DescentBB

I wonder if my kids could carry it to this school?

A Detroit-area district says it's allowing Sikh students to wear a small, religious dagger to school, MyFoxDetroit.com reports.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/02/01/mi ... er-school/

not ONLY is this a stupid ruling. one must wonder where the \"Separation of Church and State\" went by allowing religious symbols in school

Time for some Christian payback! Brother Maynard bring up the Holy Hand Grenade!!

On a serious note....this is PC at it's worst. White kids get suspended for drawing a picture of a gun or having a U.S. flag on his bicycle but some kid wearing a turban can bring his blade to school?!?
I bet Ossma bin Ladin could get an exemption to carry a sword onto a commercial airplane in Michigan.

I think it's time we ALL join Islam...and then proceed to ★■◆● it up real good until it resembles a Justin Beiber Fan Club meets FaceBook kind of thing!! Get enough white people in there and it will be up against the law in no time!!

I propose all catholic children wear their crucifix, sharpened of course to a dull point at the long end, over their outer clothing as evidence of their desire to fight isla....er Satan and all that is evil in the world.

Like their priests ?

If I was Sikh I'd go all out:



Forget the dagger. I want that wicked chrome mace and the ultra-hat.

Grendel wrote:Like their priests ?

Their priests have a poniard with a blunt end made just for a different sort of evil.

CUDA wrote:not ONLY is this a stupid ruling. one must wonder where the "Separation of Church and State" went by allowing religious symbols in school

That's...not what "separation of church and state" means. At all.

Will Robinson wrote:On a serious note....this is PC at it's worst. White kids get suspended for drawing a picture of a gun or having a U.S. flag on his bicycle but some kid wearing a turban can bring his blade to school?!?
I bet Ossma bin Ladin could get an exemption to carry a sword onto a commercial airplane in Michigan.

Ahh, and the age-old "PC" excuse gets raised again. Let's just ignore the fact that Sikhism and Islam are two completely different religions.

I think it's time we ALL join Islam...and then proceed to **** it up real good until it resembles a Justin Beiber Fan Club meets FaceBook kind of thing!! Get enough white people in there and it will be up against the law in no time!!

Yes, because this topic is totally about Islam.

Seriously, Will, did you actually graduate from high school?

CUDA wrote:one must wonder where the "Separation of Church and State" went by allowing religious symbols in school

One must wonder about your understanding of "Separation of Church and State": "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" and "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States". How does allowing a student exercise his religion conflict here ?

woodchip wrote:I propose all catholic children wear their crucifix, sharpened of course to a dull point at the long end, over their outer clothing as evidence of their desire to fight isla....er Satan and all that is evil in the world.

Already exists, ready made for action against any foe, albeit a little small.

Crucifix Knife

Top Gun wrote:...

Will Robinson wrote:On a serious note....this is PC at it's worst. White kids get suspended for drawing a picture of a gun or having a U.S. flag on his bicycle but some kid wearing a turban can bring his blade to school?!?
I bet Ossma bin Ladin could get an exemption to carry a sword onto a commercial airplane in Michigan.

Ahh, and the age-old "PC" excuse gets raised again. Let's just ignore the fact that Sikhism and Islam are two completely different religions.

I think it's time we ALL join Islam...and then proceed to **** it up real good until it resembles a Justin Beiber Fan Club meets FaceBook kind of thing!! Get enough white people in there and it will be up against the law in no time!!

Yes, because this topic is totally about Islam.

Seriously, Will, did you actually graduate from high school?

Yes, in fact that is one of the places where I learned to recognize relevance and form analogies and use them in a discussion.

No, it isn't about Islam, it is all about PC, specifically in Michigan and if you knew anything about PC in Michigan you would know there is a whole lot of PC gone wild up there and you would know there are a whole lot of Muslims up there and then armed with that knowledge you could, if you were even borderline clever, have recognized the nature of my comments were not about Islam like you assumed, but rather they were about PC, the way white guilt liberals react with it as a form of self absolution and the way it doesn't matter if you are Sikh or Muslim it only matters that you are not white therefore you get to bring your knife to school but the white kids better not even think of such things.

then I went off on the whole if you can't beat 'em, join 'em routine which is not a bad idea really. After all we westerners have found diluting and morphing religion to suit our sense of justice and flexible morality to be one of our best and strongest contributions to the quality of modern life!

Grendel wrote:

CUDA wrote:one must wonder where the "Separation of Church and State" went by allowing religious symbols in school

One must wonder about your understanding of "Separation of Church and State": "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" and "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States". How does allowing a student exercise his religion conflict here ?

