Dagger Ban unconstitutional Supreme Court says

[tracy]

I still believe preferential treatment to any one religious group is the wrong path to follow. It has happened too often in the U.S. and has led to even more separation and discrimination.

Maybe... I just don't see this as preferential treatment because I don't see how any other religious group is less respected because we respect Sikhs. Their religions are just as respected, if not more so. Like I said, the Christians get school holidays for all their holy days each year. That could be seen as preferential treatment, but most people just don't care (I sure don't). When I went to school, there were kids who wore their crosses to school, some who followed religious dress codes (long dresses and long sleeves even in gym), even a kid who wore a yarmulke (quite exotic in BC) and some who wore turbans. Allowing them to do that never impacted me in any way.

 

[sanch]

There is this tendency to impose a monolithic identity on ethnic groups or religions and this distorts the actual diversity that exists in these groups. As I posted earlier my understanding is that at most 10% of Sikhs are fundamentalist and they are the one’s who follow the religious dictates that they wear Kirpans. I am all for recognizing the rights of this 10% but I would hope that they would see that some of their practices are antiquated considering the realities of the 21st century.

But what of the other 90% of the Sikhs? One does need to remember that the biggest protest against the fundamentalist Sikh community over the Air India bombing came from moderate Sikhs.

I am becoming interested in this general form of nomenclature where ethnic groups and nations are seen as one big blob and lumped together categorically as such. If one is an American or lives in the US one automatically supports the war in Iraq. Or all Muslims must be outraged because of the cartoons. And now the religious identity of all Sikhs would be threatened if a small percentage of Sikhs are not allowed to wear the Kirpan. There is a lot of diversity in these groups even when they share and celebrate in many common practices.

 

[Mogz]

RE: Dagger Ban unconstitu

Mogz, perhaps your friend and his daughter should do what this boy and his family did.

You're right, maybe he should. Then again maybe he shouldn't. He could go and spend money over a religious symbol. He could argue his way in to the supreme court (ha) of Canada. He would probably win. Yet what would the fall out be for his daughter in a mostly muslim class? Talk about social alienation. The sad truth is that while he could no doubt spend countless dollars and countless hours to win victory, the social ramifications for his daughter would be too great a cost. Remember, the people she shares a class with are the same people who complained about her religious expression in the first place.

 

[tracy]

Re: RE: Dagger Ban unconstitu

Mogz, perhaps your friend and his daughter should do what this boy and his family did.

You're right, maybe he should. Then again maybe he shouldn't. He could go and spend money over a religious symbol. He could argue his way in to the supreme court (ha) of Canada. He would probably win. Yet what would the fall out be for his daughter in a mostly muslim class? Talk about social alienation. The sad truth is that while he could no doubt spend countless dollars and countless hours to win victory, the social ramifications for his daughter would be too great a cost. Remember, the people she shares a class with are the same people who complained about her religious expression in the first place.

I'm sure this Sikh boy's parents had the same concerns. In the end, your friend is the one who has to decide whether it's worth it or not. If it is, then I say goodluck with the fight. If it isn't, then I am not going to spend time being angry about it because I know a school official being a dumbass doesn't equate to Christians being oppressed by our country's laws.

 

[zoofer]

I wonder who paid the legal bills for this court case? I'm sure it was not the family involved.

 

[zoofer]

Muslims are now encouraged to push the Burqa dress with this decision.
Passport and drivers licenses will show only the eyes. Why not? It is a religious symbol for Islam.

The SC can't be picky. Its not like its an Nativity scene under a Holiday Tree.

 

[FiveParadox]

zoofer, perhaps you do not understand this decision from the Supreme Court of Canada — this decision does not force anyone to wear the kirpan; rather, it gives those Orthodox Sikhs who wish to do so the right to do so. No Sikh is being forced to do anything — freedom from religion is just as true in Canada as freedom to practice one's religion — your concerns are noted, but are perhaps unwarranted.

