This Security Guard has very little training, experience or logic in what he did. 3. He violated Federal Law! 4. He has left his company and himself wide open for a Federal Lawsuit. He could face State or Federal charges and go to prison for violating her Rights granted by Federal Law and his interference of her Rights. 5. Not once but twice he crossed the line. 6. This was a Shopping Mall not like an Airport, Government Building and such or a location under the direct protection of Law Enforcement Officers & State/Federal Laws. 7. There is no way in hell he had the Legal Right to do what he did and has no knowledge of the Law, State or Federal!! 8. Some of my background - Over 28 years - Investigation, Bodyguard with Federal Court Cases, Uniformed Patrol, NRA Instructor (first female in State of Texas), Firearms Smith, 9. For your information there was a Federal Report made in 1972 on Security & Officer Training in the USA. Basic finding was that Private Security should be trained almost as well as Law Enforcement Officers so Law Enforcement Officers would have more time to attend to the more serious crimes committed. You can get a copy (size of a phone book) from the US Printing Office of Publications. Very good reading.

What if somewhere on this earth was a religion that involved the smoking of marihuana before one could meditate. Would a follower of this religion now have the right to smoke marihuana in the U.S. anytime/anywhere they wanted to meditate? I don't think so. The laws of a particular country dictate the extremity of your religious belief or conviction.

People shouldn't be allowed in public wearing masks. And it is muslim men who should be apologizing to muslim women.

There is one thing I know, that muslim women can not leave the house without a male escort, was there one?

Really Peace2all can you tell me then does the Koran say women must hide there face based on religion or what the male says.

Veiling is the choice of the WOMEN based on their understanding of the message in the koran. The whole purpose of veiling is to show their modesty and not be seen as sex objects. Maybe you should talk to a muslim woman and ask her about your religious questions instead of hearing everything from what the media says and shows.

So Peace2all it is a choice of the woman based on her religion and not forced upon her by the male? For some reason I remember a story from a teenage daugther who was killed by her father for not, and I say not following their religion. What a good book the Koran is.

What is the policy in Saudi Arabia with regard to non-Muslim women covering their face while visiting mecca?

What a bunch of paranoiacs. We're talking about the MALL here, people, not the El Al gates at JFK. Do you really think Bridgewater Commons uses facial-recognition cameras? Yeah, better make sure we catch that kid who stole a packet of Splenda from Starbucks before he strikes again!

I've seen fully veiled women there many times, and this is the first time I've heard of one being approached by security for the crime of minding her own damn business.

"Ohh ooh ooh she could be concealing something!" Have you ever BEEN to Bridgewater Commons? There are people there in muumuus that could conceal an entire terrorist cell. Do we ban all loose clothing, then? Or do you think the threat is that she might have had explosives strapped to her FACE?

"Gee, ma'am, you may have anthrax spores concealed under your bra, so we're going to have to ask you to take it off or leave the mall."

When you're this scared, the terrorists have already won.

Collins you will be arrested

Okay Horch you make a point, your small town means nothing to the whole US, even thougth they are everywhere whats one more small town!

This site is just like all the others,Pending Approval!!!!!!
Peace2all, I guess there are more that follow the Koran for it's peaceful nature then the killing and beheading?

I've seen more killing and beheading from those who never touched the koran! Have you ever been deployed???

And for what?? Our freedom that we refuse to give a certain type of people??

Peace2all, How do you know that these people never touched the Koran? They take what they want from it and use it in there twisted ways, and why were we there? it wasn"t for freedom, but some how we brought them here to share in our freedom,that blood was shed for them. And how do they repay us for it their Freedom? to do what they want, and to sue who ever disagrees with them. Yes this is the land of the free, just think of all those that died for freedom.
I have 21 years in the Army, what do you think.

In the words of Ozzy Ozzborne and Black Sabbath:

PARANOID

...Or Cypress Hill
INSANE IN THE MEMBRANE

One I am not paranoid, only ready, are you?

Horch, I would have never sent troops over there, I would have pushed the little red button, it would have cost a lot less.

Gary, so if you die tomorrow by a terrorist, your odds are? just in the wrong place at the wrong time? or they had it out for any American who was near.
2, Why is it our place to worry about freedom in other countries?
Our own country is in shambles, why don't we concern ourselves with America for once instead of giving money to every country who would love to see America fall.

For all those who think I'm parnoid read this....
this law should not have been required, but it was in order to keep american laws
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/25/sam-brownback-shariah-law-kansas_n_1547164.html?ref=politics

Purely a political move which will waste the resources of the state Government. The Constitution already provides adequate protection from stupid laws Drafted by Morons.