It is the famed separation that is wielded like a battle ax to keep bibles and christmas trees etc. out of school. He's just asking where the consistency of applying the law is. Do you think there is no double standard at work here?!?

You know what's funny? I know someone whose line of work encompasses behavioral and sociological research, and according to him, \"political correctness\" as any sort of blanket statement doesn't exist. Literally, when researchers have done studies on what people mean when they use the term, just about everyone has their own individual definition of it, to the point where there's no consensus. So when I see people slinging \"zomg PC!\" around, I have to stop and wonder what they actually mean, because it's essentially a phrase without any accepted definition.

So tell me, Will, what do you mean when you say \"PC gone wild\"? Sounds like a late-night infomercial to me.

Edit: And no, there's no double-standard here at all. The school isn't supporting any religion by allowing for the knives, simply allowing for the free exercise thereof. That sort of sounds exactly like the First Amendment to me.

Top Gun wrote:You know what's funny? I know someone whose line of work encompasses behavioral and sociological research, and according to him, "political correctness" as any sort of blanket statement doesn't exist. Literally, when researchers have done studies on what people mean when they use the term, just about everyone has their own individual definition of it, to the point where there's no consensus. So when I see people slinging "zomg PC!" around, I have to stop and wonder what they actually mean, because it's essentially a phrase without any accepted definition.

So tell me, Will, what do you mean when you say "PC gone wild"? Sounds like a late-night infomercial to me.

Well give up the box-that-talks-with-pictures for a few late nights and examine my comments in the context of this discussion and I'm betting you can figure out what definition for PC I'm working from. It's all relatively OBVIOUS AS CAN BE if you are really trying to understand. If, on the other hand, you are just trolling then you have earned your cookie already so quit begging for more.

Top Gun wrote:...
Edit: And no, there's no double-standard here at all. The school isn't supporting any religion by allowing for the knives, simply allowing for the free exercise thereof. That sort of sounds exactly like the First Amendment to me.

So if children can't bring Christian religious props to school because allowing it implies the state school supports a particular religion (their explanation not mine)...but they can bring their Sikh dagger because it is a religious prop...that doesn't seem like a double standard?!? And you questioned my education?!? Lol!!

I can see where the free expression of religion can be acceptable on school grounds, but not in this case. The school also has a responsibility to protect the students during school hours, and it’s kind of a stretch to assume you have the right to practice your religion outside of the proper context or on public property.

Constitutional rights are not absolutes.

If the law forbids knives in school, then that’s the law, freedom of religion cannot be used to circumvent that law.

You have to draw the line when it comes to student safety.

Spidey is correct, IMO.

- Christian student brings Bible to school: Protected by First Amendment.

- Muslim student brings prayer mat to school: Protected by First Amendment.

- Sikh student brings religious dagger to school: Overridden by school policy against weapons (or should be).

This is absolutely ridiculous. The dagger is a WEAPON whether it has cute little sikh designs on it or My Little Pony etched on it is irrelevant.

There should be no double standards. NO WEAPONS in school!

Will Robinson wrote:Well give up the box-that-talks-with-pictures for a few late nights and examine my comments in the context of this discussion and I'm betting you can figure out what definition for PC I'm working from. It's all relatively OBVIOUS AS CAN BE if you are really trying to understand. If, on the other hand, you are just trolling then you have earned your cookie already so quit begging for more.

roffle. If I thought it was worth it to troll here, I would do far better than that. But no, Will, when your paragraph uses the abbreviation "PC" like five times in as many sentences, and then makes a ridiculous hyperbole at the end, I don't really know where you're coming from.

Will Robinson wrote:So if children can't bring Christian religious props to school because allowing it implies the state school supports a particular religion (their explanation not mine)...but they can bring their Sikh dagger because it is a religious prop...that doesn't seem like a double standard?!? And you questioned my education?!? Lol!!

Links or it didn't happen. And if that really was their explanation for a particular event, I'd most likely count said action as equally stupid.

Regarding student safety, the article seemed to establish that the knives in question are dulled, being only ceremonial in nature. If you want to get technical, even a spork can dish out some damage.

A \"dulled\" knife still makes a good stabbing weapon. The physics are there.

Yes, and so does a fork. Your point?

(Also, I dunno about your house, but the butter knives around here can barely even cut butter.)

