Australian Police in the state of New South Wales now have the right to ask Muslim women to remove their traditional Muslim veil, known as a burqa, for identification purposes.
The Australian government's decision came following a recent case where a Muslim woman, Carnita Matthews, was acquitted because she couldn't be identified in court after committing a traffic offense and arguing with the on-duty police in November 2010.
According to the Premier of New South Wales, Barry O'Farrell, police should be allowed to "see the face of anyone, regardless of what they are wearing — a helmet, a face veil, a burqa, or any other thing".
He was adamant that while all religious and cultural beliefs should be respected, identity checks are the requirement of the law, and police must have the power to enforce the law as required.
The new law will see anyone refusing to show their face a hefty fine of about $5,500 AUD, or up to a year in prison.
The new law is set to pass in other Australian states, too.
While Islamic leaders in the country are comfortable with the new law, civil liberty groups are concerned about the new powers given to the police.
What do you think of the suggested fine: appropriate or extortionate?
Image Source: www.dailytelegraph.com.au
"
When it rains, it pours. It took Todd and Julia Grovenburg three frustrating years to get pregnant. Nothing worked. Then, just three weeks after the couple conceived their first child, an ultrasound showed a second smaller and less developed baby.
Despite being born on the same day, due to size and developmental differences in the embryos, doctors immediately ruled out twins.
According to the Daily Mirror, the odds of a secondary pregnancy of this nature are a million to one. Thirty-three-year-old Julia is apparently one of only 11 women to ever conceive while pregnant, a phenomenon called ‘superfetation’.
To complicate matters even further, the twins were due in different years: Jillian on December 24, 2009, and Hudson January 14, 2010. But on December 2, 2009, Julia gave birth to both babies by C-section.
She claims the age gap between her children has been obvious from the word go.
“They’re still very young, but everyone can tell that Jillian is the older one. When it comes to Hudson’s growth he will always be two and a half weeks behind everything Jillian does in terms of crawling and teething. Sometimes it breaks my heart to watch Jillian move so quickly and Hudson take a back seat. But then I have to remind myself that they’re not progressing at the same level for a reason.”
Though doctors advise the children not be treated as twins, but as separate individuals with separate birthday parties, etc., the likelihood of them being treated as a pair is somewhat inevitable.
For now, it's a case of wait and see, says Julia. “[We] will probably leave it up to Jillian and Hudson to decide whatever label they want to call themselves. We’re not naive to the fact teachers, friends and even family will call them twins... it doesn’t bother us. But we will leave that official title up to the kids.”
Image Credit: www.dailymail.co.uk
"
It's not the 6/49, that's for sure. In Britain later this month, gamblers can scratch for a chance to win...a baby. That's right. It's the world's first ever IVF lottery.
For the cost of a £20 online ticket, the winner will receive £25,000 in fertility treatments at one of the country's top clinics.
The Gambling Commission has licensed a chance for one lucky player -- be they single, gay or elderly -- to become a parent each month. The unprecedented "game", which will no doubt provoke a huge ethical debate, is scheduled to launch on July 30th.
The prize includes a chauffeur ride to the clinic, with paid accommodation. The winner also gets a cell phone, so they can "maintain contact with medics at all times".
The no-holds barred lotto even includes donor eggs, reproductive surgery, even a surrogate birth should standard IVF procedures fail or prove unsuitable for winners.
It will be up to the fertility doctors' discretion at each clinic to determine "the feasibility of each possible pregnancy".
Profits from ticket sales will go to the charity "To Hatch" which provides online support for childless couples and those struggling to conceive. Many NHS budgets have axed IVF -- typically £5,000 per treatment -- as part of ever-tightening budgets.
If the lotto is a hit, tickets could eventually be sold in newsagents nationwide.
Does the lottery cheapen human life or make a costly procedure such as IVF available to those who wouldn't ordinarily be able to afford it?
Printer-friendly version