Peace2all, Really are you that stupid, you need to wake up from what ever dream your in. Another brainwashed liberal.....what a shock.

Perhaps she was not approached for her religious beliefs and ask to take off her niquaba as it is in line with the same requirements of others who use the Mall facilities. If religious freedom is allowed to make special interest groups then it is not in line with Rule of Law which dictates all will be treated equally. Many places now regulate not only the wearing of facial obscuring articles but also any signs that identify one with organizations... to guarantee the neutrality of a location, rules are put into place to insure the equal treatment and safety of all....

Real Americans protect the rights of all by observing rules and regulation that insure the equal treatment of all.....a belief that all should be FREE to dress, walk, look, worship and express in any way they want also carried the responsibility of agreeing to regard the rules and regulations as a member of a equal society with equal access to any facility as long as any member abides by the same rules as anyone else... As an American, you should be happy to see such beautiful diversity and have a love for humanity that is coupled with a desire to obtain an equal status by agreeing to being treated equal and that of course pertains to dress when it interferes with identification. As women have been more active n terror plots this is not a exceptional rule and the apologizes were offered due to the delicate nature of this subject but never the less will continue in hpe that all will be equally protected. .

Maybe it is clear to you that a rule doesn't exist, and I would ask how you would know that it doesn't exist and why is it clear to you. I think my point is clear that religion is not a reason to single out people for special treatment.

Gary, are you ever going to see the light? What right does a school have that allows a group to worship and the other's not to. And it's happing in your own backyard.
Wake up....Freedom, got to love it..

Gary, Bigotry,: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially: one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance , sound pretty much like you and everyone else in this world in one way or another. Lesson 101

Security is hired for everyone's SAFETY... not to champion diversity. Anything that hides someone's identity from security and cameras (that includes hoodies!) is endangering the safety of all shoppers and the apprehension of thieves and vandals. Call me bias... but I can't understand (or tolerate) a lifestyle where a woman's face cannot be seen. It's demeaning and cruel.

I wish people would go study the concept of veiling. If you did, you'd know that not every veiled woman is the property of her husband, or a brainwashed zombie. Many Muslim women choose freely to veil so that people will know them by what's inside, not by what's outside.

And as far as security goes, there are more identifying characteristics than just one's face. Who do you think is more likely to be identified, one of thousand white girls with brown hair, jeans, a North Face jacket and Ugg boots, or the one niqabi in the entire mall?

Finally, if there really were a regulation against covering one's face in the mall, why didn't mall management bring that up as part of the incident? Or if there's a rule against covering one's face anywhere in public, then I guess I've broken that every time I've skied on a cold day or ridden a motorcycle.

For all you people who've been trying to strangle this woman with your American flags, please remember that in this country there's such a thing as probable cause. That says that if you are minding your own business, you are to be left alone. You cannot be treated like a criminal until you act like a criminal.

Finally, the people saying she was trying to "impose her beliefs" on the rest of us, GROW UP! Did she make you bow toward Mecca? Did she prevent you from eating pork? Did she close down the food court during Ramadan? No? Then get over it!

Many institution do have a rule about covering the face while on their premises and it would not be uncommon for a mall to have a regulation or rule and was it or was it not brought up as part of the incident. The article doesn't indicate either way and as to covering one face while riding a motorcycle, my guess is that if you were to walk into a bank with a helmet or face mask on a cold winter day, you would be ask to remove it. An apology was issue which seem to be the diplomatic answer to a situation that could have been the result of rules to insure public safety. The imposition of people beliefs will always be a factor but it is the limits of the community that decides if it is acceptable....I am not sure if someone were to enter the mall with religious elements of the Necronomicon illustrated by wearing dead animal carcases, Ed would not be so quick to defend their rights...however, this is not a religious issue but rather a safety issue and how many would take advantage of concealing their face while unlawful activity took place ..... and if a veil were acceptable, then it could become standard in illegal acts. The only solutions is to accept public safety as being the most important factor and let those who have been upset by a removal request to accept we live in dangerous times and those that insist on wearing article of religious faith have some understanding as to the well being and the equal treatment of all who enter public areas.

By the way Gary, I live in China and in many ways it is more free than stateside.....and safer as well....

Next, security will be telling nudists to put clothes on when entering the mall. Where will it end? Woe is me.

Perfect example of why there should be no religions with their ignoran,t antiquated rules. No one should be walking around any public place with their face hidden.

Only the Lone Ranger & Batman can wear mask's in the Mall!!

