Please, try to fit in!
I couldn’t believe it yesterday when I heard the news.
The Supreme Court of Canada has ACTUALLY decided to allow Gurbaj Singh Multani, a Sikh student attending school on the Montréal Island in Québec, to wear his religiously-imposed dagger/knife (called a kirpan) and to carry it on himself at school. The Marguerite-Bourgeoys school board, which is responsible for many West Island schools including the one we’re talking about here, had previously barred the Sikh teen from carrying his kirpan on school grounds, rightly fearing for the safety of other students.
According to the CBC, "[…] Parents signed petitions, picketed and kept their children home from school. They said it was too dangerous for them to go to school with a child carrying what was seen as a potentially dangerous weapon. Singh eventually changed schools, but his family took his case to court." Where they actually kind of lost their case. "In May 2002, the Quebec Superior Court ruled that the kirpan could be worn at school, but that it would have to be sheathed in a wooden case, wrapped in heavy fabric and worn under the clothes, the belt sewn into Singh’s clothes. [But] In 2004, the Quebec Appeal Court struck down the decision. It concluded the article of faith has all the physical characteristics of a weapon and was therefore dangerous to everyone in the school. It said banning the kirpan was a hindrance to freedom of religion, but that community safety and security came first."
I don’t do it often, but I really have to praise my home province’s courts on that one. Seems they have a much better head on their shoulders than the Supreme Court of Canada. But now, thanks to the SCoC, everything has been turned upside down and a Sikh teen will have the right to wear a dangerous dagger in school. But that’s not what I’m all upset about. What angers me the most in that whole affair, is that in this "multicultural" country, we’re always the ones who have to push our traditions and beliefs aside to make place for those of immigrants, when, obviously, the opposite should be happening. You don’t immigrate to a country and then start shaping its rules so they fit you, you must adapt to those rules. Why did you choose to come here in the first place? You must try as much as possible to blend in. If you don’t, you won’t. But unfortunately for dyed-in-the-wool Canadians, it seems Canada thinks this way of viewing things is too American (and therefore automatically bad), as the melting-pot immigration philosophy would certainly solve many of those problems. You see, an immigrant coming to the U.S. HAS to adapt in order to fit in. If he doesn’t, he’ll never be able to work and live like other Americans.
Plus, the U.S. value homogeneity in their population. Here in Canada, where we’re so proud or our multicultural way of viewing things, we have actually become way too tolerant, now we’re the ones whose freedoms, rules and traditions are at stake. Not the immigrants’, as they’re too well-protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights. Ours, in contrary, don’t seem to be. If my life goes according to plan and I do move to the United States after my university studies, do you think I’ll be describing myself as a Québecer or Canadian when I’ll meet someone there, ask for bilingual service in English and French wherever I’ll go and insist on implementing the tradition of Boxing Day every December 26th? No, I’ll be an American, and I’ll try as much as possible to fit in. If I don’t want to fit in, then doesn’t it make sense that I simply stay here? Well that’s how I see things. You want to immigrate, fine. You’re welcome here. But please try as much as possible to be like the people here. Don’t ask for special rights because of your religion, ethnicity or whatever. You’re the newcomer here. We are not. We run this place and you’re going to have to adapt, not the other way around. Learn the language, do as we do. But don’t try and shape the place like your former country. If you liked it so much, then why the hell did you come here? That should be our stance on immigration. And no, it’s really not harsh or anything. It’s just normal and calls for common sense.
But we let everything fly. We’re way too tolerant, and it’s really "unpolitically correct" to even dare to think about criticizing an immigrant in Canada, even if they’re the ones who are shooing us. Americans don’t have that problem. They band and stand together. If an American says he/she stands against all immigration, they’re not going to censor him/her. Sure, that person is going to get weird looks, and people are going to hate him/her for saying what he/she did, but it’s nothing compared to the PC-fueled mayhem we have to cope with up here. You can’t even say anything anymore!
Try saying you’re against immigration in Canada and see where that gets you. Now I’m merely using that as an example, I am really not against immigration, I believe it reinforces the fabric of our society. But it’d work out better if Canada used the American melting-pot approach. To fit in, you have to want to fit in.
And that’s just great.
—
I have no religion which, according to the Supreme Court, gives me fewer rights than a person who is crazy enough to believe in an unproved god and carry a knife. What’s next? An unarmed jewish student surrounded by armed Moslems who believe killing an infidel will send them to heaven.
Comment by Jim — March 3, 2006 @ 6:15 pm
I have no religion either.
You are right, where will all this stop? Where is it going to end? We can’t know for sure! It’s quite frightening when you think about it…
Comment by Xavier R. Dubé — March 3, 2006 @ 7:33 pm
Has a kirpan ever been used as a weapon?
I’m not aware of any incidents where one has been used as a weapon.
Comment by David Simpson — March 3, 2006 @ 8:46 pm
No, it has not. However, it could be. But that’s not my main beef with the whole thing. What irritates me the most is that immigrants are changing the already established rules in this country and that we don’t stand for them. They should adapt to us, not the opposite.
