Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

man denied courthouse entry -wearing kirpan


  • Please log in to reply
82 replies to this topic

#46    SnakeProphet

SnakeProphet

    My dearest serpent

  • Member
  • 2,475 posts
  • Joined:01 Apr 2005
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 January 2008 - 07:33 PM

Quote

What the hell do you think a religious Charter is that he claims they violated if it's not a belief?

You're just yanking everybodies chain or your the most ignorant, close-minded person I heard since the Archie Bunker character.



Aww, look who's talking. You see, when you don't understand what I'm talking about, it's not me that is ignorant. It's not me, that goes about assuming things about what people might have said or done. I have shown several times already where people have done that, yet people still keep assuming things as they go along. I'd really appreciate it, if you'd stop this, but I guess you're entitled to ignorance.
Belief doesn't enter into THIS discussion, because you can't argue with a belief when it comes to a law. All it matters is that it IS a religion, which one, it doesn't matter.

Posted Image


Someone is gonna die if you listen to me.


I try to salvage thoughts long gone,
I am the mountain that dreams on.

I am the sea that longs for freedom.
lashing out towards my chains.

#47    Unlimited

Unlimited

    Truthseeker

  • Banned
  • 7,597 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida

  • Give me liberty or give me death.....

Posted 16 January 2008 - 07:33 PM

SnakeProphet on Jan 16 2008, 07:08 PM, said:

R.E.T.A.R.D.A.T.I.O.N


need i say more strawman...

God Bless America..

"one man with courage,makes a majority"..tj

#48    Spurious George

Spurious George

    Why So Spurious?

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,047 posts
  • Joined:08 Nov 2006
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 January 2008 - 07:37 PM

glorybebe on Jan 16 2008, 11:27 AM, said:

If you don't like the laws, don't come to Canada.  Plain and simple.


What if he is Canadian? Hhhmmm?? Not so plain and simple now is it!!


#49    glorybebe

glorybebe

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,726 posts
  • Joined:24 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Canada

Posted 16 January 2008 - 07:40 PM

Nihilator on Jan 16 2008, 11:37 AM, said:

What if he is Canadian? Hhhmmm?? Not so plain and simple now is it!!

If he is Canadian he should respect his country and his laws.

Save the Earth! It's the only planet with chocolate!

#50    Michelle

Michelle

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 15,441 posts
  • Joined:03 Jan 2004
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tennessee

  • Eleanor Roosevelt: Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.

Posted 16 January 2008 - 07:41 PM

SnakeProphet on Jan 16 2008, 07:33 PM, said:

Aww, look who's talking. You see, when you don't understand what I'm talking about, it's not me that is ignorant. It's not me, that goes about assuming things about what people might have said or done. I have shown several times already where people have done that, yet people still keep assuming things as they go along. I'd really appreciate it, if you'd stop this, but I guess you're entitled to ignorance.
Belief doesn't enter into THIS discussion, because you can't argue with a belief when it comes to a law. All it matters is that it IS a religion, which one, it doesn't matter.


I gave up trying to get a straight answer from you long ago. It won't be long before the new group will give up as did the last. Like I said you can change your name but you can't change the attitude.


#51    Saru

Saru

    Site Webmaster

  • 20,186 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2001
  • Gender:Male

  • "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious." - Albert Einstein

Posted 16 January 2008 - 07:46 PM

Lets keep this civil please, insults and namecalling does not make for constructive debate.


#52    Papaver

Papaver

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 895 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Guernsey, Channel Islands, Golfe de St-Malo

Posted 16 January 2008 - 07:47 PM

SnakeProphet on Jan 16 2008, 07:08 PM, said:

The difference is, one is real and the other isn't. Anyway, belief didn't even enter this discussion, so what are you going on about?



He was denied entry to the courtroom because he was carrying an item required by his religious beliefs.  There's a clue there that we're discussing beliefs.

As for one being real and the other not, you're not making sense.  Both situations as far as beliefs are concerned are comparable.  One believes that he should wear a dagger at all times, the other believes he should have the right to carry a pistol at all times.  Can you explain to me why the situations, one real and one hypothetical, are not comparible for the purposes of discussing the principle?   My perfectly reasonable hypothetical pistol carrier is a valid comparison to make whilst we are debating the subject.  Analogies are useful in debate to examine points of logic and to make comparisons between different thoughts and ideas.

Sikh wants to carry his dagger into the courtroom.  Man wants to carry his pistol into the courtroom.  They both have a strong belief that they are correct in their actions.

Why should the Sikh have special exemptions made over the other guy?

"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." ~ Thomas Paine

#53    SnakeProphet

SnakeProphet

    My dearest serpent

  • Member
  • 2,475 posts
  • Joined:01 Apr 2005
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 January 2008 - 07:48 PM

Quote

If he is Canadian he should respect his country and his laws.


If they were his laws, he might be respecting them. If you'd stop trying to deny him to be a part of the law, maybe he'd do so already.


Quote

I gave up trying to get a straight answer from you long ago. It won't be long before the new group will give up as did the last. Like I said you can change your name but you can't change the attitude.


Like I said, I can change my attitude anytime I wish to. If you really want to keep on using that excuse to bail out of a discussion, just because you don't like my answer, that is your prerogative. Only this time try to stand by what you are saying, and stop bugging me, because you're starting to become annoying. I have no interest in you.

Posted Image


Someone is gonna die if you listen to me.


I try to salvage thoughts long gone,
I am the mountain that dreams on.

I am the sea that longs for freedom.
lashing out towards my chains.

#54    Spurious George

Spurious George

    Why So Spurious?

