I wonder how the argument that it's just a piece of decorative jewellery would go down. And because wearing it isn't a requirement of the faith, that's really all it is. Talk about a hurricane in a teacup...
Christians have no right to wear cross at work, says Government
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
Odd sometimes how the push to be PC can come up with such stupid rules. Here in Canada we permit sikhs to wear turbans in hazardous work places and in both military and police in lieu of proper uniforms but a cross is a no no in an office. Being a visible minority has definite advantages.
Unreal. I wonder how they'd feel if people started wearing Swastikas, Yin-yangs, astrological symbols (like the one for Cancer -"69"), etc.
Actually, the British government allows Sikhs to wear turbans and daggers as well, because it is actually a requirement of their religion. Christians are not required by their religion to wear a cross, ergo it is a personal choice motivated by a desire to express their religion and can be countered by dress code.
So religion over rides safety? Now that is PC gone mad. But hey what do I know as a lowly first aid attendant and safety committee member both at work and our volunteer fire department.
Obviously the solution is to allow them to ride for free if they will agree to protect the aircraft from being hi-jacked.
How about flooding the plane with sleeping gas even before it takes off and leave them all out for the duration of the flight?
I can see this being an improvement (I'm thinking of SkyService) on the
experience on some of the discount vacation flights. I'm saying that if
I'm only allowed about 19" width of space for a 5-6hr flight....being
unconscious could very well be an improvement. I wonder how
much extra they'd charge for that? :roll:
But all the distillers would complain. Where else are they going to sell all those little tiny bottles of booze if not the airlines?
But all the distillers would complain. Where else are they going to sell all those little tiny bottles of booze if not the airlines?
Maybe....just maybe....they could be feed to the unconscious passengers
via I.V. so they not only sleep through the flight....& wake up drunk to deal
with Customs & Taxi Drivers & such. This just keeps getting better and
better!!! Where do I sign up?
I'm thinking that my body would object to being unconscious and in one position for a few hours.
It is not a requirement of their religion. It is a tradition, their religion requires they not cut their hair and they had to find a way to keep it from hanging into their eyes and dye vats back when India was the premiere fabric colouring place on earth and that was their primary place of employment. They happened upon the long narrow lengths of fabric cut off the ends of bolts of cloth, to make them even, being very useful to wind around their heads to contain their hair, hence the tradition of the turban. NO hair containment or a modern hair net would fit the requirements of their religion just as well.
If you will take note, they don't all grow beards in observance of those same religious tenets but those that do, don't wear a turban on their chin but do wear a hairnet of a type to contain their beards when required by food and drug related laws or simple personal hygiene and appearance preferences.
So too, the kirpans evolved long AFTER Sikhism was formed as a manifestation of their religious tenets as warriors and protectors, guardsmen, to display their status as defender's of the faith.
We were scammed and our governments simply needed to perform some due diligence and consult factual evidence before "knee-jerking" to them and allowing the turban in the mounties and other areas or organizations normally having their own headgear or none at all.
Exempting them from the motorcycle helmet laws for instance was a rediculous accommodation as a helmet contains their "unshorn" hair just as a Turban would. A classic example of our willingness to accommodate being taken advantage of to supbourn our traditions and rights.
I learned this stuff many years ago from honest sikhs who would scoff at their brethrentoday claiming the turban was a religious requirment as many sikhs of old had neither the turbans or the cloth to make one but were still devote and welcomed in the religion.