 

[I think not]

Re: RE: Dagger Ban unconstitutional Supreme Court says

ITN,
since you wish to quote law, notice that stripping Sikhs of the "right" to wear a kirpan is discriminating against them.

And I never said to strip them of anything, did I? I said the Supreme Court never considered a balanced approach to this issue, if it had, it would of been a dead issue.

I also quoted the law because FiveParadox insists on referencing article 2(a) of you Charter and doesn't take under consideration other articles, such as 15(1).

We had a similar case in California years ago, I had never heard of it, but looked into it after this news. The Ninth Cicruit Court, which is directly below the US Supreme Court, and the most liberal court of the US I might add, permitted students to wear the kirpan under certain conditions, excerpt;

On remand the district court invited the parties to negotiate the terms of the preliminary injunction. The parties, however, failed to agree on a compromise solution, so the district court, as we specifically instructed, imposed its own plan. It ordered the school district to lift its wholesale kirpan ban and allow the children (and their kirpans) back to school under the following conditions:

1) the kirpan will be of the type demonstrated to the Board and to the District Court, that is: a dull blade, approximately 3 - 3 1/2 inches in length with a total length of approximately 6 1/2 - 7 inches including its sheath;

2) the kirpan will be sewn tightly to its sheath;

3) the kirpan will be worn on a cloth strap under the children's clothing so that it is not readily visible;

4) a designated official of the District may make reasonable inspections to confirm that the conditions specified about are being adhered to;

5) if any of the conditions specified above are violated, the student's privilege of wearing his or her kirpan may be suspended; and

6) the District will take all reasonable steps to prevent any harassment, intimidation or provocation of [**9] the Cheema children by any employee or student in the District and will take appropriate disciplinary action to prevent and redress such action, should it occur.

This is what I mean on a balanced approach, your Supreme Court failed you in this instance in my opinion by once again considering group rights over any other rights.

 

[I think not]

Re: Sections 2(a) and 15(1)

If Sections 2(a) and 15(1) are to be applied equally, then one must consider the provisions of each; Section 2(a) guarantees the freedom of religion and conscience, and Section 15(a) guarantees equality before the law. Now, I would assert that a certain balance must be stricken between the two.

And that is precisely what the Supreme Court hasn't accomplished with it's ruling, a balance. To my knowledge it hasn't issued any restrictions, they just gave them carte blanche and they have set a precedence.

 

[Said1]

I'm thinking this is an expression issue, moreso than a religious freedom issue. That would be Section 2b.

 

[Colpy]

Indeed, they are not designed to be weapons. However, the groups that oppose the kirpan are using the "its a weapon" argument for their stance. It would be good to allow those opposed to hear the practices and customs of the kirpan from somebody of the Sikh community rather than second hand.

As has been raised in this thread a few times, a scissors is as effective a weapon as a kirpan, yet we are not hearing outcries for the banning of scissors. Also, as i stated, a sheathed kirpan could kill somebody so unsheathing laws may may not be adequate to address this issue.

In the end it is not the kirpan, or the scissors, but the people. Fear and intolorance makes for very small people and an increased risk of something really happening. Given some of the comments in this thread, I can just see what some types of bashing would occur if a racially intolorant person tried to take a kirpan from a Sikh because he/she thought the Sikh should not be allowed to bear it and somebody was injured in the scuffle.

CBC News - Toronto - Kirpan attack in Brampton, Ont. renews concerns

Uh huh

The Kirpan is, was and always will be a WEAPON.

Where's my Browning??? The Order of the Sacred High Power beckons.......

 

[#juan]

CBC News - Toronto - Kirpan attack in Brampton, Ont. renews concerns

Uh huh

The Kirpan is, was and always will be a WEAPON.

Where's my Browning??? The Order of the Sacred High Power beckons.......

Does that look dangerous?......does to me..;-):lol:

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

This is another bad decision by the SCC. You see, the Scientific Revolution proved there is no g/God or religion. That's a book, that's a pen, that's a car. Real things. You cannot point to a g/God. Considering how powerful a g/God is supposed to be, this is a very easy test. g/God is like UFOs, everyone has heard of it/them, but no one has actually seen one.

