The issues of “honor” and “hat removal” in the US Courts

[Sharing Lights]

I) I find the practice of demanding a removal of hats before Judges in the US Courts to be:

1) degrading,
2) manipulating,
3) humiliating,
4) and placing the People in the position of being inferior to Judges as if the
latter are their masters.

II) I also feel that the term “Honorable” used and demanded to be used in
references to Judge is:

1) a forced opinion of the Government on People,
2) presenting its opinion of all Judges, putting them all in the category of
being “Hon arable’ as an opinion presented as a fact or even law.

Questions/Arguments:

a) By what Constitutional right and or law, the Government demands the People to obey the two, stated above?

b) Is it not true that many Judges prove themselves on the record as issuing wrong decisions and even acting in every day life as far from always “honorable?”

c) What is so honorable in the fact that most Judges have been overruled by the Appellate Term at some point of their life?

There are many more arguments; yet, the bottom line remains that the term “Honor” is used in operations rarely based on true Honor, Morals, and Virtues.

Definitions of “Honorable” – are stated in the next Post.

I could see one legal ground for demanding hat removal from the People when that was employed as a safety measure vs. carrying a hidden weapon under a hat.

As, to my knowledge, there is a metal detector search employed in Metropolitan Courts and the issue of the hidden weapon is illuminated, the demand of hat removal is barbaric and serves to make the People feel like slaves before their owners.

I mean such literally.


I, believe that the word ”Procedure” is the key factor here as do not see where the law comes into play?


Further Questions/Arguments:


How could and would you challenge these two, provisions of the Court’s Procedure?

What about males and females, for example, who are bald or balding or have medical conditions on their head and who feel humiliated by exposing such to all in Court?

Why the People have to be degraded in such way which serves no purpose as except to separating Judges and non-judges in two opposing parties by the virtue of the procedure?

Courts claim that they allow retention of hats for religious purposes; yet, they (Court Attorneys serving Judges and Court Police Officers), often question the People why the hat is on is it looks as non-standard of their concepts how it should look if based on religious cause. They, even, engage in interrogating what is the person's religion, when the People respond that they wear a hat or what covers their head for such, religious purposes.

Is personal freedom and right to parts of our, own body and what we may or may not do to them are at stake here?

By what right, Courts tell the People what the latter may or may not put on their head, which belong not to the Courts but to the People, themselves? Don't they belong to the People indeed?

What venues could be used to change such infringement on the People’s Rights?

[Sharing Lights]

Definitions of the term “honorable:” (reprinted)

Dictionary

hon•or•a•ble

adj.
1. Deserving or winning honor and respect: led an honorable life.
2. Bringing distinction or recognition: honorable service to one's nation.
3. Possessing and characterized by honor: an honorable person.
4. Consistent with honor or good name: followed the only honorable course of action.
5. Distinguished; illustrious: this honorable gathering of scholars.
6. Attended by marks of recognition and honor: received an honorable burial.
7. Honorable (Abbr. Hon.)
a. Used as a title of respect for certain high government officials: The Honorable Jane Doe, Associate Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts.
b. Used as a courtesy title for the children of barons and viscounts and the younger sons of earls.
c. Used in the House of Commons as a title of respect when speaking of another member.
honorableness hon'or•a•ble•ness n.
honorably hon'or•a•bly adv.


Thesaurus

honorable
adjective

1. Deserving honor, respect, or admiration: admirable, commendable, creditable, deserving, estimable, exemplary, laudable, meritorious, praiseworthy, reputable, respectable, worthy. See good/bad, praise/blame, respect/contempt/standing, value/worthlessness/evaluation.

2. Having or marked by uprightness in principle and action: good, honest, incorruptible, righteous, true, upright, upstanding. Informal straight-shooting. Idioms: on theup-and-upup and up. See honest/dishonest.



Antonyms

honorable

adj
Definition: illustrious
Antonyms: deplorable

adj
Definition: morally correct
Antonyms: crooked, dishonorable


Devil's Dictionary

A cynical view of the world by Ambrose Bierce
honorable

adj.
Afflicted with an impediment in one's reach. In legislative bodies it is customary to mention all members as honorable; as, "the honorable gentleman is a scurvy cur."



