Dont know if this is the right forum for this, but Ontario, Canada recently denied the appeal of Sikh motorcyclist that they should be exempted from wearing helmets because of the religious requirement of wearing Turban. As much as this may make sense to have that right denied, British Columbia and Manitoba grant a religious exemption for motorcycle helmets, as do Britain, India and Hong Kong.
Do you think that when religion clashes with pure common sense, common sense should prevail? If you answer yes, then how different this is than France’s ban on Naqaab? Do you support that ban also?
if they don’t want to survive a crash then let them be exempted. helmets are for their own protection.
’
some entrepreneur in near future may design a helmet that looks like a turban.
during my last trip to India, i was stunned to find out that Sikh travelers are allowed to wear a dagger with up to 6 inch blade [on domestic flights ONLY]. 6" blade is big in the execution of a hijacking.
why do we have to allow such dangerous exemptions in the name of political correctness?
A law is a law, just like seat belt laws in USA. Its for your own safety but following it is an obligation. Plus if you allow them not to wear helmet because of turban, then I can argue that not stopping at red light is part of my religion. Where will you stop with this religious frenzy?
KKF, were they allowed international air travel with the dagger or just in India?
Turban shaped helmet is a great idea and I already have patented it.
One part of the article implied that because Canada provides health insurance at Tax Payer’s expense, allowing dangerous driving practice is unhealthy for the economy.
what about it? Halal meat stores are there which are NOT funded/subsidized by the taxpayers. it’s NOT dangerous…it doesn’t kill people so no insurance issues. lol
See, thats stupid because fasting only last 8-12 hrs and it has nothing to do with well being. It would only make you feel better unless you have kwashiorkor. They are not putting themselves or creating problem for anyone else in the society for doing so. Also, I think whatever people do to themselves in their homes shouldn’t be the government’s concern but motorcycles are on roads and freeways and with accidents happening, I could see the motorcyclist being seriously injured or dead and then follows, lawsuits, wasting resources of hospital/EMT which could have been prevented. You cant compare those two
It should not be done on religious basis but rather on safety basis. In India sikhs are not exclusively exempted from wearing helmets, instead anyone wearing turbans is exempted. Though they define the thickness of the turbans but people rarely follow it. I see people wearing two layer thin pagri going through the traffic without problems.
Indian ad aptly says, Marzi hai aapki, aakhir sir hai aapka.
From what I understood about the Sikh religion is that kesh - is the requirement - not pug … Kesh is the keeping of long hair … the Sikh motorcyclist should hence be able to wear the helmet (much like those harley-davidson bikers) and keep their hair either loose or tied in a different way.
The third option is to invent a special helmet … which could either be a protective pug or an actual helmet that can contain the hair/or pug inside it.
In every religion many rituals , mandates, and beliefs clash with common sense. If common sense prevails over religion then no religion will exist.
I do not support any ban or law which goes against any religion.
Religion stems from belief system only. Something I believe in would seem against common sense to others but for me it is the religeous law and I would not dare to go against it.
For Sikh folks not cutting hair and wearing a turban is more than enough to protect his life in an accident. His protector is not the helmet but Waheguru.