Religion is not real. Religion is now trumped by science because religion is bogus. We have a constitution we think trumps the Scientific Revolution, but it doesn't. And this decision flies in the face of our rational, modern, Western civilization which believes in progress and not tradition.

 

[AnnaG]

This is another bad decision by the SCC. You see, the Scientific Revolution proved there is no g/God or religion. That's a book, that's a pen, that's a car. Real things. You cannot point to a g/God. Considering how powerful a g/God is supposed to be, this is a very easy test. g/God is like UFOs, everyone has heard of it/them, but no one has actually seen one.

I guess electricity is a hoax, too, because we can't point to it either. We think it does stuff, but that's no different than the religious people thinking gods did stuff.

Religion is not real. Religion is now trumped by science because religion is bogus. We have a constitution we think trumps the Scientific Revolution, but it doesn't. And this decision flies in the face of our rational, modern, Western civilization which believes in progress and not tradition.

I guess Canada should dump the Heritage Museum then.Get rid of all the fossils and history books of Canada for the past 20,000 years or so.

Knives are knives. We should do as the Indians did and limit the lengths of kirpans, or else ban everyone from carrying edged items.

 

[CDNBear]

I guess electricity is a hoax, too, because we can't point to it either. We think it does stuff, but that's no different than the religious people thinking gods did stuff.

Bad choice Anna, you can point at electricity and we do know where it's formed and how.

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

I guess electricity is a hoax, too, because we can't point to it either. We think it does stuff, but that's no different than the religious people thinking gods did stuff.

I guess Canada should dump the Heritage Museum then.Get rid of all the fossils and history books of Canada for the past 20,000 years or so.

Knives are knives. We should do as the Indians did and limit the lengths of kirpans, or else ban everyone from carrying edged items.

Perhaps you could point to the computer screen and tell me what shining stuff coming out of the monitor is. g/God did not make it. Hit a switch and it disappears, then it reapppears. Like a scieintific test, you make its existence, over and over again. Build a battery and you get power. "Pray" and you get aching knees.

If I was a mean guy, I would point a live electrical wire at you and you could tell me whether those sparks are able to inflict pain on you are real or not.

Fossils are real things. Some have DNA in them, more real stuff.

 

[AnnaG]

Bad choice Anna, you can point at electricity and we do know where it's formed and how.

No it isn't. You took one phrase out of his post and spun the context with it. Another part of his post said "but no one has actually seen one". You can't see electricity, you can only see its effects. Electrons are just too small to see.

 

[CDNBear]

No it isn't. You took one phrase out of his post and spun the context with it. Another part of his post said "but no one has actually seen one". You can't see electricity, you can only see its effects. Electrons are just too small to see.

Not that I was saying anything against you Anna, or trying to deviate from the topic, I was just trying to point something out...


YouTube - Lightening Storm caught on tape

 

[dumpthemonarchy]

No it isn't. You took one phrase out of his post and spun the context with it. Another part of his post said "but no one has actually seen one". You can't see electricity, you can only see its effects. Electrons are just too small to see.

So you're saying the existence of electricity is not thoroughly documented from dam to lamp/computer screen?

 

[Colpy]

This is another bad decision by the SCC. You see, the Scientific Revolution proved there is no g/God or religion. That's a book, that's a pen, that's a car. Real things. You cannot point to a g/God. Considering how powerful a g/God is supposed to be, this is a very easy test. g/God is like UFOs, everyone has heard of it/them, but no one has actually seen one.

Religion is not real. Religion is now trumped by science because religion is bogus. We have a constitution we think trumps the Scientific Revolution, but it doesn't. And this decision flies in the face of our rational, modern, Western civilization which believes in progress and not tradition.

As I pointed out before..... BALONEY!

The scientific Revolution proved no such thing............