I would highly encourage the few ignorant racists who posted their comments to take a look at this 3 minute YouTube video. It may be refreshing for you to see the other side's point of view.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLp_Vgz-VPY&feature=youtube_gdata_player

If you want to be a part of a religion that oppresses women to a comedic level, that's your prerogative. Take off your mask or go some place where it is acceptable, like Syria.

As in Rhome you do as the Rhomans do or you leave. In America you do as the Americans do or you leave and go to Syria!

while I think most religion oppresses men and women alike, this issue is about equal treatment for the purpose of safety and the obligation to apologize because of social mores recognize some complaints to in fashion and therefore more valid while giving those who are ultra conservative or liberal a point of supposed higher ground to illustrate their choice of a condescending point of view.
.

Free Tibet!!

The bottom line is this rent-a-cop obviously didn't know the law and VIOLATED this woman's constitutional right. If all you racists and so called "Americans" have a problem with the constitution, then you need to take it to the supreme court and change the constitution. Meanwhile, she can dress ANYWAY she wants-just as long as she doesn't violate the laws (which she hasn't). If you are so worried about security issues, then maybe you guys should be fighting for metal detectors to be put at the mall doors. Terrorists come in ALL religions, ALL genders, ALL races and even kids. Remember the Columbine shootings?? Oh yeah, by the way, if the constitution does change and veils are banned, brides would not be allowed to wear dresses that have veils; there would be no Barney, Spongebob, Elmo or any other cartoon characters; men would have to shave so people could see their appearances, and heck there won't even be Santa Clause!!!!

the security issues is about identification.....and it is legal to require certain manor of behavior and dress in public areas .... it doesn't have to be a law or a change in the constitution ... which speaks to religious freedom but doesn't include mannor of dress... such as recently a lady was not allowed to board a plane due to the words printed on her t shirt as it was considered offensive by the airline....banks, malls and other public places have the right to limit articles of clothing...or require that some articles are not allowed...

Now your launching into hyperbole.....concealment of the face is the issue ..not enhancement..and no one jailed the woman in this particular incident.....she was simply asked to remove an article of clothing which many public places do..

a public area does have the right under the constitutions to limit articles of clothing ....as do cites such as New Orleans where mask are against the law except on tow special events of the year.....I not sure that a mall manager came to her aid.. I think the article reveals they tried to stop an emotional response from becoming an issue.. Hum, and why would the police arrest her.... as far as I know she didn't cause a disturbance ....and there is nothing illegal about wearing a veil... it is a public safety issue and nothing more ... a regulation or rule if you were that is designed to protect those who facilitate the use of a mall...and why would there be special consideration for a veil wearer as opposed to a gang banger who wears a kerchief...it is due to supposition on the part of the owners of the mall that a regulation was instituted for public safety and little more.. the guard did what he thought his jobs was and the mall tried to avoid the issue of a very hot subject... by issuing a apology through the mall manager... I understand your possibilities are offended .... but the constitution is all about protecting the individual when safety regulations are all about protecting the possibility of wrong doing so as to better provide protection for the public...

did she do what? and why would a Muslim would be jailed for simply wearing a veil .. work places are different due to the labor and employment laws of a state....and what law are you speaking too.... is there a law that addresses the wearing of a face covering in a public place... ... many institutions do not allow you to enter with a face covering...such as banks and schools...

Perhaps you should read the article again...you are misinformed.

I think this is reason un spoken .....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=JXyh8WeRYiE#!

Again, HERE, we are talking about her religious freedom, you know...the 1st amendment?

I think your trying to confuse an issue of public safety with the 1st amendment....even though we have free speech.. it doesn't cover utterance that will endanger the public...the example most often cited is yelling "fire" at a theater...

In the United States, the First Amendment of the Constitution guarantees a person's right to freely practice the religion of his or her choice. For Muslims, this choice often includes a certain standard of modest dress and common religious clothing. Such a clearly-stated freedom may not be violated except for a greater public good.

Some people insist that ID photographs, for the safety and protection of everyone, must show a person's complete head and face. They hold that all headcoverings of any type must be removed for the photo. However, several government agencies have made exceptions to this rule in the case of religious headwear.

The U.S. State Department, for example, gives explicit guidelines for U.S. passport photographs:

Can hats or religious headgear be worn for the photo?[bl] Do not wear a hat or head covering that obscures the hair or hairline, unless worn daily for a religious purpose. Your full face must be visible, and the head covering must not cast any shadows on your face.

Also .... a far as the unspoken reasons illustrated in the vid... officials in the UK and the US are aware of this threat in the US as well... before 911 almost no one thought that an attack of that nature could have taken place... why do you think that terriost bombings are limited to the middle east..

