Turn on thread page Beta

The Burkha Controversy - Now Sikhism watch

  • View Poll Results: Should the Kirpan be banned?
    Yes
    75
    50.00%
    No
    75
    50.00%

    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    It doesn't matter how rare the attacks are.

    They will always happen in the future, and some people will be victims of them regardless.

    I don't think religion should be used as an excuse for gaining special treatment from the law regardless of what that religion is.

    Personally I find the motion of being able to carry a knife/short sword around because of one's religion as absoloutely absurd.

    I don't buy the "blunt" and "short" arguments. Having seen pictures of them, and an actual Kirpan at my own school, I can safely say they are very dangerous.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thisisnew)
    Didn't seem to matter with the burkha ban

    That's because it's not compulsory nor is it a major aspect of the religion unlike the Kirpan. In fact I saw numbers somewhere which suggested like 350 women would be affected by the ban in France... When we're talking about the Kirpan we're talking about the religion and it's followers in their entirety not a minute amount of people following a culturally influenced practice devoid of any religious compulsion.
    The burqa is compulsory and we are talking about a minute amount of Sikhs. not that it's OK to discriminate against a minorty group as you seem to be advocating. So because the burqa ban will only affect a small amount of women it is justified?

    (Original post by thisisnew)
    It is a dagger. I could convert to Sikhism and justify carrying a goddamned knife around.

    Yes, and you could become an armed police officer and justify carrying a submachine gun around. You could become a police officer and justify carrying a truncheon (something otherwise illegal to carry). You could become a tradesman and justify carrying around a carving knife and so on.

    Convert to Islam/Judaism and wear a goddamned niqab around.

    Become an armed response unit and cover your face.
    Become a surgeon and cover your face.

    Your arguements could easily be applied to the niqab. Be consistent with your critisicms or you will just look like a prejudiced bigot.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i have not seen a single sikh person using one voilently ever , maybe they have, but i have not heard it
    it does pose a threat, the burka does not though, lol...
    i'ma leave you all to yourselve, why use my precious time trying to convince you the truth when you already know it...
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    If knives are banned the kirpaan should be too. There should be no religious exemptions from the law.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thisisnew)
    Please provide several reliable sources. I'm fairly sure wearing of the Burqa is more cultural than religious. Perhpas you're thinking of the Hijab (even then I don't think it's compulsory). I don't think the Quran even suggests that women should be veiled but merely suggests that men and women dress "modestly" something which is open to interpretation. Either way it's a debated issue where as there is no debate surrounding the Kirpan for Sikhs.

    And just to clarify it's not a Burqa ban, it's a ban on concealing your face in public. Something which includes balaclavas, motorbike helmets etc.
    Why is a ban on face coverings acceptable? To say someone can't leave their house and walk on the pavement because of their dress code is ludicrous.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think people are missing the OP's point.
    He's rightly pointing out this almost hypocritical view we have in society.

    Many here are saying the kirpan isn't dangerous because of X, Y and Z, I think the OP's trying to draw attention the fact that there's more uproar in regards to a peice of cloth then something that, normally brandished, would get you a prison scentence.

    Anyway, I've never heard of a kirpan ( until now with that one news link) being misused and thus I think the current system in place is fine.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by R.B.G)
    Well in the OP I posted the link to the UK government website which states the laws on carrying knives, so you can check it out, it isn't very long. So what, if they have to be registered that doesn't mean no one is going to use a kirpan to attack. They probably have to be registered in Canada too. This isn't going to stop some 15 year old Sikh from Handsworth killing someone. Or the weapon being taken away from the owner or any one of a hundred potentially disasterous things. There is a reason you are not allowed knives (with the absurd exception of religious observance).
    The fact is in the time that legislation has been present, there have never been any crimes. Your argument seems to be along the lines of, 'there might be', which doesn't count for anything.

    (Original post by R.B.G)
    I have nothing against Sikhs. I have something against the legislation allowing them to carry life-threatening knives. I was never a Muslim; not a big fan of Islam.

