This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- RE gcse
- RE GCSE
- Dress code
- Best exam tips that aren't your usual 'dont cram info' etc.
- Eduqas A-level French Component 2 (12 Jun) and 3 (19 Jun 2023) [Exam Chat]
- GCSE Subjects!!
- faith
- Is sandhu a muslim name?
- Conversion - Sikhism Islam
- Lee Anderson: MP suspended from Tory party over 'Islamists' comments
- Driving test moving ahead tools that are working now?
- The lazy student | A GCSE blog
- Should government ministers and officials communicate on WhatsApp?
- Anthropology, Classical Studies, and English in a Personal Statement?
- I do not like Halle Bailey's boyfriend
- A level History NEA Coursework
- Any thoughts on Little Mermaid Movie?
- Super racist author on my personal statement
- Help
- French irp topic ideas
The Burkha Controversy - Now Sikhism
Scroll to see replies
Original post by aarora
This thread is ridiculous! There's very few Sikhs who carry a kirpan and those who carry it don't go around stabbing people. If it was such an issue it would be all over the news! The burkha is a bigger threat, you can carry all sorts under it. Are you a muslim? Because I think you have a personal issue with Sikhs for starting this. Prick.
No I am not a Muslim; I am an athiest. "Those who wear it don't go around stabbing people"? Clearly some do as you can check in my OP.
Original post by Singh993
the kirpan doesn't pose a significant enough risk to deprive followers of a major world religion the right to practice their faith
/thread
the kirpan doesn't pose a significant enough risk to deprive followers of a major world religion the right to practice their faith
/thread
A sharpened blade which can slice through flesh does pose a risk to the public, which is why these weapons are banned in the first place.
(edited 13 years ago)
Original post by R.B.G
No I am not a Muslim; I am an athiest. "Those who wear it don't go around stabbing people"? Clearly some do as you can check in my OP.
Yeah I saw it, you have about 3 incidents your acting like there's been millions and you don't even know the full story
Original post by aarora
Yeah I saw it, you have about 3 incidents your acting like there's been millions and you don't even know the full story
I have never made the claim there was millions of incidents. The number of incidents is irrelevant. Any individuals carrying sharp knives poses a danger to the public.
On the overall, I think if they are that big or the size of a real knife-dagger, then of course they should be banned. It is too much of a threat to the public. But if it is a 1 or 2cm one, which I heard people wear, then I suppose it could be allowed.
Original post by Singh993
yea and given the number/usage of them, the risk is minimal
Well if most Sikhs have a blunt one, and that's good enough for them, why do they need sharp ones?
Original post by Singh993
you don't have a clue - no disrespect here, but in your eyes the kirpan poses a massive risk with every other baptised sikh carrying a sharpened kirpan to go on a murder spree
you don't have a clue - no disrespect here, but in your eyes the kirpan poses a massive risk with every other baptised sikh carrying a sharpened kirpan to go on a murder spree
That's not what I think at all. I'm opposed to introducing exceptions to laws based on people's religion. If a Sikh can prove they will be responsible with the knife, I have no problem with them carrying it. As long as everyone has the same opportunity to prove themselves responsible enough to carry a knife.
Original post by Singh993
just think , for a second "pysk"; the reason the kirpan hasn't been banned is because it has proved to be something of very very little risk in society.
how many times to you hear of non-religious youth in gangs stabbing each other?
compare this to the minuscule number of cases whereby a kirpan was involved?
there's only a tiny handful of cases
the kirpan doesn't pose a significant enough risk to deprive followers of a major world religion the right to practice their faith
/thread
just think , for a second "pysk"; the reason the kirpan hasn't been banned is because it has proved to be something of very very little risk in society.
how many times to you hear of non-religious youth in gangs stabbing each other?
compare this to the minuscule number of cases whereby a kirpan was involved?
there's only a tiny handful of cases
the kirpan doesn't pose a significant enough risk to deprive followers of a major world religion the right to practice their faith
/thread
It seems you're not getting my point. I'm not opposed to them because I think Sikhs are likely to go around stabbing people. My point is that it is totally unfair to have laws that apply only to members of a specific religion. There may be many other people who want to carry knives, and will be responsible with them. But they are not allowed to because they are not Sikhs.
Original post by R.B.G
I have never made the claim there was millions of incidents. The number of incidents is irrelevant. Any individuals carrying sharp knives poses a danger to the public.
Yeah the number of incidents are relevant because there's 3. If it posed such a danger to the public it would have been banned by now. So take your ignorance somewhere else.
Original post by Democracy
This thread is being re-opened but if it descends into spam and fighting, it will be locked permanently and further warnings/bans given. Stay on topic and keep things civil.
well sorry here but when people go around saying that the 1984 massacres weren't genocide and post ridiculous comments like "only a few people got hurt" then i have evey right to ****ing swear
it's disgusting...forget my language
Original post by Singh993
well sorry here but when people go around saying that the 1984 massacres weren't genocide and post ridiculous comments like "only a few people got hurt" then i have evey right to ****ing swear
it's disgusting...forget my language
it's disgusting...forget my language
No you don't, you can make your point effectively without personally attacking others. That's not even the point of the thread, so stay on topic. Thems the rules.
