Supreme Courts Gets it Wrong Again!
Once again falling all over themselves in a fit of political correctness the SCC judges put the sensitivities of religious groups ahead of the public interest and security.
Apparently the justices can't seem to get their heads around the idea that religious freedom does not mean License to Flaunt the Law. So we have again been had by the SCC as they enact social policy through their liberal interpretation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms!
This is a DISGRACE and travesty of democracy! It is high time that our elected government put this unelected cabal of social engineers in their place!
See the article and try the link:
Excerpted from the CP article.....March 02/2006
OTTAWA (CP) - A Montreal school board went too far in imposing a blanket ban on the wearing of Sikh ceremonial daggers by students, says the Supreme Court of Canada.
In an 8-0 judgment, the court overturned a decision that barred teenager Gurbaj Singh Multani from wearing the dagger, known as a kirpan, to class.
The court said a total ban can't pass muster under the Charter of Rights, because the policy infringes on guarantees of religious freedom.
But the court left room for some restrictions to be imposed on the carrying of kirpans in the name of public safety.
A number of schools in British Columbia, Alberta and Ontario have long permitted the wearing of kirpans subject to certain conditions.
The rules often include a size limit on the dagger, or a requirement to keep it sheathed and to wear it under clothing and out of sight.
posted by OMMAG at 12:19 p.m.
5 Comments:
You mean "flout" not "flaunt." ;-)
Anyway, where's the freedom from religion if everyone can wear religious symbols even if they are deliberately offensive to others. Maybe I should wear my Mohammed the bomber T-shirt.
To Rob and Augur
I stand corrected...FLOUT as in blatantly and obviously disregard in a most disprespectfull way.
Facetiously ....I understand that It's possible to have a religion legitimized under Canadian law..... what excuse do I need to go about armed?
My point is that these SCC justices need to be straightened out about what their role in this democracy is.
But just on the principle of this ruling I think ....The school board was absolutely within its rights to view the kirpans as a threat to the peace and security of others. I have seen Sikhs FLAUNTING these ridiculous penis substitutes in efforts to intimidate others. I am well aware also that this is frowned on by the tenents of the belief and general good sense. Most Sikhs I've met demonstrate sound judgement, good nature and are disciplined in their behaviour. So do I and my children , yet the bleeding hearts would have an apoplectic fit if we showed up with concealed weapons regardless of our reasons!
Can Christians wear swords in sheaths?
Jesus said unto the apostles: "...he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one". (Luke 22:36)
Jesus instructed Peter: "...Put up thy sword into the sheath...". (John 18:11)
Jesus said: "...thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it". (Matthew 16:18)
"Facetiously ....I understand that It's possible to have a religion legitimized under Canadian law"
I think you need a critical mass though the mass doesn't have to be in Latin.
There's a point at which minority groups should compromise and accomodate. Allowing Sikhs to carry around metal kirpans into schools makes about as much sense as allowing other ethnic groups to have metal swords in their possession at all times because their ancestors did 500 or 1000 years ago. As someone whose heritage is Japanese, I could advance a completely bogus argument that I'm entitled to carry a sharp, 3 foot Samurai metal sword into public places because my ancestors did. I could also insist that others refrain from calling it a sword, since its proper Japanese term is daito - katana(long sword) or shoto - wakizashi (short sword). Now, I could advance an equally proposterous notion that I promise never to use the sword for violent purposes or draw it in public, because it is against the honour and principles of my Samurai ancestors. So what if the majority of Canadians don't agree with me and they don't like it when I wear the sword to concerts, schools, work or playgrounds? So what if they or their children feel threatened or are frightened by the presence of the sword in schools? Tough luck. Those who oppose me oughta live with MY heritage. My religion and personal liberties take precedence over the safety and personal sense of well-being of 32,000,000 other Canadians. In fact, my children and all descendants of the Samurai living in Canada should have the same right as me. Since the Supreme Court has granted the privledge to Sikhs to carry around a kirpan, then I should be able to carry a sword, sorry, I mean a daito.
Of course, the case I've advanced for carrying a sword is totally spurious. In modern society, a pointed metal object which represents a perceived danger to others (especially our children), has no place in our public spaces. A Sikh has about the same right to carry around a potentially dangrous metal kirpan as I do to carry a 3 foot Samurai sword. It simply doesn't belong in this time and place. This is not 15th century India nor medieval Japan. If it's that important to have a kirpan in their posession, then orthodox Sikhs should attach a small, labled, unconcealed, unremoveable facsimile with a blunted point and edge pasted to a belt instead. A Catholic cross or Bhuddist prayer beads don't become any less significant if they're made out of plastic as opposed to gold. Likewise if I need to publicly display my ancestral heritage, then I should wear a small pendant around my neck or crest made out of cloth. As for the samurai sword, if I had one, I'd keep it in a locked glass case high on a shelf out of the reach of any child.
Post a Comment
<< Home