WordNet

Note: click on a word meaning below to see its connections and related words.
The adjective honorable has 5 meanings:
Meaning #1: not disposed to cheat or defraud; not deceptive or fraudulent

Synonym: honest
Meaning #2: showing or characterized by honor and integrity

Synonym: honourable

Antonym: dishonorable (meaning #1)
Meaning #3: used as a title of respect

Synonym: honourable
Meaning #4: adhering to ethical and moral principles

Synonyms: ethical, honourable, moral
Meaning #5: deserving of esteem and respect

Synonyms: estimable, good, respectable


Wikipedia

The Honourable

The prefix The Honourable or The Honorable (abbreviated to "The Hon." or formerly "The Hon'ble") is a title of quality attached to the names of certain classes of persons.

British usage

Entitlement

In the United Kingdom, all sons and daughters of viscounts and barons and the younger sons of earls are styled with this prefix. (The daughters and younger sons of dukes and marquesses and the daughters of earls have the higher style of Lord or Lady before their first names, and the eldest sons of dukes, marquesses and earls are known by one of their father or mother's subsidiary titles.) The style is only a courtesy one, however, and on legal documents they are described as, for instance, John Smith, Esq., commonly called The Honourable John Smith. As the wives of sons of peers share the titles of their husbands, the wives of the sons of viscounts and barons and the younger sons of earls are known as, e.g., The Hon. Mrs John Smith.

Some persons are entitled to the prefix by virtue of their offices. Rules exist that allow certain individuals to keep the prefix The Honourable even after retirement.

• Judges of the High Court and other superior courts in the Commonwealth (if the judge is a knight, the style Sir John Smith is used socially instead of The Honourable Mr Justice Smith.);

• Members of executive councils (and by extension, cabinets);

• Members of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada;

• Members of legislative councils (or senates) where the legislature is bicameral; and

• Certain representatives of the Sovereign, e.g. Lieutenant-Governors of Canadian provinces.
Many corporate entities are also entitled to the style, for example:

• The Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament Assembled;

• The Honourable East India Company;

• The Honourable Artillery Company;

• The Honourable Society of the Inner Temple etc.

Usage

The style The Honourable is always written on envelopes (where it is usually abbreviated to The Hon), and formally elsewhere, in which case the style Mr or Esq. is omitted. In speech, however, The Honourable John Smith is referred to simply as Mr John Smith.

In the House of Commons and other lower houses of Parliament and other legislatures, members refer to each other as honourable members etc. out of courtesy, despite the fact that they are not entitled to the style in writing.

Where a person is entitled to the prefix The Right Honourable he will use this higher style instead of The Honourable.

American usage

In the United States, the prefix The Honorable is used for a large number of high ranking (and not so high ranking) government officials, including:

• The President and Vice President of the United States

• Members of the Congress and state legislatures

• Members of the Cabinet

• Senior officers of executive departments

• Ambassadors

• Supreme Court Justices, Federal judges and magistrate judges

• Governors of States of the Union

• Mayors of cities

• City council members

• State and municipal judges and magistrates

• Elected party leaders

• Other elected officials

The term Your Honor as a spoken form of address is usually reserved for judges, justices, and magistrates (who are addressed as such when presiding in court). Some mayors, such as the Mayor of New York City are also given the title.

H.L. Mencken on the American usage of "The Hon."

Australian usage

In Australia, all ministers in Commonwealth and state (but not territory) governments are entitled to be styled The Honourable. Except in New South Wales and South Australia, the title is retained for life because it recognises that their appointment to the relevant executive council (when they first become a minister) is an appointment for life, and the person technically remains "an executive councillor-on-call". In New South Wales and South Australia the premier can advise the Queen to grant former ministers the title for life. The Presiding officers of the parliaments of the Commonwealth and the states are also styled The Honourable but normally only during their tenure of office. Special permission is sometimes given for a former presiding officer to retain the title after leaving the office.

The title "The Honourable" is not acquired through membership of either the House of Representatives or the Senate. A member or senator may have the title if they have acquired it separately, eg. by being a current or former minister. During proceedings within the chambers, forms such as "The honourable Member for ...", "The honourable the Leader of the Opposition", or "My honourable colleague" are used. This is a merely a parliamentary courtesy and does not imply any title.

Traditionally, members of the Legislative Councils of the states were also styled The Honourable. This practice is still followed in New South Wales, Western Australia and South Australia. It is not followed in Tasmania. In Victoria, the practice was abolished in 2003.

Canadian usage

In Canada, the following people are entitled to the style The Honourable (or l'honorable in French) for life:

• Members of the Canadian Senate

• Members of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada

• Provincial Lieutenant-Governors
In addition, some people are entitled to the style while in office only:

• The Speaker of the Canadian House of Commons

• Judges of the Supreme Court of Canada and other superior courts

• Members of provincial Executive Councils while holding office

• Speakers of provincial legislatures while holding office.

