Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: TechMan on January 07, 2011, 12:53:35 PM
-
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/01/07/michigan-sikhs-want-religious-swords-school (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/01/07/michigan-sikhs-want-religious-swords-school)
Members of the MI Sikhs community are upset that a student was banned from school after he brought the sabre, called a Kirpan, to school. The sword symbolizes the Sikhs' efforts to ward off evils and followers say it poses no danger to the community. Any person who has been baptized into the faith -- the world’s fifth largest religion -- is expected to carry the saber all the time.
So if the Sikhs can carry a sword for religious reasons, can I as a follower of the John Moses Browning religion carry a 1911 any where I want to?
-
So if the Sikhs can carry a sword for religious reasons, can I as a follower of the John Moses Browning religion carry a 1911 any where I want to?
Give it a try and sue whenever any government entity infringes on your religion.
-
To paraphrase my CHL instructor:
Those who live on the cutting edge of the law had better have the money to bleed!
-
I don't see Sikh adults carrying sabres around in public.
I fail to see why schools need to be the test ground for religious-based weapons discrimination trial cases.
Show me some Sikh adults walking around with swords (in everyday life, not in ceremonial duties), and I'll consider the case having merit.
-
Show me some Sikh adults walking around with swords (in everyday life, not in ceremonial duties), and I'll consider the case having merit.
they wear them under their outer garments. its meant as a spiritual weapon not a temporal one. there were a lotta sikh in the clubs i used to run around in pretty decent folks the ones i met
-
You know, had zero tolerance not existed, this would not be an issue.
-
From http://www.sikhs.org/art12.htm
The Reht Maryada does not specify the length of the Kirpan or how it is to be worn by the devotee. Kirpans can be anywhere from 3 foot swords carried by Sikhs on religious festivals, marriages and parades, to a few inches in length. They can either be worn over ones clothing or under the clothing. The Kirpan is usually kept sheathed except when it is withdrawn from it's casing on such occasions as consecration of the ceremonial sweet pudding distributed during religious ceremonies.
Fine, then perhaps students need to merely learn that "concealed means concealed" and keep it in their pants. A small one.
they wear them under their outer garments. its meant as a spiritual weapon not a temporal one. there were a lotta sikh in the clubs i used to run around in pretty decent folks the ones i met
I'm not impugning the honor of Sikhs. All the ones I've met have been wonderful people.
I'm questioning the integrity of a group of people that want to use religious tolerance as a tool to segregate weapons carriers from non-weapons carriers. This group of people doing this happen to be Sikhs, but they need to first establish via case law that carrying a full length sword in public in Michigan is 100% A-OK for an adult to do. At the mall. At the public swimming pool. At the movies. Et cetera.
They're using the education environment and religious tolerance as distractions to try and win via PC-fiat. Rather than the merits of bearing a weapon.
The push for overt brandishing in a school environment proves my point.
If the blade is not specified by religious text and is merely an article of faith, it very well could be a simple lapel pin or necklace pendant, like most Christian crosses.
ETA:
http://sikhism.about.com/od/culture/a/Culture.htm
Adult Sikhs are not permitted to bear the Kirpan past TSA checkpoints or into courthouses.
Schools are subject to the same technical restrictions as TSA/courthouse rules in most areas, but they're just not checked or enforced by magnetometers or nekkid scanners.
-
I follow the Prophet Samuel (Colt) and his disciple WB Ruger =)
Six is a holy number.
-
Banning all knives in school rather than banning the misuse of knives (etcetera) teaches what? That no one can be trusted and everyone must be controlled?
A number of us here remember a time when knife carry was the norm, and some of us can remember guns being brought to school for "show and tell" or for hunting on the way home.
Change the law back. Full-size kirpans are fine for show-and-tell, small discrete kirpans should be fine for daily wear. The rest of us and the kids should be allowed our out-side-of-school daily wear knives as well. You do have a daily wear knife, don't you?
-
Banning all knives in school rather than banning the misuse of knives (etcetera) teaches what? That no one can be trusted and everyone must be controlled?
A number of us here remember a time when knife carry was the norm, and some of us can remember guns being brought to school for "show and tell" or for hunting on the way home.