I know you have no idea what I am talking about .. you approach this issue in a hyperbolic manor...I was illustrating that passports do indeed limit the veil....

What about face veils? In a 2002-03 in Florida, a Muslim woman petitioned for the right to wear a face veil in a driver license photo, in accordance with her interpretation of the Islamic dress requirements. The Florida court denied her claim. The judge supported the DMV's opinion that if she wanted a driver license, a brief removal of her face veil for an identity photograph was not an unreasonable request and therefore did not violate her religious rights.

Yelling "fire" in a theatre is not allowed under free speech because it does not show CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER (unless there is a fire). How is this women's religious dressing showing clear and present danger?? Maybe to some racists who are ignorant to the muslim religion, but not to the majority. Again, she is protected by the 1st amendment to practice her religion freely.

How is this women's religious dressing showing clear and present danger? slinging insults such as racist do little to convince folk of your benevolent intentions and clearly indicate a lack of willingness to discuss an issue on a playing field that can be considered intellectual.... in the same way a helmet worn into a bank can conceal identity so can a veil...so .... it would be up to the people who own the business to decide what is possible threat level and not to those who read a story in a newspaper ...I don't think I have supported any regulation or rule that would not allow her to , "practice her religion freely." ... .only stated that i support rules that are designed for public safety and personalty feel that coverings of any kind when involving a face is a possibility for id concealment and all who enter public facilities should be treated equal.. from the gang banger .. motorcyclist ... or Muslim...equal treatment under the law should be the goal and not special considerations for people of faith

PEACE and TOLERANCE for ALL of humanity-people deserve to be treated with respect regardless of race and religion. We all bleed and we all die. Every knows damn well that this is NOT a security issue.

In this statement about me "You have NO idea what is going on in the middle east. If your family was being attacked, would you care who is doing the attacking, or would you just fight the attacker??" your making a lot of assumptions...I travel to the middle east quite often...but I think it is clear that you support those that would like laws to give them concealment powers ... perhaps so tht they could attack innocents.... now that is me supposing without really knowing you ... and as you can see it is a flawed argument....

could you please provide your reasoning as to why "Every knows damn well that this is NOT a security issue" because for me .. it is!

Well being a vet is one thing we share... 71 - 77 ..... and I think where we disagree is the reasoning for non concealment rules and the rights of the individual as opposed to the right to safety by the public...also in the manor we address this situation... mud slinging such as calling those who disagree with you "racist" belittles your POV and alienates the readers who may be on the fence as to which side to take on issues like this.. wouldn't it be better for all to be treated with the same regards...whether it pertains to posting on a public board or entering a public facility.

Well, being a vet, I could understand the feelings that you had regarding muslims. For me, it was all a "brainwashing" tactic and the root is EVIL.

i would doubt that you have any idea as to my feelings regarding Muslims but I do appreciate your offering to enplane as to why you regard all who disagree on matters of public safety as "racist"..... the truth of Mohamed as illustrated in the Koran does not indicate that women should be veiled but rather it is dictated by Sharia law and it is the interpretation of that law that we are discussing along with a need for public safety...

I'm not here to win an audience, I'm here to protect the freedom which I fought for. You know that the "security" is not the issue. Or do you?? Maybe you don't know the bigger picture like I do...

While I am assure you are not here to win an audience, slinging hate speech or insults will not protect the freedom which you fought for. I have not idea that "security" is not the issue and if you do I would welcome a discussion that would provide that information other than your armchair opinion... Maybe I don't know the bigger picture like you do... I merely came out in favor of rules designed to insure public safety

We obviously don't seem to have common grounds. I for one will not give in to an idea that does not promote peace and equality for All human beings.

absolutely .... it would seem on this we do have common grounds. I will support ideas that do promote peace and equality for All human beings and in my opinion treating all equally as to rules, laws and regulations in regards to public safety...where we don't have common ground is on the inability to allow others to voice their opinions and thoughts without being label with hate speech ....racism is an ugly characteristic of humanity and to further that kind of speech is not becoming of one who fought for the freedom to express oneself....

again as I have said .. the Koren doesn't dictate veiling...in your own words some women choose to wear a veil ..... .and while true it is her right to wear one..no one questions that.. it is also justified that public safety sometimes mandates that faces be shown such in passports...and if a mall or any other place has a regulation or rule that no face coverings be worn, it is the obligation of those who use a facility to abide by the rules... also Peace .... I wondered how you know she is an American . as this fact wasn't mentioned in the article...even though it has no real bearing on the outcome but while your beating the civil rights drum indicating that she is American .. I just wondered how you know that...

I think that you didn't read the article carefully. Click on the ABCLocal in the article.