Comment by Xavier R. Dubé — March 3, 2006 @ 9:03 pm
No sorry super duper “X”, but I don’t follow you there. A governement has no right tell people which religion is right or not. Is Christianism right? Is Islam right? I dont know. Just who are we to decide for other people’s choices, eh? If you want Canada to be really multicultural, then respect other people’s religions!
Oh, and I can tell you about 1047017 ways to kill someone (some are untested though) in a school… if you really want to kill someone, you don’t need a kirpan. You need a bear trap, ropes, and a spring. Or eXplosives. Or a mix of explosive and bear traps!
I now have 1047018 ways to kill someone in a school hehe…
Nah, seriously, I see this decision like the Karla Homolka thing : “Oh no, Karla is free! we’re all gonna die! Even if I live 500km away, and that I don’t know her at all, and that she doesn’t even know that I exist, she will kill me! (running everywhere panicking)”
If you like paranoia, cut in people’s civil rights, go around. As for me, I don’t care at all, I don’t wear a kirpan…
Comment by PL — March 4, 2006 @ 1:07 am
“…the already established rules in this country…”
The “already established rule” is that kirpans are ok. Quebec is just a few years behind the rest of the country wrt this issue. Your comments re immigrants can be extrapolated in many directions, as we are a country of immigrants. I suspect that baseball bats have done more physical damage than kirpans.
Comment by richard — March 4, 2006 @ 10:57 am
Richard and PL, see comment # 4 above for clarification of my position.
Why do you think “the already established rule” allows the wearing of kirpans in school in Canada? Possibly because immigrants coming here are now trying to shape the country so it fits their views, and we’re so tolerant we actually accept that! Never forget that they are the ones who should adapt to us, and NOT THE OPPOSITE. That’s the main problem I have with the SCoC’s decision, not the fact that kirpans are knives which are dangerous and should be kept away from school grounds. I could care less, as, like you say, “baseball bats have done more physical damage than kirpans.”
And it’s true. It’s the lack of principle we show behind occulting our own rules and traditions to make way for THEIRS that infuriates me! Not too long ago, immigrants wanted Koranic law (Charia) to be imposed in Ontario! Now they’re secretly plotting on how to legalize polygamy so the province can make new immigrants that are used to these kinds of practices feel more at home! I don’t give a fuck about polygamy, but I have a problem with the fact that it’s come to the point that you can’t retain any rights anymore in this country if you’re not part of a visible minority!
No matter how you try to spin it, it has become true. We’re not standing up and immigrants are ruling us in our own home!
Comment by Xavier R. Dubé — March 4, 2006 @ 5:23 pm
Xavier Dube, forget about kirpans for a while.
You are white person of European origin. Why don’t you go back to where your ancestors came from? If the Sikhs and their culture don’t belong in Canada, neither do you and your culture. And neither do I with my culture!
Comment by John Holmes — March 8, 2006 @ 4:23 am
Once again,
I never said that the Sikhs and other cultures weren’t welcome in Canada. I said that they were not to change the rules which are there for the majority, as it should be. Plus, I can’t go “back” to where my ancestors came from as I’ve never set foot there in the first place.
*Sigh*
My position remains the same.
Comment by Xavier R. Dubé — March 8, 2006 @ 9:05 pm
Well, most Sikh children in Canada cannot go back to India, because they have never been there. In modern Canada, we allow difference. We let the Francophones in Quebec be Francophones, even though they are in the minority. We don’t force them to use English, just because there are more of us and our ancestors won control of what is now Canada.
That some in Quebec would deny the Sikhs the freedom to do things differently from the majority of Canadians seems like hypocrisy to me.
Comment by John Holmes — March 9, 2006 @ 12:10 am
John,
You’re the one who brought up that going “back” thing in the first place. I did not use that kind of language in my post. It IS racist to suggest anyone should go “back” to where they came from - and especially if it’s not the case -. And I disagree with your point of view on your Québec comparison. Remember the TWO founding peoples of Canada? The French, and the British. Therefore, we are entitled to specific rights in that country. Hell, we were even here FIRST! Your comparison doesn’t stand. Our French culture and traditions have been comprised in the Canadian identity for hundreds of years and are an historic part of Canada. Not the Sikhs’.
And if we actually encouraged the blending in of newcomers like the U.S. and not multiculturalism like the Trudeauist vision of Canada does, we probably wouldn’t be here talking about this today.
Comment by Xavier R. Dubé — March 9, 2006 @ 12:46 am
So, because your ancestors got to this piece of earth before the Sikhs (and they were here before 1910), your traditions and culture count for more?
Well, I disagree. And as far as multiculturism goes, I think (just my opinion!) Canada is better of that way — precisely because it was settled by two different and at times mutually antagonistic peoples: the French and the English.
And even though the US encourages blending in, that does not mean they ban ALL kirpans in schools. They don’t.
Comment by John Holmes — March 9, 2006 @ 7:03 pm
Let’s agree to disagree then.
But I never said any culture counted for more than another. On an international basis, they’re all equal to me. I was merely using that example to demonstrate that it is the newcomers who must adapt to their new country and not the opposite. My whole message is based on that alone.
Comment by Xavier R. Dubé — March 13, 2006 @ 10:38 am