Multiculturalism v Uniculturalism? THE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH.

With the implication that Sikhism wasn't tolerant in the past?

If that is what you were implying, then you are quite clearly wrong.

Please actually read what I said before replying.

Did. Still wonder how you made those conclusions. Care to elaborate so I understand you?

Oh, sorry, I didn't realise Sikhism supported gay marriage, equal rights for women, tolerance towards other religions and democracy over theocracy right from its inception in 1499

I was saying that Modern Christianity is more tolerant that Islam, which has yet to modernise, although when it does, I'm sure it will be almost as tolerant.

With the exception of the bit I crossed out, it does

Having said that, gay people can get married in a Sikh state. They just can't get married in a Gurdwara and they can't claim that the marriage is lawful under Sikhism. But if they're Hindus/atheist/whatever who just happen to live in a Sikh state, then they can get married to whoever they want.

And still I don't understand you. We got many fine examples about how "modern" Christianity and Judaism still are not as tolerant as you might hope.

And when it comes to Islam, I find it to be quite modern and somewhat tolerant. It's all about your point of view, of how fundamentalist / orthodox people are.

I'm talking about the religion in general, not individuals.

I don't see any Christians going about trying to get women to cover themselves in burkas/niqabs or stoning people to death (essentially torture) on the slightest suspicion that they may have committed Haram.

Listen Singh, I know you're a Sikh,

so of course you are going to be a blindly ignorant typical religious bigot and suggest that your religion is the most tolerant and above all the only true religion.

I certainly hope you have the intellectual capability to comprehend the fallacies of your chosen (I say chosen, the more likely outcome is that you were indoctrinated from an early age) religion.

I think that's fairly obvious, given the picture in my sig. I'm not trying to hide, I want people to know that I'm Sikh.



Why don't you actually read up on Sikhism instead of posting about a topic that you have no knowledge of? You're the bigot, not me. I actually know something about Sikhism.

We'll take religious tolerance for example. You say we're intolerant, but did you know that Guru Tegh Bahadur died for the survival of Hinduism? The Hindus came to him begging him to save them from extinction, so he challenged Emperor Aurangzeb to convert him to Islam. The wager was that if the Emperor could convert him, he would order all of Kashmir and Punjab to convert.

He was tortured, and then executed. All because he supported religious freedom.

Now you could never do that, and probably neither could I, but he did. He is the only religious prophet in history to have died for another religion, which is definitely worthy of praise, whatever religion you are.

Bhai Sati Das, Bhai Mata Das, and Bhai Dayala all died for the survival of Hinduism, not Sikhism. So how can possibly you say that we're not tolerant?




Next time, try reading about a religion before you make such slanderous statements against it.


Actually, my parents aren't that religious. My knowledge of Sikhism has come through my own efforts. It is true to say that I was born a Sikh, but it's not my parents didn't really encourage me to take an interest in my religion. That came from me.

Then maybe you should. There is a huge community within Islam who are studying the Qu'ran and the religious text regarding these issues. Many Muslims today to not agree with the social stigmas and laws that some Muslim countries have.

As far as I know, I know no country that have based there laws on Christianity/Judaism only (like in the case of Sharia - KSA, Iran etc). If we stick to the written parts of religion neither is very tolerant. There is many religious people (both Christians and Jews) who advocate women to cover up and have very specific regulation when it comes to women and what they can and cannot do. The stoning.. Yeah, that one I can give you, but still it's a tad off because all Muslim countries do not use this "method" of punishment.

How can people of different cultures do anything other than segregate themselves? If one culture believes in democracy and equal rights for women (like modern Christianity/Judaism) and another culture believes in theocracy and unequal rights for women (like but not limited to Islam etc.) then of course they are not going to get a long which is where multiculturalism falls short.

Bravo for wasting 5 minutes of your life

P.S. I didn't say Sikhism was intolerant in a modern context,

it was just as intolerant as the other religions at the time (Sikhism is not special)

and considering that after Pakistan and India were formed the Sikhs fought against both sides to try and create their own nation

despite the fact that they weren't being oppressed at all in India

kind of suggests they are very egotistical in that they want a country for their own people.

Nice cop out there, you successfully dodged my whole argument and didn't counter anything I said. You're really fair when it comes to judging religions aren't you.


Sikhism, as it is today, is probably the most intolerant it's ever been.

So your point kind of fails there.


Did you not read what I posted? We are the only religion in the world that has a prophet who has died for the sake of another religion, which he did not adhere to nor recognise as true. I don't see how you can just pass that off as being nothing.


Who were they fighting? How many did they kill?

Find some statistics before you make such assumptions.



Oh really? So you think being told to convert to Hinduism is not oppression? Fast forwarding to 1984, do you not think that being raped in your own house by the police, who are supposed to be helping you, is oppression?



Everyone would be treated fairly in a Sikh state, as has been demonstrated by history;

"At present, flushed by a series of victories, they (the Sikhs) have a zeal and buoyancy of spirit amounting to enthusiasm; and with the power of taking the most exemplary revenge, they have been still more lenient than the Mohammedan were ever towards them"
(Masson, Charles. 1842. Narrative of Various Journeys in Balochistan, Afghanistan and the Panjab, 3 v. London: Richard Bentley, (1) 435)

"...though a Mohammedan the Sikhs repaired and beautified his [mosque], which is now a conspicuous white building that glitters in the sun. I have always observed the Sikhs to be most tolerant in their religion"
(Burnes, Alexander. National Archives of India (New Delhi) Foreign Secret Consultation, 6 June 1833, No. 5)

As I said earlier, 'culture' is not a concrete, real concept that can be juxtaposed in any meaningful way. You are presupposing the extent and compatibility of those traits with other people, when you have no basis to do so. The extent to which you can have an amiable relationship with another person is idiosyncratic.

Are there Satanists and Catholics in Britain?

I'm talking about the religion in general, not individuals.

I don't see any Christians going about trying to get women to cover themselves in burkas/niqabs or stoning people to death (essentially torture) on the slightest suspicion that they may have committed Haram.

England, USA, Italy, The Vatican, Israel etc.

Give me an example of Christians who want to cover women from head to toe and in extreme cases cover their faces completely in a veil/burka.

Regardless of whether the stonings are "legal" or not, I'd be willing to bet all Islamic states practice that form of execution.

There are Catholics (a type of Christian ) and probably Satanists, what's your point?

Religion is only as radical as those people who practice that religion.

E.g. Christians in certain parts of Africa and the Caribbean, for example, would not be nearly as tolerant as those say in Western Europe.

E.g. Jews attacking other Jews for not wearing "conservative" clothing

Its a bit incorrect to say that religion is what controls people's extremism. What is a bit more important is the culture, and how each particular culture INTERPRETS that religion