Change the law back. Full-size kirpans are fine for show-and-tell, small discrete kirpans should be fine for daily wear. The rest of us and the kids should be allowed our out-side-of-school daily wear knives as well. You do have a daily wear knife, don't you?
Concealed means concealed.
And yes, I remember those better days. As recent as 1995, when I (and another student) carried a katana around my school all day and engaged in a full-speed choreographed duel with a classmate while recreating the death scene from Hamlet. The swords were pre-approved by the principal, but it just wasn't a big deal. It was well known that we were both experienced martial artists and swordsmen, and we exercised discipline, technique and control of the blades.
I'm A-OK with your suggestion on the principle that weapons themselves aren't bad.
I'm 100% opposed to some sort of judgement that "weapons are only okay if you have a religious compulsion to wear one." That way madness lies.
-
From the article:
The principal initially allowed the child to keep the sword but the Plymouth-Canton School District later determined the religious symbol resembled a weapon and was officially banned.
Key word is resembled. This is not a sword. This is not even a knife. This is a small knife shaped piece of metal with no edge. There's no reason, other then stupid fear of imagery to object to this.
If I wanted to start a fight I could point out that the Christian's symbol was used to kill someone. Not a great weapon but still lethal.
The whole idea that we should ban something that "resembles" a weapon is asinine in the extreme, and I'll support anyone that fights it anywhere.
-
I'm 100% opposed to some sort of judgement that "weapons are only okay if you have a religious compulsion to wear one." That way madness lies.
I would clarify that I agree with RedHawk's statement in regards to actual weapons.
Little weapons shaped chunks of symbolic metal? Not so much. Ideally the law/policy should read something like: "We know you're supposed to have a saber on you at all times, but this is a sensitive area. the three foot long actual swords not going to cut it here. Why don't you wear the optional 4" one with no edge."
And yes, adively should be able to carry a miniature, pot metal, non-firing 1911 repro to symbolize his faith in JMB, if he so chooses.
-
Concealed means concealed.
Carrying a weapon openly does not equal brandishing.
Just because you prefer concealed carry of pistols as your personal choice, does not make open-carry somehow illegitimate or wrong.
-
Carrying a weapon openly does not equal brandishing.
Just because you prefer concealed carry of pistols as your personal choice, does not make open-carry somehow illegitimate or wrong.
You're partially right about brandishing. My statement might be little over the top, except for the fact that walking with a sword does involve manipulation of the sword to avoid objects and other people since it's 3 feet long.
Watch bushido/iaido practictioners who carry a sword all day. They constantly fidget with it. Or the actors at a renaissance fair. They do, too. A sword requires constant manipulation, even when sheathed.
But, I'm splitting hairs here at this point.
I don't prefer concealed carry, by the way. I open carry whenever culture dictates it is acceptable to do so. And sometimes when I can help "stretch" culture's acceptance. =D And... sometimes I don't carry at all. Yep. Even me, Mr. Gung-ho gottahavagunallthetime.
-
You're partially right about brandishing. My statement might be little over the top, except for the fact that walking with a sword does involve manipulation of the sword to avoid objects and other people since it's 3 feet long.
But we're not talking about a sword. We're talking about something with no edge that is small enough a fourth-grader concealed it for a good long time. For crying out loud the Brits, home of you cant have a steak knife, let the Sikh kids wear one in school.
So does New York.
-
But we're not talking about a sword. We're talking about something with no edge that is small enough a fourth-grader concealed it for a good long time. For crying out loud the Brits, home of you cant have a steak knife, let the Sikh kids wear one in school.
So does New York.
And for better or worse, we don't allow toy guns in school either.
I fail to see how a religious test on either real or fake weapons should be permissible to allow some people to break the rules but not others.
It's exclusionary politics.
-
And for better or worse, we don't allow toy guns in school either.
I fail to see how a religious test on either real or fake weapons should be permissible to allow some people to break the rules but not others.
It's exclusionary politics.
Maybe, but it's something we have a long and storied history of doing. There's a whole hat full of religious exemptions from government rules and policies.
And I think, in actuality, they make sense. There's school (and work) dress codes that we make religious exemptions for, as well as various exemptions for prayer time and time off. And that's good. Unless the state can show an actual threat or harm that requires interfering we should let people practice their religion as they see fit. Wasn't that one of the whole points of this country?
