The column “Check your hat at the door” (ODE, April 5) represented an astonishing new low for the commentary section of Emerald. In it, Marissa Jones states that she does not believe banning headscarves from public schools constitutes religious discrimination. While she is certainly entitled to her opinion, Jones only manages to support her viewpoint by ignoring both the context surrounding this issue, as well as the rules of logic.
To begin with, Jones states that bandanas and hats “are often linked to current problems of gang activity in schools.” However, many people who wear hats are not in gangs, and many people who are in gangs do not wear hats. And in a strange twist of logic, Jones also manages to equate all religious groups to gangs, simply because some people kill other people based on religious differences. This is similar to saying that all shoes should be banned because criminals can run faster from the police when they have shoes on, which is obviously ridiculous. Therefore, her logic is completely unsound on both of these points.
The column also argues that religious headdresses and baseball caps are the same. In reality, however, religious apparel carries a much greater significance than a baseball cap. For instance, to many Muslim women, wearing a hijab is a sign of modesty and faith; therefore, forcing those women to keep their heads uncovered essentially makes them dress in a way that could be too revealing for their emotional comfort.
Lastly, Jones states that banning religious headdresses is only fair when she writes, “The rule either applies to all or none.” While I would agree with this, I would argue that a rule already exists that fulfills this idea: the First Amendment. I suggest that next time, she should consult both the Bill of Rights and Supreme Court cases such as Tinker v. Des Moines before she writes another column.

Kyle Malin
freshman
English