    Didn't you support the ban on the Burkha? If so is not hypocritical of you to not support a ban on the kirpan?
    Burkas have been used as disguises for crimes in the past, and they're also a mark of division in society.

    There are many Muslim women who pay taxes(by having a job), integrate into society and are generally decent citizens. These women do not wear burkas.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.islamicweb.com/beliefs/wo...bani_niqab.htm
    http://muslimahdressing.blogspot.com...lsory-for.html
    http://www.answering-christianity.com/niqab_no.htm

    There's are two sides to this debate. Both will accuse the other of various things which discredit their view.

    The important thing to consider is that this is debated where as the consensus on Kirpan and Hijab are unanimous.

    (Original post by TheLeader)
    Obviously a blunt or downsized version should not be banned. This wouldn't be against the Law if you was non-Sikh either. However it then wouldn't match the criteria of being able to use it in self defence and therefore be illegitmate to a Sikh man. It would be like telling a niqabi you can't wear the veil but here have some sunglasses - they are more suitable.
    Yes, such modification would defeat the actual purpose of the Kirpan but again I point you to the fact that virtually nobody has been attacked, let alone killed by one. Because we can't realistically expect Sikh's to modify such an integral part of their religion I'd choose not to ban the Kirpan and I don't really feel like my safety is compromised when making such a choice.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It should be banned because it poses a threat simples.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CombineHarvester)
    Why is a ban on face coverings acceptable? To say someone can't leave their house and walk on the pavement because of their dress code is ludicrous.
    I don't know, ask the relevant French people perhaps? Polls showed that the majority supported the ban [on concealing your face] and the bill was passed almost unanimously. I'm sure you wouldn't be best pleased with people wearing balaclavas all the time in public so why would a non-compulsory religious item be exempt from such a ban? I wasn't best pleased about the new rule at my old collage with forbade me from wearing a hat on the premesis but I had to go along with it because that's what they wanted, they gave their reasons, I could wear it elsewhere & my hat wasn't compulsory (unless I bothered arguing it was medically relevant in regards to my BDD) I'd understand if it was specifically a "Burqa" ban but it's not, they are still allowed to wear Hijab.

    I'd find the ban unacceptable if it included Hijab but it doesn't so whatever.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Harrifer)
    The fact is in the time that legislation has been present, there have never been any crimes. Your argument seems to be along the lines of, 'there might be', which doesn't count for anything.
    Kirpan's have been used to kill people. Perhaps not in the UK but that is irrelevant. I could probably find another type of knife which has never killed anyone in the UK but that shouldn't make it legal. It's legality should be based on the damage that weapon could potentially inflict.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thisisnew)
    virtually nobody has been attacked, let alone killed by one
    I repeat, what planet are you on?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    I thought you could get kirpans welded into their sheaths so they could never be drawn. O_o
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thisisnew)
    I don't know, ask the relevant French people perhaps? Polls showed that the majority supported the ban [on concealing your face] and the bill was passed almost unanimously. I'm sure you wouldn't be best pleased with people wearing balaclavas all the time in public so why would a non-compulsory religious item be exempt from such a ban? I wasn't best pleased about the new rule at my old collage with forbade me from wearing a hat on the premesis but I had to go along with it because that's what they wanted, they gave their reasons, I could wear it elsewhere & my hat wasn't compulsory (unless I bothered arguing it was medically relevant in regards to my BDD) I'd understand if it was specifically a "Burqa" ban but it's not, they are still allowed to wear Hijab.

    I'd find the ban unacceptable if it included Hijab but it doesn't so whatever.
    This TSR poll seems to show that most people are in favour of banning the kirpan. I'm sure you wouldn't be best pleased if the local chav was carrying around a sword with him.

    Who cares if they are allowed to wear the hijab. That's like saying Sikhs are allowed to wear Turbans so it doesn't matter if we ban the kirpan.

    Your hypocricy is unblievable. Either support the ban of both or the ban of neither. You are clearly prejudiced against Islam.

