The Kirpan: Symbol of Religious Freedom
The Supreme Court of Canada has brought down a unanimous ruling in recognition of the Kirpan as a bona fide symbol of religious freedom within Canada.This is the Supreme Court of Canada, learned judges of the highest court of the land. They have ruled that the Montreal Board of Education erred when it supported a principal of one of its schools in his stand banning the wearing of the kirpan by a then-12-year-old Sikh student. The principal of the school in question had earlier reached an agreement with the boy that he would be permitted the wearing of the kirpan if it were wrapped and placed under his garments, and would permit scrutiny of it when requested by teachers of the school. The boy at first agreed, then decided, doubtless with the encouragement of his parents, that this compromise was unacceptable to him and an affront to his religious rights as a citizen of Canada. The boy left his public school to attend a private school, and launched a law suit against the Board. Four years later, the Supreme Court of Canada brought down their decision, a rare unanimous decision, no dissenters.
I find this personally troubling. Yes, we are a pluralistic society, and we cherish our much-vaunted spirit of multiculturalism, tolerance of other cultures and religions. However, there is another issue here, and that is one of public safety, at the very least the public apprehension of public safety in, of all places sacred to a parent's trusting heart, elementary schools.
In the Sikh religion the kirpan, a steel-bladed dagger, is a symbol of armed resistance against "injustice", and injustice in this particular religious instance can be taken as perceived threats to the Sikh religion and its adherents. Sikhs are felt to be a combative group, particularly in their native India. Indira Gandhi and her son Rajiv, were both assassinated by aggrieved Sikhs. We like our immigrants to leave their grievances behind in their native lands, and we anticipate that they will embrace our values, instead. Else why come here? British Columbia has had experience with intra-Sikh aggression, and Canada has experienced the tragedy of the loss of hundreds of innocent lives as a result of a Sikh cabal waging war from within Canada against their perceived Indo-Canadian enemies.
The justices, in their wisdom, pointed out that there has never been an incidence of violence involving a kirpan in the long history of Sikh emigration to Canada, and that is reassuring. They pointed out, moreover, that it was highly unlikely that this particular 12-year-old boy would behave in an aggressive manner. They stated that under our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the freedom to practise one's religion, and presumably to display all the symbols of that religion are guaranteed.
There is another issue here, that of the right of other children never to feel intimidated by the presence of a potential weapon within a classroom; the right of persons of authority within an elementary school setting to ensure the safety of his or her many charges; the right of parents to rest easy that potential threats to their children's physical well-being are not present in a classroom. When does the "right" of a child to display symbols of an imported cultural artefact related to a religion displace the right of the majority to go about their business free from the potential of bodily harm?
Yes, this particular young boy wore a kirpan proudly as a symbol of his faith, and he likely suffered from hurt pride as a result of his principal informing him that the school has a policy which will not permit the presence of potential weapons, even those of ceremonial purpose. But this ruling opens the possibility of inappropriate and possibly more troubling inroads in the issue of public safety, particularly as it applies to the most vulnerable in our society, our children.
We may pride ourselves on our sensitivity to other cultures and religions in general, but must our commitment to multiculturalism come at such a steep price? Does it not make eminently greater sense for valued individuals who come to Canada to live freely within the society at large, taking advantage of all opportunities available to all citizens, to abridge their expectations in accordance with an acceptable norm? There are certain societal expectations which should be accepted as being of universal benefit to all citizens and one of these is the issue of safety.
Cultural artefacts? Symbols of religious freedom? Why not, when they can be innocent symbols such as crosses, a crescent moon, a Star of David, a turban, a modest head covering for women, a skullcap, a sari, the list of innocuous items can go on. A steel dagger to complete a ceremonial costume? It may have its place, but not in the classrooms of the nation's elementary schools.
posted by Pieface @ Thursday, March 02, 2006
<< Home