The Veil of Nancy Pelosi
pelosi gets pwned in Syria
By streiff Posted in Democrats — Comments (77) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
The image of the Speaker of the House of Representatives, a constitutional officer and third in line for the presidency, wearing what appears to be either a tablecloth or the thickest scarf in the history of the world was unsettling to many. Me among them.
Now come her apologists who claim, maybe correctly maybe not, that the photo was taken while she visited a mosque – or more accurately a Christian shrine that has been appropriated as a mosque – and her wearing Islamic garb under those conditions was justified.
Is that the case?
We’ve all been raised on the saying, “when in Rome, etc.” like any timeless aphorism there is a grain of truth so long as it is mixed with a degree of common sense. There are lots of activities that go on in different parts of the world that common sense tells us we should not participate in just because we are "in Rome."
Speaker Pelosi clearly violates the rule of common sense by slapping on a singularly unattractive hijab while visiting Syria ostensibly in her role as Speaker and not as a private citizen.
If the photo was taken in a mosque, she had other options available to her.
1. Take a private tour. The issue of wearing funny headgear revolves around offending the sensibilities of the locals. No locals. No offense. She is there as a sightseer, not a worshipper so going sans chapeau would be entirely appropriate. Surely the Speaker has enough juice to arrange a private tour.
2. Wear a hat. I know it’s thinking outside the box but she could wear a hat, achieve the requisite headcovering, and retain a modicum of self-respect. Women wearing hats to Mass is a tradition that died out in Catholicism with Vatican II but it is an option that a non-dhimmi would have explored.
For instance, this scene is from a Mass in Netherlands in the 1940s. Look closely and you will see hats. Lots of hats.
3. Wear a chapel veil. This trend is developing in some Catholic communities. It would be a two-fer, she would have a head covering and she would be adhering to her religious tradition which is some variety of Catholicism that supports abortion (our lamented poster Tom Crowe referred to them as “Catholycs”).
This meets the criteria of wearing a head covering plus it would be sending a very strong message to Assad, and to the Islamic world, that we are dealing with them as equals not as supplicants.
Were she traveling as a private citizen this would be no more significant that me wearing a sombrero on a rampage through Nuevo Laredo, but she is traveling as the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives. Mosque or no mosque, the Speaker sends a message to the Islamic world that we follow their rules. That is wrong.
But let’s do a thought experiment. Muslim men wear turbans, khaffiyeh, etc. It is Christian tradition that men remove their hats in church (see 1 Cor 11:4 for the source). Should a muslim man remove his hat in a Christian church in deference to our sensibilities? Even when just sightseeing or spreading jihadi propaganda? Specifically when Former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami presented a lecture at the National Cathedral, the cathedral that hosted the National Day of Prayer and Remembrance after 9/11 and the funeral of Ronaldus Magnus, what did he do?