Bruce Allen Furor

[canuckboy]

Are we still talking about this? I'd like to know how this became a "Sikh" issue. I don't think BA was talking about any one group in particular.

How about those Syrian-Canadians who demanded that the Canadian government evacuate them when the fighting started in the middle-east? You know what happend to them? They all went back "home" after six weeks. I'll bet they are sure glad they have that Canadian passport as a get out of hell card. Or how about all the satallite kids in Richmond and Coquitlam that are here for the free education while thier parents only come back for the free health care, and pension. It has nothing to do with race. It has to to with respect for this country. If you are just going to use us to rescue you, educate you, or heal you then go back home to your "real country" you really don't do the rest of us hard working taxpayers much good. Noone likes to be walked on, even us overly polite Canadians.

[Gurps]

Originally Posted by canuckboy

Are we still talking about this? I'd like to know how this became a "Sikh" issue. I don't think BA was talking about any one group in particular.

Actually, he was talking about Sikhs in particular in his rant. Next time, try and learn what the discussion is about before you go off on a rant.

P.S. I agree, I don't like people who abuse their citizenship as well. However, that is not what we are discussing. Start a new thread for that.

[guru]

Originally Posted by XXX

Guru....it actually hurt reading ur post...where to start? First, I'd rather Canada be known for its democratic processes and acceptance of all people regardless of race, religion, sex or attire, than the mountie uniform.

Second, the legion issue...turbans didn't seem to be a problem when countless Sikhs fought and died for and beside Canadian and British soldiers....but no turbans in the legion!

Third, this is not a debate about religion vs. science.

Finally..as for religion not superseding laws...please refer to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom.

Where to start indeed.... I think you missed my point(s) I too would rather be known for our democratic process, however, this process is being manipulated by sects. Whether it's religion, race, sexual orientation... (our democratic process is not in danger due to the mountie uniform... lets not get all mellow dramatic shall we). Politicians for the past 25 years have aimed their campaigns towards minorities and immigrants. This is where elections are won and lost. This isn't news. And if it isn't painfully obvious to you yet, then take a look at the staunch unbending conservative right wing, who spend the majority of campaign funds on showing off how much they care about these minorities and their issues, then when elected leave them cold.

Your second point, the legion... what the hell has Sikhs fighting and dying in the war got to do with it? I was referring to the legion and it's traditions. Since it's inception (and indeed since the creation of the civilized world) men have removed their hats when going indoors, when greeting a lady, when eating, and in the entering of the legion it is mandatory to remove your head wear in respect of the fallen men. PERIOD. This is not a knock against any faction what-so-ever. It is respect/tradition/legion rules! To have any faction, (religion/gender/race etc) supersede these traditions is (in my opinion) wrong. The people (men and women) who started the legion and who created it's constitution are in great disrespect of people who enter it who do not adhere to it's traditions and rules. I mentioned the turbans, (because it was mentioned before me) but the same should be said for baseball hats, biker scarves etc etc... these are all breaking traditions. It's not just a religious thing, but it IS the religious factions (as well as the gender factions) that are putting up the most controversy towards changing these rules and traditions. We (the subsequent generations) are losing out on the ideals our fore fathers set in place. Taking your hat off in greeting a woman, or when entering a home, or when eating are all courtesies lost on the generations starting with the baby boomers. We have become far to selfish and unthoughtful a society. Things as simple as holding doors or chairs for women and the elderly .... I could go on and on (and in fact have) time honoured traditions are at risk, and it's blatantly obvious that there is no longer any respect in place... this shows when you see someone beat up an old woman for her pocket book... society is crumbling due to the lack of respect, and it starts when we lose focus on our values. We break traditions and those values are lost... and so on.

I'm not putting the blame on any one group, nor one religion... whether it's religion, sex, race, political belief... they are all to blame.

three... don't get me started on the charter of rights... this is what's sighted any time someone feels like they should go to a 20 hour work week, because it gets in the way of their right to sleep in.....

Originally Posted by Gurps

Actually, he was talking about Sikhs in particular in his rant. Next time, try and learn what the discussion is about before you go off on a rant.

P.S. I agree, I don't like people who abuse their citizenship as well. However, that is not what we are discussing. Start a new thread for that.

