School district allows religous daggers!!

[Nova]

You know, as a religious person who is also a humanist, I often consider this issue - b/c, honestly, if I felt humans were actually better off without religion, I would let it go very easily. But non-magical, rational state-controlled violence is just as deadly, and often more efficient. In that, I pause.

The vacuum left by "magical thinking" would likely be filled with something just as nasty, b/c, basically, humans are rotten creatures - we have tremendous capacity of violence and cruelty and prejudice. So, I guess we may as well keep something that does give important emotional and identity structures to so many, b/c what can we really expect in the place of it? Reason? Zyklon-B and the H-Bomb? For me, neither is all that compelling an alternative.

Granted, all extremism and fervent sectarianism is troubling to me, as someone who generally abhors conflict. (Despite the way I seem to be arguing here, I normally don't bother to do so.)

I would love it if violent people just didn't exist, and we all ran around on grassy hills, singing, like a Coke commercial. But, as it is, I will take those lovely moments of "going okay" between periods of crapulance, and not try to say who should give up what, as I can't honestly say what anyone should give up.

So, I guess one can say I am a devote middle-pather, with no answers whatsoever. You're all very welcome.

Given the discussion thus far, one would expect that I would have numerous arguments with this post. Surprisingly, I have none.

There is no question that reason can run amok--or more properly, faulty reasoning is employed to excuse the actions of people who have been run amok by their emotions.

I am not opposed to magical thinking and I readily admit to indulging in my own magical beliefs. But I think a healthy society can only be one in which the difference between faith and reason are understood, and each is allowed to temper the other. That isn't what you get when half the people think the world is 6,000 years old.

So I have no problem saying to Sikhs, the world has changed quite a bit since 1699. Schooling has changed immensely in the years since, and children now attend public schools in which there are far more children to be supervised by each teacher than there were in 1699. Sorry, but your kid has to leave the weapon at home.

(And, yes, I recognize the irony of picking on kirpans in a country like the U.S., where far too many children have access to handguns.)

 

[WhyaDuck?]

And I had removed my post, recognizing the silliness of arguing against arguing. :crazy:

(I normally try to not harp so much, so I decided that that pontificating naval gazing speech of mine was, with credit to Brewer & Shipley, "one post over the line.")

 

[Nova]

And I had removed my post, recognizing the silliness of arguing against arguing. :crazy:

(I normally try to not harp so much, so I decided that that pontificating naval gazing speech of mine was, with credit to Brewer & Shipley, "one post over the line.")

Whya, I will remove the quote from my post if you ask me to do so.

But I will do so with regret, because I think you make a number of important arguments. I don't see the post as "arguing against arguing," but as a necessary rejoinder to my argument, reminding us that "reason" has not proved a panacea for all human ills.

Your choice, but I think you criticize yourself too harshly...

 

[WhyaDuck?]

Whya, I will remove the quote from my post if you ask me to do so.

But I will do so with regret, because I think you make a number of important arguments. I don't see the post as "arguing against arguing," but as a necessary rejoinder to my argument, reminding us that "reason" has not proved a panacea for all human ills.

Your choice, but I think you criticize yourself too harshly...

That's fine, Nova.

And I don't judge myself all that harshly - I generally can't bring myself to judge anyone. That's one of my greatest charms and saddest weaknesses.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Because I think fundamentalism (note the lower case "f") is intellectually lazy. And generally goes hand-in-hand with sexism, racism, xenophobia and, not uncommonly, child abuse.

There, I said it. Not PC, but I think the evidence of the world backs me up.

I don't see holding strong in your faith (popular or not) as intellectually lazy.
JMO

I see it as being strong and holding onto what you believe. I don't think people should "bend" to make anybody else happy.

 

[Nova]

I don't see holding strong in your faith (popular or not) as intellectually lazy.
JMO

I see it as being strong and holding onto what you believe. I don't think people should "bend" to make anybody else happy.

And I don't think fundamentalism (still small "f") is the only way to stay strong in your faith. More often, it's just an excuse to go through the motions or to express one's fear of change and force others to do things your way and only your way.

Regardless of our belief system, we all worship (or refuse to worship) the God of an infinite universe with more stars and planets than there are grains of sand on earth. With phenomena as varied and miraculous as supernovas and black holes, but also spiderwebs and snowflakes.