    [EDIT] Oh and because you keep bringing it up I would also like to point out that wearing the kirpaan is not considered compulsory by all Sikhs just as the niqab isn't considered compulsory by all Muslims [/EDIT]
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Anyone who advocates the banning of the Burkha but has no problem with the Kirpaan is an anti-Islamic ****.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thisisnew)
    I don't know, ask the relevant French people perhaps? Polls showed that the majority supported the ban [on concealing your face] and the bill was passed almost unanimously. I'm sure you wouldn't be best pleased with people wearing balaclavas all the time in public so why would a non-compulsory religious item be exempt from such a ban? I wasn't best pleased about the new rule at my old collage with forbade me from wearing a hat on the premesis but I had to go along with it because that's what they wanted, they gave their reasons, I could wear it elsewhere & my hat wasn't compulsory (unless I bothered arguing it was medically relevant in regards to my BDD) I'd understand if it was specifically a "Burqa" ban but it's not, they are still allowed to wear Hijab.

    I'd find the ban unacceptable if it included Hijab but it doesn't so whatever.
    There's a difference between needing to comply with a dress code to go to a college and needing to comply with a dress code to leave your house. It doesn't matter what the reason is, the vast majority of people wear their clothes out of choice rather than medical reasons anyway. It doesn't matter whether the majority of people in an opinion poll support something it doesn't mean it should be passed unless you believe France is an ochlocracy. If you asked everyone in the UK, should white people not have to pay tax or should only Muslims pay tax then you'd most likely get more people in favour of the law which discriminates against minorities. Fact is, the veil ban only affects a small number of people (367 iirc) and therefore it is stupid to ask the majority of people what they think about it when it doesn't affect them in the slightest. Btw there were 100 abstentions to the bill which isn't unanimous at all.

    Then you're arguing that a kirpan should be allowed because of religious reasons but someone covering their face shouldn't? :lolwut:
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Iron Mike)
    Kirpan's have been used to kill people. Perhaps not in the UK but that is irrelevant.
    Well it isn't irrelevant because we're only talking about the UK. The Sikhs in this country aren't the same Sikhs you will find in Ontario or India or anywhere else. It is a different community, subject to different laws under different conditions.

    (Original post by Iron Mike)
    I could probably find another type of knife which has never killed anyone in the UK but that shouldn't make it legal
    What on earth are you talkign about?

    (Original post by Iron Mike)
    It's legality should be based on the damage that weapon could potentially inflict.
    Rather than basing its legality the fact that in all the years British Sikhs have been carrying them, there have been no incidents?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I've never heard about a Bhurka attack!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Harrifer)
    Well it isn't irrelevant because we're only talking about the UK. The Sikhs in this country aren't the same Sikhs you will find in Ontario or India or anywhere else. It is a different community, subject to different laws under different conditions.
    So Sikhs should be subject to different laws to the rest of us in the UK? Because they are better than us apparently

    (Original post by Harrifer)
    Rather than basing its legality the fact that in all the years British Sikhs have been carrying them, there have been no incidents?
    Erm yes there has. Admittedly I can't find any where a kirpaan is stated to have specifically been used but I have seen stories where it has been reported that sword fighting took place between Sikhs.

    I would also like to draw your attention to this:

    (Original post by Uzzy?)
    As long as they're not used outside the home I think its fine.

    Whilst we're on this topic, my bf's uncle was chased by an old sikh man threatning to chop his head off with that thing :lolwut:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    "haven't seen a single sikh carrying"
    it's a concealed weapon.
    carrying a KNIFE should definitely be banned especially in these circumstances-- it's not like it's clothing.

    loads have it but i guess it's brownie central around these parts.

    maybe someone needs to get stabbed before anything happens or maybe then it'll still be ignored. there needs to be some conspiracy in play to force these weapons off the streets. dunno how defensive someone thinking they're prince of persia is.
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

2,917

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
How are you feeling about GCSE results day?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.