Original post by Democracy
No you don't, you can make your point effectively without personally attacking others. That's not even the point of the thread, so stay on topic. Thems the rules.
well I never made it the point of this thread...anywho whatever's... Had it been real life the person in question would've got a good pounding...shame such keyboard warriors can get away with it online.
I personally think that neither the Burkha nor the Kirpan should be banned. For some Muslims, the Burkha is not a contentious issue, and is something which is a necessity. Likewise, for Sikhs, the Kirpan is a fundamental part of their faith, and in both instances they should be allowed to wear them.
Also to the guy saying that the killings of Sikhs was not a genocide I would disagree. It was a systematic targetting of a select group of individuals in society, much like the holocaust you refer to. In essence it was a genocide and it was pretty illogical to say otherwise.
Also to the guy saying that the killings of Sikhs was not a genocide I would disagree. It was a systematic targetting of a select group of individuals in society, much like the holocaust you refer to. In essence it was a genocide and it was pretty illogical to say otherwise.
(edited 13 years ago)
Original post by Singh993
well I never made it the point of this thread...anywho whatever's... Had it been real life the person in question would've got a good pounding...shame such keyboard warriors can get away with it online.
yes yes singh saab I like your fightback. Fair play to mod this isn't the thread, tho start one up wake up mans about 1984 I'll join. Also, mod says stay on topic, but wasn't air india and sikh extermism mentioned ages ago in this thread. I also plead with the mod that please allow us to expose the tragedgy of 84. We have been made to shut up for 26 years, please do not contribute to our pain. Cheers
Original post by The Dynamic Uno
Is that to do with the religion itself or the people that follow it? I understand what you're saying about everything being black and white to a lot and they piss me off too. What I'm saying is the religion on its own is not what a lot people perceive it to be.
Well I don't know what you perceive people to perceive it to be.
Obviously they're not all terrorists. The fact there have been so few attacks compared to the size of the Muslim community confirms this. Everybody knows they're not all terrorists.
I also understand that burka wearing women aren't necessarily cajoled into doing it by male relatives. I was under the impression that motives include making a political statement, as well as boasting about piety by making a big show of it.
I don't believe modesty is a factor at all in the wearing of veils. You can't perv over someone's face, that's ridiculous.
I still don't like the religion, because it seems so over the top to me, with all the endless restrictions on what you should and shouldn't do, and the absolutely bizarre notions of ritual cleanliness, having to take a shower after farting to continue your prayers etc.
The reason I see Islam as particularly different to the other religions is that it takes things so far. I'm aware that there are branches of other religions that take it to similar extremes, such as certain sects of Judaism or Hinduism.
Faith seems to please a lot of people, and I've no problems with that, but there's no reason people need to jump through hoops to worship God.
It's all a lot of ridiculous old hocus pocus that seems to do more harm than good. I suggest you check out the CEMB website.
Anyone can wear a burkha whereas not everyone can carry a kirpaan. So I can see why some people are against it.
I'm against any burkha ban. You can be against the burkha all you like but calling for a ban is ridiculous and hypocritical. Freedom is for everybody. Women should be able to wear what they like out of choice. I don't call for a ban on obscene looking women that strut around children and that's more offensive imo (but that's their choice).
I'm not against the kirpaan as long as it's blunt, but they should also limit the size of it. It doesn't need to be a long 'sword' but more like a knife.
I don't know about anybody else but I kinda like variety in our culture. This homogenous crap we're tending toward feels void and quite boring.
I'm against any burkha ban. You can be against the burkha all you like but calling for a ban is ridiculous and hypocritical. Freedom is for everybody. Women should be able to wear what they like out of choice. I don't call for a ban on obscene looking women that strut around children and that's more offensive imo (but that's their choice).
I'm not against the kirpaan as long as it's blunt, but they should also limit the size of it. It doesn't need to be a long 'sword' but more like a knife.
I don't know about anybody else but I kinda like variety in our culture. This homogenous crap we're tending toward feels void and quite boring.
(edited 13 years ago)
Original post by Singh993
when people go around saying that the 1984 massacres weren't genocide and post ridiculous comments like "only a few people got hurt"
They said what now?!
Original post by R.B.G
The number of incidents is irrelevant.
But.. that is very relevant!
NO IT SHOULD NOT BE BANNED
Ok so I'm a bit biased because I'm from a Sikh background but I shall express how I feel.
The guys that usually tend to wear a kirpan are the most Sikh of all Sikhs, i.e they choose to wear it because they are true Sikhs; these are the ones that won't even look at meat or won't even touch alcohol.
As for those who decide to wear the kirpan as a non-baptised Sikh, I really do think they need to wear a small one, underneath their item of clothing. Keep your big kirpans safely in a trunk at home!
It's not used for defence, more a SYMBOL of defence.
The turban is also a sign of defence, and I hope that people also recognise that the Sikhs who wear turbans in this country are a sign of how Sikhs fought in both of the world wars, for BRITAIN.