I can see, and would support, if a Sikh child were pulling or actively disrupting class with his kirpan punishing him for disrupting class. But the report is that it was seen during some roughhousing that was so low key that he's not in trouble for rough housing. There's no harm here, and no valid reason for the state to interfere with his religion.
As far as the rule for the rest of us, it's stupid, but one of the tenets of our government is that one's religion is ...well sacred. Valid religious beliefs do, and have for the entire history of our country, let various stupid laws not apply to various groups.
Question: How do you feel about the Conscientious Objector exclusion to the draft?
I would also posit that our societies energy would be better spent getting rid of idiotic rules rather then forcing more people to comply with them, if we deside that exclusionary politics is so evil.
-
I think that if we cannot, for whatever reason, repeal a stupid and evil rule, we should create as many exemptions as possible.
-
So why are Sikh gangs dealing drugs in Vancouver if they're so morally exemplary?
-
So why are Sikh gangs dealing drugs in Vancouver if they're so morally exemplary?
Are you serious?
-
So why are Sikh gangs dealing drugs in Vancouver if they're so morally exemplary?
What does this have to do with what we were discussing?
-
So why are Sikh gangs dealing drugs in Vancouver if they're so morally exemplary?
Same reason Christian gangs have lynched blacks since Reconstruction.
-
From http://www.sikhs.org/art12.htm
To suggest that the Kirpan is a weapon is both incorrect and misleading. If it was instituted as a weapon, then would Sikhs not be expected to carry guns today?
You know, I really wouldn't think there was anything wrong with that if they were...
-
This Sikh website disagrees:
http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Kirpan
In 1699, Guru Gobind Singh told his Sikhs at the Baisakhi Amrit Sanchar to constantly and regularly wear a Kirpan at all times. This was an article of defence which together with the other 4 Kakars formed the external visible symbols to outwardly display ones commitment to the Hukam of the tenth master.
This injunction was primarily in order to protect the weak from tyranny and slavery, to maintain a state of harmony and security, to allow for the free development of trade, craftsmanship, arts & literature and to safeguard and protect the universal right of all beings to live their lives in a peaceful, stable and sheltered environment.
Carrying weapons to protect the weak from slavery seems to me to be an awesome thing.
The kirpan has both a physical function, as a defensive weapon, as well as a symbolic function. Physically it is an instrument of "Ahimsa" or non-violence. The principle of ahimsa is to actively prevent violence, not to simply stand by idly whilst violence is being done. To that end, the kirpan is a tool to be used to prevent violence from being done to a defenseless person when all other means to do so have failed.
-
There's school (and work) dress codes that we make religious exemptions for, as well as various exemptions for prayer time and time off. And that's good.
I disagree. It's not good at all. It's discriminatory, and it undermines the rule of law by making rules that only apply to special groups. That's not "equality", despite your attempt to spin it that way. It's "some, more equal groups of people are allowed to wear hats/carry knives/get extra breaks/etc but you, being a lesser caste, are not eligible to do those same things".
I have no problem with making it legal to carry knives in schools for EVERYONE so that the Sikh's can carry their ceremonial thingies. I have no problem with beards being allowed in the military so that Sikh's can serve. I do have a very big problem with Sikh's being allowed to do anything that white/atheist/CFSM aren't allowed to do.
-
This Sikh website disagrees:
http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Kirpan
Carrying weapons to protect the weak from slavery seems to me to be an awesome thing.
i have never heard of sikh-ism, but it seems they have this part of the kool-aid right.
Banning all knives in school rather than banning the misuse of knives (etcetera) teaches what? That no one can be trusted and everyone must be controlled?
A number of us here remember a time when knife carry was the norm, and some of us can remember guns being brought to school for "show and tell" or for hunting on the way home.
Change the law back. Full-size kirpans are fine for show-and-tell, small discrete kirpans should be fine for daily wear. The rest of us and the kids should be allowed our out-side-of-school daily wear knives as well. You do have a daily wear knife, don't you?
this goes back to the inanimate object being the evil, rather than the one weilding it.
-
I'm a Christian....and Jesus told his followers to carry a sword (the SD weapon of that historical period)....so all the gun/knife ban laws are infringing on my religious freedom (since pistols & knives are the SD weapons of this historical period).....
Best of luck to the Sikhs....win this suit, and the Christians can file one right behind you..... =D