Secret Chief
Veteran Member
Seems reasonable. What about light sabres?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Sikh Queenslanders allowed to carry ceremonial knives in schools after court ruling
- Thread starter danieldemol
- Start date
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
The Sikh kirpan is not blunt. Even a blunt kirpan can inflict wounds. But, it is Canada's internal matter. India allows Sikh kirpans, but it is part of our culture. We do have regulations about the length of its blade - 6 inches or less, as I remember. They have been wearing it since 1699.
Secret Chief
Veteran Member
Even better: what if a judge is stabbed? (Note: no mention of the word "karma" please).Interesting. I wonder what will happen if there's another attack. Will the judges be held responsible
Secret Chief
Veteran Member
Definitely! I work in a school.
Mine. And the Queensland Supreme Court's.
I've already stated that a mere claim isn't sufficient for a religious exemption.
Queensland is in Australia. In any case, I'm not worried about getting stabbed by the local Sikhs. (If any even live in my town).
Secret Chief
Veteran Member
Dear god, kilts and bagpipes is more than enough.
In your opinion, should a decision concerning the legality of infant circumcision primarily be based on medical considerations or religious ones?
I don't disagree with the crux of your posts in this thread, so I'm asking this question out of curiosity more than anything else.
Last edited:
PureX
Veteran Member
Personally, I think it leans too far toward religious exception. If the ban were upheld, and perhaps more clearly defined, I think it would have forced those that want to carry them for religious reasons to alter them in some way that fulfills their religious proscription, yet still follows the rules.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
Wait, so you don't have a hat on your head right now just like that one?
In the UK, an inch long folding knife (for a keyring) is illegal to carry if the blade locks in place.
Fascinating how difficult it is for some humans to respect the cultures and traditions of others. Sad, but fascinating.
No, no, no...I take it off whilst on the toilet, and I generally post whilst I'm...err...tmi?Wait, so you don't have a hat on your head right now just like that one?
You might need to expand a little on what you mean there.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
My first thought is that I do not like the idea of having different rules based on religion in public schools. The same rules should apply to everybody.
I mean I can create my own religion that claims I need to carry a knife.
I mean I can create my own religion that claims I need to carry a knife.
Lots of people in this thread are rolling with the idea that you could easily carry a knife and claim your religion demands it. That's simply not the case. Whilst it is vague, the law holds exceptions only for 'real religious requirements'. We have not (yet) tied ourselves in knots enough to confuse the long-stated Sikh practice with...well...whatever made up religions others appear to be thinking of.
syo
Well-Known Member
A knife is a knife. Why weapon???
Secret Chief
Veteran Member
Alien826
No religious beliefs
There is a difference. Circumcision presents no danger to anyone but the unfortunate child. A knife is a weapon ....
Alien826
No religious beliefs
An often omitted factor is the affect on those that don't get the special treatment. I think it was in the 1970's in England, they passed a law to make the wearing of motorcycle helmets compulsory. Many bikers objected to it. The Sikhs claimed that it interfered with their religious "rule" to wear a turban. Well, they were allowed an exception to the law.
The non-Sikh bikers were furious at what they saw as an unfair exemption, and what would probably have calmed down quite quickly became a movement. Bikers would engage in "towel runs", where large groups would ride around with no helmets and towels wrapped round their heads. A lot of anger was directed at the Sikhs who were generally seen as inoffensive before.
I know I'm going to be accused of being intolerant, but the way things are evaluated based on "fair" and "not fair" is deeply seated in us and generally, I believe, a good thing. Forcing people to do things against their will and simultaneously allowing a minority to avoid that ruling based on religion is unfair, as I see it at least.
The non-Sikh bikers were furious at what they saw as an unfair exemption, and what would probably have calmed down quite quickly became a movement. Bikers would engage in "towel runs", where large groups would ride around with no helmets and towels wrapped round their heads. A lot of anger was directed at the Sikhs who were generally seen as inoffensive before.
I know I'm going to be accused of being intolerant, but the way things are evaluated based on "fair" and "not fair" is deeply seated in us and generally, I believe, a good thing. Forcing people to do things against their will and simultaneously allowing a minority to avoid that ruling based on religion is unfair, as I see it at least.