Sikh Garda not allowed to wear turban

bond-007 said:
Sikhs who wear Turbans need not wear crash helmets when they ride Motor Cycles or Scooters. They have been allowed to wear Turban as their only headgear. In accordance with the Motor-Cycle Crash Helmets (Religious Exemption) Act 1976 passed by the British Parliament in 1976, Section 2A "exempts any follower of the Sikh religion while he is wearing a turban" from having to wear a crash helmet.
Click to expand...

That's hilarious. First they pass a ridiculous law mandating that everybody has to wear a helmet when riding a motorcycle, then they have to pass an exemption if that happens to offend your religious sensibilities!
 
room305 said:
I do wonder about the choice of minister for this extremely unnecessary ministry. How much of it was motivated by a desire to salvage his reputation post-kebab incident ("What, me racist? Sure, wasn't I in charge of the Ministry for Integration").
Click to expand...
As I said at the time here on AAM whatever about that comment being ill judged I hardly think that it represented a racist slur.
 
That's unbelieveable, apart from costing a packet for insurance, it creates an us and them problem. It's like the right to walk topless in Ottawa - they had to amend laws to allow women to do it, and since it's been passed the people who were behind it haven't gone topless in the street, they said in a CBC interview that they wanted to do it as it needed to be done. I mean, come on, for the one good (joke) month a year, doesn't make sense!

bond-007 said:
In the UK:
Riding Motor Cycles

Sikhs who wear Turbans need not wear crash helmets when they ride Motor Cycles or Scooters. They have been allowed to wear Turban as their only headgear. In accordance with the Motor-Cycle Crash Helmets (Religious Exemption) Act 1976 passed by the British Parliament in 1976, Section 2A "exempts any follower of the Sikh religion while he is wearing a turban" from having to wear a crash helmet.
Click to expand...
 
Jaysus mountain and mole hill come to mind.
Just because a sikh garda is wearing a turban, we suddenly now will have Islamic women with burkas in the guards, followed by Arnott jersey wearing individuals. The last one could also be used undercover I suppose.

Since we are getting so santimonous about the garda uniform, maybe we should also look at what great Irish examples we have filling or should that overfilling their garda uniforms.

Anyway he can always get one of Trotter Independent Traders Sikh crash helmets for when there is a riot in Gorey, probably due to the blow-ins suffereing incredible neagtive equity.
 
Since we are getting so santimonous about the garda uniform, maybe we should also look at what great Irish examples we have filling or should that overfilling their garda uniforms.
Click to expand...

The point is its a uniform, not a garment of fashion. If you choose to join the guards, you are directed by there rules and regs. I don't understand what your point is regarding great irish examples overfilling their uniforms, should we let all and sundry decide whats best for us cause sure our fat guards are useless?. In fairness alot of the guards on the street don't meet that old sterotype anymore, if you took a spin round the training college you might be surprised at the levels of work being put in
 
Ceist Beag said:
I think Keelin Shanley made a good point last night on Prime Time - what about Catholics on Ash Wednesday? Currently they're allowed to have the ash on their forehead but surely this is a religious symbol? I'm all for one law for everyone but it has to be for everyone - not a case of some religions being more acceptable than others.
Click to expand...

Keelin Shanley is talking rubbish. Ash, dust or dirt on one's forehead or chin does not form part of one's dress, uniform or otherwise.

Why confuse uniforms and religious symbols in the first instance. Most religious symbols I can think of are not items of clothing. So what is the problem?
 
i dont agree with the ash on ash wednesday thing, but that is for one day, considering garda reserves (which this lad wanted to join) only do 8 hours a month couldnt he take it off for that short period of time?
 
This all comes down to whether you believe integration is either a one-way or two-way street...personally I believe the man in question should not be allowed wear his turban as the onus should be on him to adapt to our ways. Alternatively, as a Sikh avoid situations where you cannot wear the turban.
It is a difficult and emotive topic where it's hard to see if there is a right or wrong.
 
ClubMan said:
I don't see why special allowances/exceptions should be made for any religious clothing or other paraphenalia in this sort of situation to be honest. I don't consider this to be a racist or sectarian stance. Religious beliefs and affiliations are one's own personal business and should not impinge on such situations. If some people have beliefs that prevent them from making this separation between state secularism and personal religiosity then that's their own problem not the state's or its institutions'.
Click to expand...
This sums it up nicely.
ClubMan said:
Why exactly does what clothes other people choose to wear concern you [almo - I saw a Muslim woman wearing full cover (black) with gloves . .]?
Click to expand...
I don't think adults should be allowed to completely cover their face in public places, be it with a balaclava or a burqa.
ubiquitous said:
Keelin Shanley is talking rubbish. Ash, dust or dirt on one's forehead or chin does not form part of one's dress, uniform or otherwise.
Click to expand...
Agree with this.
room305 said:
I do wonder about the choice of minister for this extremely unnecessary ministry. How much of it was motivated by a desire to salvage his reputation post-kebab incident ("What, me racist? Sure, wasn't I in charge of the Ministry for Integration").