It is usual for Speakers of the House of Commons to be made Privy Councillors, in which case they keep the style for life, and provincial Premiers are sometimes also made Privy Councillors.

Members of the Canadian House of Commons and of provincial legislatures refer to each other as "honourable members" (or l'honorable député) but are not entitled to have The Honourable as a prefix in front of their name.

The Governor General of Canada, the Prime Minister of Canada, the Chief Justice of Canada and certain other eminent persons are entitled to the style The Right Honourable (or le/la Très honorable in French).

Hong Kong usage


• Members of the Legislative Council

• Members of the Executive Council

• The Chief Executive

• Chief Secretary, Financial Secretary, Secretary of Justice, and Secretaries of Bureaux

• Judges of the Court of Final Appeal

• Judges of the High Court

• Bearers of the title Grand Bauhinia Medal, the highest medal in Hong Kong's honours system

New Zealand usage

In addition to the standard Commonwealth usage, the Speaker of the House of Representatives is entitled to be referred to as "the Honourable". New Zealand office holders who are "honourable" ex-officio are usually personally granted the title for life as a courtesy when they vacate the office.

Manx usage

In the Isle of Man, the style The Honourable (often abbreviated to Hon.) is used to refer to a Minister while holding office.

[wargamez102]

...presentation herein.

Check your archive(s)/post(s) and go back and re-read that flag presentation... "It will work for you, like a psalm.

Happy Trails...

[Sharing Lights]

Could you, please, provide the direct link?

[planetmark]

I believe this is how the Quakers felt... hence the mondo big hats. They made them big, and wore them to court to be clear and obvious that they weren't removing it.

[Sharing Lights]

How can we reinstate our rights to be treated as humans and not subservient to judges as sub-humans?

I am, honestly, not getting it: why judges are above non-judges? By what Nature’s or God’s given Right?

It is a direct insult and challenge to all People.

I really feel that this issue is more crucial than it may seem.
As, once, we can reinstate our right to be treated not a slaves but as free men and women, we can open up the venue for other rights for us.
I sense it.

When I learn enough, I intend to bring a lawsuit for humiliation of people by unwarranted demands, which subject them to humiliation as to cause a part of their body (see physical flesh) be publicly displayed bare.

No one expects women to take off their skirts in Courts or men their pants for example.
Why would any one, if not in non-ego worshiped mode, expect People to bare their head or any part of their body?

What if our head is sacred to us and we feel that it is our expression of freedom and symbolism to cover our flesh on head with a hat or such in Court, feeling that we need certain symbolism there as the environment is too often hostile towards us?

I take an icon or, at least a replica of it in Court, as that gives me certain confidence – it does as belief is power. What is next? Are they going to force me to give that up too?

We should be able to appear in Courts without being interrogated what religion or absence of it do
we pursue as I was interrogated by Court Officers.

None of their "6th letter in order of the alphabet" business, reply I.

I know I am right, as I am right indeed… nobody’s business – period!
I do not ask anyone to alter any appearance of any part of their body by attributes.
No one has any right to expect anything different from me (read – “all of you.”)

I say, let’s organize a united lawsuit to take our God-Nature-Given Right back!
I mean it!!!
Let's research real law and do so.

It is, also, more than personal to me because I felt it to the bones.

A Court Attorney working for a Judge in the Civil Court of NY, threatened me with a Court Police Officer as I refused to remove my hat (it was cotton and tight so no vision was obstructed at all to anyone.)

I was ordered by the armed Court Officer in a very intimidating manner, while I perceived that I may have even been arrested the way I was approached with hostility and spoke too loudly for all to hear.
I was ordered to leave the Courtroom and was denied my right to see the Judge.

I was marked as defaulted in the Court system, which is contrary to the facts as I was there but expelled, accompanied by threats.
If they did that to me, that means they can do so to any of you.

I forgive many individuals for acts against me anywhere but I have no right to forgive them for acts against others as kindness is, too often, taken for a sign of weakness.

I would elaborate further.

I was interrogated on the choice of my religion when I stated that have a right to keep my hat for religious reasons as well as I stated that had a skin condition on my head that appeared, at that time, as a burn and I do not wish to expose myself publicly.

I told them truth in both cases in reality and they were based on facts not excuses.

I was lectured outside the Court room after being expelled.
The lecture was provided by the Court’s Attorney working for the Judge.

The Court' Officer escorted me outside of the Room prior to that.
Then, the Attorney took over (so that all are clear on the sequence.)

I replied that there is no law forcing me to divulge my religious choice and or reasons.