Also, have you ever heard of attacks with these kirpans? No. Unless you hear about many incidents which occur, then make a fuss. Otherwise don't bitch just for the sake of you being an Athiest and hating religion.
Ok so I'm a bit biased because I'm from a Sikh background but I shall express how I feel.
The guys that usually tend to wear a kirpan are the most Sikh of all Sikhs, i.e they choose to wear it because they are true Sikhs; these are the ones that won't even look at meat or won't even touch alcohol.
As for those who decide to wear the kirpan as a non-baptised Sikh, I really do think they need to wear a small one, underneath their item of clothing. Keep your big kirpans safely in a trunk at home!
It's not used for defence, more a SYMBOL of defence.
The turban is also a sign of defence, and I hope that people also recognise that the Sikhs who wear turbans in this country are a sign of how Sikhs fought in both of the world wars, for BRITAIN.
Also, have you ever heard of attacks with these kirpans? No. Unless you hear about many incidents which occur, then make a fuss. Otherwise don't bitch just for the sake of you being an Athiest and hating religion.
(edited 13 years ago)
Also, on another note, I really thought this thread was going to be on the relevant issue of the Sikh golfer who was forced to take his turban off in an Italian airport despite the fact there is a law which states that a Sikh shouldn't be allowed to take his turban off.
Original post by Harrifer
Well I don't know what you perceive people to perceive it to be.
Obviously they're not all terrorists. The fact there have been so few attacks compared to the size of the Muslim community confirms this. Everybody knows they're not all terrorists.
I also understand that burka wearing women aren't necessarily cajoled into doing it by male relatives. I was under the impression that motives include making a political statement, as well as boasting about piety by making a big show of it.
I don't believe modesty is a factor at all in the wearing of veils. You can't perv over someone's face, that's ridiculous.
I still don't like the religion, because it seems so over the top to me, with all the endless restrictions on what you should and shouldn't do, and the absolutely bizarre notions of ritual cleanliness, having to take a shower after farting to continue your prayers etc.
The reason I see Islam as particularly different to the other religions is that it takes things so far. I'm aware that there are branches of other religions that take it to similar extremes, such as certain sects of Judaism or Hinduism.
Faith seems to please a lot of people, and I've no problems with that, but there's no reason people need to jump through hoops to worship God.
It's all a lot of ridiculous old hocus pocus that seems to do more harm than good. I suggest you check out the CEMB website.
Obviously they're not all terrorists. The fact there have been so few attacks compared to the size of the Muslim community confirms this. Everybody knows they're not all terrorists.
I also understand that burka wearing women aren't necessarily cajoled into doing it by male relatives. I was under the impression that motives include making a political statement, as well as boasting about piety by making a big show of it.
I don't believe modesty is a factor at all in the wearing of veils. You can't perv over someone's face, that's ridiculous.
I still don't like the religion, because it seems so over the top to me, with all the endless restrictions on what you should and shouldn't do, and the absolutely bizarre notions of ritual cleanliness, having to take a shower after farting to continue your prayers etc.
The reason I see Islam as particularly different to the other religions is that it takes things so far. I'm aware that there are branches of other religions that take it to similar extremes, such as certain sects of Judaism or Hinduism.
Faith seems to please a lot of people, and I've no problems with that, but there's no reason people need to jump through hoops to worship God.
It's all a lot of ridiculous old hocus pocus that seems to do more harm than good. I suggest you check out the CEMB website.
I definitely see your point, it is a point of view I kinda take myself. The whole full veil thing is not necessary, it's just culture. Nowhere in the Qur'an does it say that you have to cover your face. Nowhere does it say you have to cover your hair either, it just says to dress modestly. What was modest when it was written is different to what is modest now so people who take everything as black and white piss me off too. It's not the religion that puts such a strong chokehold over people, it's the people. It's the culture. It's the years of culture being confused with religion. The point of having to redo wudu if you farted might seem a little extreme but praying is seen as something sacred and wudu is about cleansing yourself before you pray and farting isn't really exactly being clean. It can be interpreted as a little extreme though I get you. Like you said, any religion can be taken to an extreme but it just appears to you that Islam is more extreme cos of the sheer coverage it gets. There are 'crazy' parts to all religions and crazy people that follows those religions.
Again, it's the people, not the religion.
Related discussions
- RE gcse
- RE GCSE
- Dress code
- Best exam tips that aren't your usual 'dont cram info' etc.
- Eduqas A-level French Component 2 (12 Jun) and 3 (19 Jun 2023) [Exam Chat]
- GCSE Subjects!!
- faith
- Is sandhu a muslim name?
- Conversion - Sikhism Islam
- Lee Anderson: MP suspended from Tory party over 'Islamists' comments
- Driving test moving ahead tools that are working now?
- The lazy student | A GCSE blog
- Should government ministers and officials communicate on WhatsApp?
- Anthropology, Classical Studies, and English in a Personal Statement?
- I do not like Halle Bailey's boyfriend
- A level History NEA Coursework
- Any thoughts on Little Mermaid Movie?
- Super racist author on my personal statement
- Help
- French irp topic ideas
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