With this ministry and the various quangos it is sure to spawn, the very best we can hope for is that it will be completely ineffectual. In the worst case scenario, it actually prompts some kind of a backlash through its meddling. The more you run around shouting that everybody should ignore each other's differences the more you simply highlight that differences exist.
Click to expand...
The would-be minister's comments were buffoonery not racist. I assume that the ministry is one of 'Integration' rather than 'immigration' or 'multiculturalism' as the government realises that multiculturalism doesn't really work anywhere, and rather than the Irish bend over backwards to accommodate all comers the new Irish should endeavour to adjust to custom and practice here.
 
michaelm said:
The would-be minister's comments were buffoonery not racist. I assume that the ministry is one of 'Integration' rather than 'immigration' or 'multiculturalism' as the government realises that multiculturalism doesn't really work anywhere, and rather than the Irish bend over backwards to accommodate all comers the new Irish should endeavour to adjust to custom and practice here.
Click to expand...

I agree - I don't think they were racist either but the Orwellian-bent of a "Ministry for Integration" disturbs me greatly.
 
I understand Lenihan and Justice Ministry have rejected British multiculturalism and French integration and want to go for assimilation.

I don't understand the distinction between integration and assimilation. Is assimilation the US model?
 
I would support the decision of the Gardai not to allow the wearing of any religious symbols while on duty as a Garda. I think it is better that the Gardai represent only the force and not their own individual private faith/organization. I also hope a neo-nazi who lives down the road does not suceed in joining the Gardai and demand to display his swaztika armband while on duty.
 
almo said:
A woman has to have her face uncovered in the presence of Allah, also it is personal choice of covering to such extremes.
Click to expand...

First, it depends on the country and the interpretation:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6596933.stm

Secondly, there is no limit in the Qur'an itself to the amount of covering (which your original post implied). Indeed, it is the Hadith that discuss the amount of covering in much more detail.
 
bond-007 said:
(Religious Exemption) Act 1976 passed by the British Parliament in 1976, Section 2A "exempts any follower of the Sikh religion while he is wearing a turban" from having to wear a crash helmet.
Click to expand...
Isn't that religious bias against all non Sikhs - I assume one can take a case to the ECHR about it?
 
Killter said:
if you dont like the rules, go home. simple.simple.simple.
.
Click to expand...
Just like our Minister for Integration, Kebabs Lenihan, you are making the mistaking of assuming that a Sikh person is not already at home in Ireland.
 
I was quite open to the views of the Sikh community until, I heard a Sikh policeman on Prime Time's report from London say that he wears a turban because he "is a Sikh first and a policeman second".

Sorry, but when you join a police force, you are a policeman first and foremost!

To further clarify the point I am making, I wouldn't want a Garda with strong Catholic beliefs, putting his Catholic ethos first when dealing with me or my family, no more than I would be in favour of a Protestant or Hindhu or Muslim or Jewish Garda putting his religious beliefs first! In most police forces across the USA, religious symbols and dress are not allowed infringe on the standard issue uniform.

When you migrate to a country, you become a citizen of that country. This has been the bedrock of the USA, for over 200 years. The Irish, Italians, Greeks and other nationalities, when they went to the USA didn't try and retain or promote original languages, native dress and other traditions that would collide with the more pluralaistic values of their new country. England and France are examples where too much leniency has led to problems in later generations.

We are not being racist if we ask new migrants to adapt at least some of the long established values and standards of living that should be common to all citizens. All of us should be free to continue to practise our religions and other traditions in private and also invite each other to share these traditions at other times e.g. in multi-cultural schools where all our children should be educated together, religious festivals etc.

The Gardai have got the balance right.

Having travelled to other countries, especially Asia and the Middle East, I am only too aware of how intolerant these countries are to our traditions and even our codes of dress. We are given no choice, but, to conform! We used to have an Ireland like that!
 
carpedeum said:
When you migrate to a country, you become a citizen of that country. .....
We are not being racist if we ask new migrants to adapt at least some of the long established values and standards of living that should be common to all citizens.
Click to expand...
And what if the Sikhs in question are not migrants, and have (for example) been living here for a generation or two?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top