As the Attorney, insisted instead of watching the National Geographic channel if he is so inquisitive about life and people, I replied, “since you insist so much, I would tell you: I am of the Judeo-Christian background and that is my religion by choice."

I was lectured by this imposter of law on what kind of hats or yarmulke, and coverings pertaining to different religious should be worn, and that I did not confer to the standard of yarmulke.

Who told him that I have to wear yarmulke or what should be my chooice?

Who is he to set a norm for me and my head, which belongs not to the State or minions of ignorance and quest for power but to me and the forces that created me?

I state what feel and believe:

I) No person should be denied a right to seek justice in a court of law based on his/her choice to cover his/her head and or body for whatever personal reason he/she chose.

II) No person should be denied a right to seek justice in a court of law and forced to divulge his/her personal religious or non-religious beliefs or be questioned on anything not pertaining to the lawsuit.

III) No person should be denied a right to seek justice in a court of law and or may be told by the State or Federal Government what kind of covering for his/her head the latter is allowed to wear based on the criteria set by the Government.

Criteria pertaining to one’s body should be set by the owner of that body which is neither the State’s nor Federal Government’s property but belongs to the individual him/herself only.

I propose these, three reinstatements of our basic, rights for personal freedom and expression in Court and or off Court.

Amen!

[Sharing Lights]

I believe that Freedom should not be expected - it should be assured as, then, it may be expected and, only, then!

[Sharing Lights]

To You, "Your Honors."


You hypocrites, you judges;
to you, I speak outright.
Who are you? The imposters.
You have no clue what's “right!”

As gods, you give decisions
but of a shallow, prideful mind.
You push your, own agendas.
You recognize your kind.

You judge. Oh, please,
you have no honor, you...
and flocks that voted for you.
They also have your view.

You love to play by Power,
to feel like God, to rule.
You are on a quest and striding.
Ambition is your tool.

One day, you judges will be…
yes, will be judged as all.
You can not hide from Justice
from True One of the soul!

Well documented. Very accurate and to the point.

As I see it, because Congress cannot bestow a title of nobility on persons, they have set up a situation wherein the people themselves are obliged to bestow that title upon such persons as judges etc.

Of course, though, as long as there is that 'presumption' that we are who we are not, then they can act however they will in regard to our presence and demand of us whatever they want as long as we do not object to their outlandish assaults upon the intelligence of the average man or woman. It is because the people are passive and indifferent, that the situation has gotten to be so intolerable.

Also, the hat (like the crown) is the sign of nobility(sovereign status) and removing your hat in the presence of another is relinquishing your sovereign status in surrender to that of another. Does a king ever remove His crown in the presence of inferriors?,, how about a priest,, does he ever remove his mitre in the presence of inferriors? Hmmmm.

Jerry.

Originally Posted by Sharing Lights

Definitions of the term “honorable:” (reprinted)

Dictionary

hon•or•a•ble

adj.
1. Deserving or winning honor and respect: led an honorable life.
2. Bringing distinction or recognition: honorable service to one's nation.
3. Possessing and characterized by honor: an honorable person.
4. Consistent with honor or good name: followed the only honorable course of action.
5. Distinguished; illustrious: this honorable gathering of scholars.
6. Attended by marks of recognition and honor: received an honorable burial.
7. Honorable (Abbr. Hon.)
a. Used as a title of respect for certain high government officials: The Honorable Jane Doe, Associate Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts.
b. Used as a courtesy title for the children of barons and viscounts and the younger sons of earls.
c. Used in the House of Commons as a title of respect when speaking of another member.
honorableness hon'or•a•ble•ness n.
honorably hon'or•a•bly adv.


Thesaurus

honorable
adjective

1. Deserving honor, respect, or admiration: admirable, commendable, creditable, deserving, estimable, exemplary, laudable, meritorious, praiseworthy, reputable, respectable, worthy. See good/bad, praise/blame, respect/contempt/standing, value/worthlessness/evaluation.

2. Having or marked by uprightness in principle and action: good, honest, incorruptible, righteous, true, upright, upstanding. Informal straight-shooting. Idioms: on theup-and-upup and up. See honest/dishonest.


SNIP

[FreeFromContract]

Originally Posted by jerrypitts

Also, the hat (like the crown) is the sign of nobility(sovereign status) and removing your hat in the presence of another is relinquishing your sovereign status in surrender to that of another. Does a king ever remove His crown in the presence of inferriors?,, how about a priest,, does he ever remove his mitre in the presence of inferriors? Hmmmm.

Jerry.

Do you have a link that I could do some research on this? Not that I doubt you, I am just interested in how customs developed over the ages.

Thanks.