Hi all,
Just a couple of things before I comment, I live in Canada and I consider myself a secular person and a skeptic.
In this weeks commentary the following was noted by Peter Donnelly
I found the comment struck a cord with me for a couple of reasons. First off the bit about the dagger, the dagger has to be sealed inside it's sheath making it very hard to be used as a weapon. I also wonder is Peter more concerned about a student having the right to have a religious symbol in school or that a dagger is a weapon. If he is concerned about students having religious symbols with them then schools should also ban wearing of crosses, head scarfs, yarmalukes and so on. I don't think that is the way to go.
I think the bit about RCMP head wear is just plain nonsense. I'm more worried about heads of state saying god bless every time they open their mouths declaring allegiance to a belief system rather than the secular state they represent.
Cheers!
Just a couple of things before I comment, I live in Canada and I consider myself a secular person and a skeptic.
In this weeks commentary the following was noted by Peter Donnelly
Your notice of the Alberta Hutterites claiming exemption from having picture ID did not tell the worst of it: their claim has now been recognized by the court. Sorry had to delete the link.
This kind of nonsense makes me glad I have escaped Canada, at least till the cost of health care in the U.S. drives me back again. Here in Washington State, my son is not allowed to carry a penknife to school, but in Canada the Supreme Court has recognized the "right" of Sikh children to carry daggers into the classroom. RCMP [Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the federal police] officers are also allowed to wear religious headgear, thus proclaiming that their primary allegiance is to a belief system rather than to the civil law that they are supposed to be enforcing.
In India, there are people whose religious beliefs require them to go naked. One wonders if the courts of Canada would also allow them to attend public schools or join the police force.
This kind of nonsense makes me glad I have escaped Canada, at least till the cost of health care in the U.S. drives me back again. Here in Washington State, my son is not allowed to carry a penknife to school, but in Canada the Supreme Court has recognized the "right" of Sikh children to carry daggers into the classroom. RCMP [Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the federal police] officers are also allowed to wear religious headgear, thus proclaiming that their primary allegiance is to a belief system rather than to the civil law that they are supposed to be enforcing.
In India, there are people whose religious beliefs require them to go naked. One wonders if the courts of Canada would also allow them to attend public schools or join the police force.
I found the comment struck a cord with me for a couple of reasons. First off the bit about the dagger, the dagger has to be sealed inside it's sheath making it very hard to be used as a weapon. I also wonder is Peter more concerned about a student having the right to have a religious symbol in school or that a dagger is a weapon. If he is concerned about students having religious symbols with them then schools should also ban wearing of crosses, head scarfs, yarmalukes and so on. I don't think that is the way to go.
I think the bit about RCMP head wear is just plain nonsense. I'm more worried about heads of state saying god bless every time they open their mouths declaring allegiance to a belief system rather than the secular state they represent.
Cheers!