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,047 posts
  • Joined:08 Nov 2006
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 January 2008 - 07:55 PM

glorybebe on Jan 16 2008, 11:40 AM, said:

If he is Canadian he should respect his country and his laws.


He didn't start a fight or fling feces at anyone... I'd say he was being respectful!


#55    glorybebe

glorybebe

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,726 posts
  • Joined:24 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Canada

Posted 16 January 2008 - 07:56 PM

SnakeProphet on Jan 16 2008, 11:48 AM, said:

If they were his laws, he might be respecting them. If you'd stop trying to deny him to be a part of the law, maybe he'd do so already.




Like I said, I can change my attitude anytime I wish to. If you really want to keep on using that excuse to bail out of a discussion, just because you don't like my answer, that is your prerogative. Only this time try to stand by what you are saying, and stop bugging me, because you're starting to become annoying. I have no interest in you.


So, we should change our whole social structure for one religious group?  Who is being unreasonable now?  When people emigrate they should respect the laws of the country that is taking them in.  If they can't accept that their life may change a bit, then maybe that country isn't for them.

Save the Earth! It's the only planet with chocolate!

#56    SnakeProphet

SnakeProphet

    My dearest serpent

  • Member
  • 2,475 posts
  • Joined:01 Apr 2005
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 January 2008 - 08:03 PM

Papaver on Jan 16 2008, 08:47 PM, said:

He was denied entry to the courtroom because he was carrying an item required by his religious beliefs.  There's a clue there that we're discussing beliefs.

As for one being real and the other not, you're not making sense.  Both situations as far as beliefs are concerned are comparable.  One believes that he should wear a dagger at all times, the other believes he should have the right to carry a pistol at all times.  Can you explain to me why the situations, one real and one hypothetical, are not comparible for the purposes of discussing the principle?   My perfectly reasonable hypothetical pistol carrier is a valid comparison to make whilst we are debating the subject.  Analogies are useful in debate to examine points of logic and to make comparisons between different thoughts and ideas.

Sikh wants to carry his dagger into the courtroom.  Man wants to carry his pistol into the courtroom.  They both have a strong belief that they are correct in their actions.

Why should the Sikh have special exemptions made over the other guy?



It doesn't matter because that's a whole different subject. What you are discussing is why one is a religious symbol, and not the other. You see, right now, I don't care why the kirpan is a religious symbol. For this discussion, it is only relevant that it is one. If you want my personal opinion? I think a gun is not and never will be a religious symbol, because gun-toting idiots will never have the cerebral capacity to form a valid religion, hence eliminating the chance of it ever being a religious symbol. Religion, and religious symbol, are legal terms, they aren't just an arbitrary definition, like you seem to believe. So if you want to know why those two aren't comparable, look at the legal definition of it, and try to understand how a gun doesn't fit this definition.
That is but one of the reasons, why you're "comparison" doesn't belong in here, I think you don't want to know all the others.

Posted Image


Someone is gonna die if you listen to me.


I try to salvage thoughts long gone,
I am the mountain that dreams on.

I am the sea that longs for freedom.
lashing out towards my chains.

#57    glorybebe

glorybebe

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,726 posts
  • Joined:24 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Canada

Posted 16 January 2008 - 08:06 PM

Michelle on Jan 16 2008, 11:41 AM, said:

I gave up trying to get a straight answer from you long ago. It won't be long before the new group will give up as did the last. Like I said you can change your name but you can't change the attitude.


Thanks for the heads up, Michelle, I understand now.

Save the Earth! It's the only planet with chocolate!

#58    SnakeProphet

SnakeProphet

    My dearest serpent

  • Member
  • 2,475 posts
  • Joined:01 Apr 2005
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 January 2008 - 08:07 PM

Quote

So, we should change our whole social structure for one religious group? Who is being unreasonable now? When people emigrate they should respect the laws of the country that is taking them in. If they can't accept that their life may change a bit, then maybe that country isn't for them.


Good god, you've got to be kidding me. You just went ahead and repeated every stupid so called argument there is. How many times do I have to explain that this isn't the case here, why do you keep repeating it? If you want Sikhs out, because you don't like them, just say so, I tire of saying the same things over and over.

Edited by SnakeProphet, 16 January 2008 - 08:09 PM.

Posted Image


Someone is gonna die if you listen to me.


I try to salvage thoughts long gone,
I am the mountain that dreams on.

I am the sea that longs for freedom.
lashing out towards my chains.

#59    Tiggs

Tiggs

    Relax. It's only me.

  • 9,269 posts
  • Joined:30 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County, California

  • Universe Service Pack 2 still needs patching.

Posted 16 January 2008 - 10:09 PM

SnakeProphet on Jan 16 2008, 06:28 PM, said:

1. Like kitchen knives?

Like any knife. I take it that you've heard of a shank. Did you read any of the links illustrating the use of knives in courtrooms that I provided in my last post?

As an aside - I have absolutely no idea how you could possibly think that this is a racist issue. Knives in a Courtroom are just a really bad idea. Race, Religion, Height, Weight, Gender, Age, Hair colour, Eye Colour, whether someone prefers drinking Coke or Pepsi etc. doesn't enter into the equation.



#60    Aztec Warrior

Aztec Warrior

    Ancient Order of Hibernians Grand Master

  • Member
  • 3,339 posts
  • Joined:24 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mexico City

  • A neoconservative is a "liberal mugged by reality," one who became more conservative after seeing the results of liberal policies.Iriving Kristol

Posted 16 January 2008 - 10:19 PM

forget it!

Edited by Aztec Warrior, 16 January 2008 - 10:21 PM.

Posted ImageBlurring and Stirring the truth and the lies

So I don't know what's real and what's not
Always confusing the thoughts in my head
So I can't trust myself anymore
I'm dying again




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users