Moein Al-Din Saeedi, a member of the parliament, says that the scandal of the Bagh-e Azgol has a negative impact on religion or just a few strands of women’s hair.
Moein Al-Din Saeedi, a member of the parliament, states that juxtaposing chastity and hijab is not necessarily correct. The meaning of hijab is not necessarily chastity. Some individuals cannot be judged on their chastity. It is interesting that these same individuals without hijab are showcased on national occasions on TV, but after the elections, such issues are forgotten. The embezzlement of tea, dubash, and the Bagh-e Shomal in Tehran, which was done without the knowledge of the Friday prayer leader in their name, has a negative impact on religion or just a few strands of women’s hair.
He mentioned the reason why the hijab bill did not reach a conclusion, saying, ‘We did not discuss the chastity and hijab bill in the parliament because it became subject to Article 85 of the Constitution and was referred to the Joint Commission. It was no longer discussed in the parliament.’
Saeedi talked about the claim of Kayhan regarding the lack of need for a hijab law, saying that we have certain principles regarding clothing. If we are just talking about the law, we already have a law prohibiting the use of satellite dishes, but this law is enforceable. A law must be enforceable. Hijab is undoubtedly a religious and political necessity, but we have many other cases that are more necessary. The issue of usury in banking is a much more important issue. There are serious religious doubts on this matter. The discussion of livelihood, shrinking people’s dining tables, and the flight of meat and chicken from people’s tables are more important subjects. The discussion of waste management, disabled individuals, housing, and child labor are a thousand times more important.