To insist that this infinite God demands that children wear knives to school isn't just arrogant (though it certainly is that), it's blasphemy. (And if I have misunderstood Sikh theology (entirely possible) and the kirpan is not required by God Himself, then there's even less excuse for clinging to the custom.)

 

[WhyaDuck?]

And I don't think fundamentalism (still small "f") is the only way to stay strong in your faith. More often, it's just an excuse to go through the motions or to express one's fear of change and force others to do things your way and only your way.

Regardless of our belief system, we all worship (or refuse to worship) the God of an infinite universe with more stars and planets than there are grains of sand on earth. With phenomena as varied and miraculous as supernovas and black holes, but also spiderwebs and snowflakes.

To insist that this infinite God demands that children wear knives to school isn't just arrogant (though it certainly is that), it's blasphemy. (And if I have misunderstood Sikh theology (entirely possible) and the kirpan is not required by God Himself, then there's even less excuse for clinging to the custom.)

For the Sikhs, G-d reveals his will through the Gurus, and the kirpan was mandated by the tenth guru, Guru Gobind Singh. So, it's kind of a Protestant notion to say that revelation brought through a guru is not G-d's will because it is mediated through an authority.

ETA: Though, I will say, I agree with your nuance of fundamentalism, and this is certainly not the only way to be devoted. It is also not exactly synonymous with orthodoxy or orthopraxy, IMO.

 

[Nova]

For the Sikhs, G-d reveals his will through the Gurus, and the kirpan was mandated by the tenth guru, Guru Gobind Singh. So, it's kind of a Protestant notion to say that revelation brought through a guru is not G-d's will because it is mediated through an authority.

I didn't say that. I was merely allowing that I might not understand the exact nature of the requirement from a Sikh's point of view. If they believe it is God's will as revealed by a prophet, fine by me.

Now it's time to consider that the God of an infinite universe might have had a thought or two since 1699.

(ETA Sorry I hit "quote" before you added your ETA, with which I agree wholeheartedly.)

 

[WhyaDuck?]

I didn't say that. I was merely allowing that I might not understand the exact nature of the requirement from a Sikh's point of view. If they believe it is God's will as revealed by a prophet, fine by me.

Now it's time to consider that the God of an infinite universe might have had a thought or two since 1699.

(ETA Sorry I hit "quote" before you added your ETA, with which I agree wholeheartedly.)

BBM

You're correct. The final guru (after the ten human gurus) is Guru Granth Sahib, which are the texts of Sikhism, which replaced the authority of the human gurus, and places authority with the community, itself. I suppose an orthodox Sikh could say since the community has not decided definitively to set aside the kirpan that G-d's will is that it should be kept.

But I will agree there is some room in Sikhism for negotiation of these traditions, which would be up to them. I am just not nervous enough about the kirpan to find it needed, I guess.

ETA: I should note that all of this is based on my woefully weak understanding of Sikh tradition, so my apologies to anyone reading who is shaking their head over my errors, etc.

 

[Nova]

BBM

You're correct. The final guru (after the ten human gurus) is Guru Granth Sahib, which are the texts of Sikhism, which replaced the authority of the human gurus, and places authority with the community, itself. I suppose an orthodox Sikh could say since the community has not decided definitively to set aside the kirpan that G-d's will is that it should be kept.

But I will agree there is some room in Sikhism for negotiation of these traditions, which would be up to them. I am just not nervous enough about the kirpan to find it needed, I guess.

ETA: I should note that all of this is based on my woefully weak understanding of Sikh tradition, so my apologies to anyone reading who is shaking their head over my errors, etc.

"In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king."

You've been our one-eyed man here today.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

I found this entire article a very interesting read.

http://www.becketfund.org/index.php/article/367.html

Snipped:
For peacefully observing the commands of his Sikh faith, fifteen-year-old Amandeep Singh was suspended for eight school days last month from his school in the Greenburgh Central School District in Westchester County, New York. Despite the ninth-grade honor student's exemplary academic and disciplinary records, Principal Michael Chambless initially determined that Amandeep's kirpan, an element of Sikh religious expression, was a "weapon" and suspended him.

Amandeep became a baptized Sikh at age eight, requiring him, like 20 million other Sikhs worldwide, to follow the five Sikh articles of faith. The best known of these is the requirement to wear hair uncut in a turban. Another requirement is the kirpan, an item shaped like a sword that reminds Sikhs of their duty to speak out against injustice and stand up for the defenseless. In deference to school security concerns, school-age children like Amandeep typically wear a very small, blunt kirpan that cannot be used to harm anyone.