Grendel wrote:

CUDA wrote:one must wonder where the "Separation of Church and State" went by allowing religious symbols in school

One must wonder about your understanding of "Separation of Church and State":

OH PUUHLEEESE. I have an excellent understanding of the Seperation of Church and state better than many here.

Grendle your trolling you know EXACTLY what I mean't

.

CUDA wrote:Grendle your trolling you know EXACTLY what I mean't

Nope. Your comment looks stupid to me, very much like blunt "trolling by prejudice". Maybe it would help if you explain what you ment ?

The purpose of the "dagger" is to be a religious icon, it's not a weapon. Of course it could be abused to be one -- just like any object that someone has at hand. I'm sure the process of allowing it to school was more than a 5min consideration, that and from what I know about Sikhism I don't see a problem by allowing a student to wear it. Banning that thing is as dumb as banning a cross for representing a torture device.

Edit: to clear that up -- I was talking about the dull one from the article.

The Kirpan (English pronunciation: /kɪərˈpɑːn/; Punjabi: ਕਿਰਪਾਨ kirpān) is a sword or dagger carried only by Baptized Sikhs. According to a mandatory religious commandment given by Guru Gobind Singh (the tenth Guru of Sikhism) at the Baisakhi Amrit Sanchar (a holy religious ceremony that formally baptizes a Sikh) in CE 1699, all baptised Sikhs (Khalsa) must wear a kirpan at all times.

Historically, the kirpan was a defensive weapon, worn on a cloth belt called a Gatra. It was one of the five Kakars which displayed commitment to the Hukam of the tenth master and identified a Khalsa Sikh.

The kirpan is both a defensive weapon and a symbol. 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. Symbolically, the kirpan represents the power of truth to cut through untruth

I wonder why no one has mention the carrying of the symbol in schools in New York where students were made to used adhesives and to make the kirpan impossible to draw. It has been ruled on twice once New York and in once Oho before this case. Face it, it's unconstitutional to take a religious right from someone unless your are a Christian wanting to practice your faith in school then it's ok to take their right away.

http://augustafreepress.com/2011/02/01/ ... esolution/

Oh please, spare me the \"persecuted majority\" speech. That particular case involves a prayer being broadcast before a football game, which can be viewed as the school endorsing that particular religious belief. It's a fundamentally different situation from individual students being allowed to display symbols of their own faith.

Top Gun, there is more than just saying prayers:

\"A school told a child to remove a Christian cross she was wearing even though it lets Sikh children wear bangles as part of their religion.

Lauren Grimshaw-Brown was told to take off a necklace with a cross on it because of health and safety fears.

But the eight-year-old's furious mother has accused the school of double standards because they allow children following other faiths to wear jewellery on religious grounds.\"

\"Last Thursday, an announcement at Mann Middle School warned students they aren't allowed to wear the rosary in public view during school hours. On Monday, the school sent out an e-mail to parents reminding that if their children wear a rosary, it must be underneath the shirt.\"

\"In Rhode Island last June, eight-year-old David Morales wore a hat to school with an American flag on it and with toy soldiers (representing American soldiers) as a way of honoring U.S. troops. The hat was banned.\"

\"In Texas City,Texas, last May, Christian Thompson was prohibited from wearing a cross at Blocker Middle School\"

\"The New District High School in San Fernando, California, has banned crosses (as symbols of torture), WWJD (\"What Would Jesus Do?\") bracelets, and “Choose the Right” rings worn by LDS members. The Christian Bible has also been banned from the school library.\"

Want me to go on?

No, because I already said earlier in the thread that I find those actions to be equally idiotic as banning a Sikh from wearing that knife. I mean, what do you want me to tell you?

When you said:

\"Oh please, spare me the \"persecuted majority\" speech.\"

I thought you might be ignoring the disparity in what the Sikhs were allowed and what the Christians were allowed.

I'm not ignoring the disparities noted in these specific cases, but what I have observed is that there's a not-insignificant percentage of Christians who see far more disparity than actually exists. Christianity is obviously the majority culture in the United States, and when you're part of said majority, it's a lot harder to see that the minorities are coming from an inherently-disadvantaged position. It's very easy to cry \"Persecution!\" when a pre-game prayer that 90% of the student population has no problem with is declared unconstitutional, but the intent of said judgments is to protect the rights of that 10% minority against the \"tyranny\" of the majority (\"tyranny\" being used in the very loosest sense).

CUDA wrote:I wonder if my kids could carry it to this school?

Forget knives. List "NRA" as your religion, and get around the stupid "only criminals can have guns" restriction.