Also snipped:

"Such a ban would have been especially unfortunate because schools do allow students to handle numerous items much more dangerous than a kirpan such as scissors, mathematical compasses, screwdrivers, and baseball bats. Moreover, a recent Canadian study revealed that there has never been a single reported incident of kirpan-related violence in any North American school."


BBM
***much more at link***

 

[Nova]

I found this entire article a very interesting read.

http://www.becketfund.org/index.php/article/367.html

Snipped:
For peacefully observing the commands of his Sikh faith, fifteen-year-old Amandeep Singh was suspended for eight school days last month from his school in the Greenburgh Central School District in Westchester County, New York. Despite the ninth-grade honor student's exemplary academic and disciplinary records, Principal Michael Chambless initially determined that Amandeep's kirpan, an element of Sikh religious expression, was a "weapon" and suspended him.

Amandeep became a baptized Sikh at age eight, requiring him, like 20 million other Sikhs worldwide, to follow the five Sikh articles of faith. The best known of these is the requirement to wear hair uncut in a turban. Another requirement is the kirpan, an item shaped like a sword that reminds Sikhs of their duty to speak out against injustice and stand up for the defenseless. In deference to school security concerns, school-age children like Amandeep typically wear a very small, blunt kirpan that cannot be used to harm anyone.


Also snipped:

"Such a ban would have been especially unfortunate because schools do allow students to handle numerous items much more dangerous than a kirpan such as scissors, mathematical compasses, screwdrivers, and baseball bats. Moreover, a recent Canadian study revealed that there has never been a single reported incident of kirpan-related violence in any North American school."


BBM
***much more at link***

Kimberly, I realize the fact that wearing the kirpan is a rule is very significant to you. But to me, men makes rules and they can make a new one. I do however think this business of lengthy suspensions for every offense has gotten out of control. Whatever happened to simply confiscating something and telling the kid not to bring it back to school?

I realize there are necessarily other objects at school that can be turned into weapons, but that is not their primary purpose.

Sikhs are relatively few in number, and we've already seen sources that say the majority do NOT wear the actual dagger to school (but wear a symbolic replica instead). So the fact that no kirpan has been used in an incident of school violence yet isn't too surprising; but it doesn't change the principle.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Kimberly, I realize the fact that wearing the kirpan is a rule is very significant to you. But to me, men makes rules and they can make a new one. I do however think this business of lengthy suspensions for every offense has gotten out of control. Whatever happened to simply confiscating something and telling the kid not to bring it back to school?

I realize there are necessarily other objects at school that can be turned into weapons, but that is not their primary purpose.

Sikhs are relatively few in number, and we've already seen sources that say the majority do NOT wear the actual dagger to school (but wear a symbolic replica instead). So the fact that no kirpan has been used in an incident of school violence yet isn't too surprising; but it doesn't change the principle.

ETA: While many think Jesus was "just a man" I disagree. And I pay close attention to the red words in my Bible. So, if the red words told me to wear something at all times, I would.
Sikh believe the guru requires them to wear it. IMO it's the same thing. I don't think they look at the guru as being "just a man" who made up a rule.

Confiscating something a child believes he must wear at all times would be cruel. IMO
I don't think we've seen sources that say the majority do NOT wear the actual dagger. I missed that.

 

[Nova]

ETA: While many think Jesus was "just a man" I disagree. And I pay close attention to the red words in my Bible. So, if the red words told me to wear something at all times, I would.
Sikh believe the guru requires them to wear it. IMO it's the same thing. I don't think they look at the guru as being "just a man" who made up a rule.

Confiscating something a child believes he must wear at all times would be cruel. IMO
I don't think we've seen sources that say the majority do NOT wear the actual dagger. I missed that.

Check the Wiki link. I understand Wiki isn't gospel (pun intended), but it suggests there are many alternatives to the actual dagger worn in 1699.

I believe Jesus said something about "rendering unto Caesar." Well, nowadays, Caesar has a law against weapons at school.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Check the Wiki link. I understand Wiki isn't gospel (pun intended), but it suggests there are many alternatives to the actual dagger worn in 1699.

I believe Jesus said something about "rendering unto Caesar." Well, nowadays, Caesar has a law against weapons at school.

Alternatives for SOME. But if they believe in wearing the literal dagger, who are we to discredit it as some rule made by a man that should be changed because we are smart??? :waitasec:

I'm telling you if the red letters in my Bible said, "Wear a kirpan" I'd wear one.

My point is, just because you do not hold any "man's" words litterally and obey them, does not mean others see it your way.

It is their right to believe what they believe.

And, the kirpan's are not considered weapons in all schools. See opening post.

 

[Nova]

Alternatives for SOME. But if they believe in wearing the literal dagger, who are we to discredit it as some rule made by a man that should be changed because we are smart??? :waitasec:

I'm telling you if the red letters in my Bible said, "Wear a kirpan" I'd wear one.

My point is, just because you do not hold any "man's" words litterally and obey them, does not mean others see it your way.

It is their right to believe what they believe.

And, the kirpan's are not considered weapons in all schools. See opening post.

What do you think you are telling me that I don't already know?

Yes, Sikhs and everyone else have a right to believe as they choose.

All rights, however, are tempered by other rights. Children also have a right to a safe environment in which to learn.

That's what we are discussing: which right prevails.

Declaring something a "rule" does not magically make it a right that automatically supersedes all other rights.

(And BTW, Jesus didn't speak English and no original manuscript of the Four Gospels survives. Nobody knows what he said or didn't say, which is one reason why it is helpful to use reason when viewing remarks attributed to him.)

 

[Kimberlyd125]

What do you think you are telling me that I don't already know?

Yes, Sikhs and everyone else have a right to believe as they choose.

All rights, however, are tempered by other rights. Children also have a right to a safe environment in which to learn.

That's what we are discussing: which right prevails.

Declaring something a "rule" does not magically make it a right that automatically supersedes all other rights.

(And BTW, Jesus didn't speak English and no original manuscript of the Four Gospels survives. Nobody knows what he said or didn't say, which is one reason why it is helpful to use reason when viewing remarks attributed to him.)

Nova, that's a silly question. Don't you know everything??? :smile:

The kids are safe. Find me one example of a child being hurt at school by a Sikh with a kirpan. I looked for a while. I can't find one.

Maybe we should ban electricity in schools. You know a kid could stick their finger in the socket.

So what makes something right or wrong? Beliefs. Somebody's beliefs. You have to believe in something. You of all people should know the importance of being able to believe what you believe.

As far as not knowing what Jesus said, well that's your opinion. Being a believer means I don't need proof. My faith is proof enough for me.
Belittle those red words all you want to. I will continue to hold them at the utmost highest priority.

JMO

 

[Kimberlyd125]

BTW, the first sentence in the above post was a joke. Hence the smilie.
Too late to edit to say that.

 

[Nova]

Nova, that's a silly question. Don't you know everything??? :smile:

The kids are safe. Find me one example of a child being hurt at school by a Sikh with a kirpan. I looked for a while. I can't find one.

Maybe we should ban electricity in schools. You know a kid could stick their finger in the socket.

So what makes something right or wrong? Beliefs. Somebody's beliefs. You have to believe in something. You of all people should know the importance of being able to believe what you believe.

As far as not knowing what Jesus said, well that's your opinion. Being a believer means I don't need proof. My faith is proof enough for me.
Belittle those red words all you want to. I will continue to hold them at the utmost highest priority.

JMO

I think there is great wisdom in "those red words." I didn't belittle them. I stated the FACT that we have no record of Jesus' actual words. All we have are copies of copies of copies, and most of us can only read translations. (BTW, no two of the pre-printing press copies agree, so one can't really argue that the copies are exact.)

You have every right to attach great importance to the words you read. But it remains a FACT that Jesus' actual words are not available to you or anyone else.

And Sikhs have every right to attach divine significance to the teachings of their gurus. Nonetheless, most public schools ban weapons. IMO, security trumps anyone's right to follow 17th century customs. The same applies to the 1st century, which is why schoolchildren are not allowed to stone adulterers.

That Sikhs are few in number doesn't give them fewer rights, but neither should it automatically increase their rights. That nobody has been wounded by a kirpan so far doesn't change the principle. No school has been blown up by a hand grenade so far; that doesn't mean children should be allowed to carry them.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Like I said posts ago, they believe they have to have it. We can't change what they believe. So, there are only a couple options. Allow them to carry them, or kick them out of school.
We can't expect them to not carry them.