First off, I wasn't singling out Sikhs, it was the topic of discussion (RE: turbans in place of helmets and mountie hats) long before I replied. My posty was long enough without going on about other issues such as Canuckboy went into.

I also mentioned that the Turban wasn't the first issue with the mountie uniform, it was the women's hat (which I originally found offensive).

[johnnybluenose]

I think, whether it is warranted or not, there is some frustration from the Stereotypical WHiteGuy Canadian with the minority communities sikh and otherwise with a lot of aspects relating to assimilation. I have many good friends of Indo Descent that have Fathers who have classic cars that they drag race, and play hockey, and drink Tim Hortons coffee and a whole host of other things that are narrowmindedly considered "Canadian" or "White"

The frustration comes from generational stereotyping.

The Idea that Chinese and other Asians can't Drive
The Idea that Indo's cheat the system on having 4 families share a home
The Idea that Jews are cheap and hoard money

If your father makes bigoted/racial comments your whole life, or others in your circle of influence it is hard for you to not start to develop twisted views on things, intentional or not..there is a certain thing that happens whent the people you look up to make bad judgement calls and it sets into your psyche.

Bruce Allen is free to say what he wants. He always has, always will. These needs not to be arguments on the merits of the Sikh community in forging Rule Britannia, or the history and fabric of the Dominion of Canada.

Look at how the Gurkha's were treated.

If you want to stay on topic, and debate the Merits of Bruce Allen and whether or not he should be involved in the Olympiad in any way shape or form is fine. I have no problems with what he said...I can also symapthise with the Indo community and their outrage over the issue. I say this because he has the freedom to say what he wants when he wants to, and he has been gifted the platform to do it (again rightly or wrongly, doesn't change the fact he has it)

Bruce Allen can often be found to squirrel from one issue to another, and his points tend to bleed into each other, and he can be guilty of generalizing.

My thoughts are very Libertarian. If a Sikh man wants to cruise around with a turban instead of a motorcycle helmet on his hog, then so be it. If he wipes out and turns into a vegetable because he wasn't wearing a helmet than he should have to pay for the healthcare system himself, and not have BC Med foot the bill for his lack of care to his own personal safety. Same thing goes for the wite guy who decides that a helmet isn't cool, and that his greasy hair in a bandana is cool.

The whole Turbans in Legions thing is way off base. They (Sikh's in turbans, should be afforded the same service as every other veteran, and should be allowed in with their religious headgear)

I honestly think a lot of frustration comes from the PERCEPTION that many minority groups do not try to become "Canadian"
That a 5 year old boy that is born in Canada to second generation Indo Canadian Parents and shows up to school day 1 without having any decent grasp on the English Language (This story has been relayed to me by a School teacher Friend of Mine)
The frustration with the reports of Streetracing you see in the media where some dude in Rice Rocket has driven over a senior citizen crossing Knight street and when faced with deportation claims refugee status.

Stereotypes exist for many reasons. Usually when there is smoke, there is fire. Other times you can just chalk it up to pure ignorance.

[Gurps]

Guru, I wasn't implying that you were singling out Sikhs, I was stating that Bruce Allen was singling out Sikhs in my post.

It's tough talking to people with a grade 12 education.

[Gurps]

Originally Posted by johnnybluenose

If a Sikh man wants to cruise around with a turban instead of a motorcycle helmet on his hog, then so be it. If he wipes out and turns into a vegetable because he wasn't wearing a helmet than he should have to pay for the healthcare system himself, and not have BC Med foot the bill for his lack of care to his own personal safety.


That a 5 year old boy that is born in Canada to second generation Indo Canadian Parents and shows up to school day 1 without having any decent grasp on the English Language (This story has been relayed to me by a School teacher Friend of Mine)

The frustration with the reports of Streetracing you see in the media where some dude in Rice Rocket has driven over a senior citizen crossing Knight street and when faced with deportation claims refugee status.

Point #1 If a snowboarder ski's out of bounds, then he should have to pay his medical bills as well. As should smokers. The list could go on.

Point #2 I don't know about your teacher friend. I know that every third generation Indo I have met has always spoken english, and does not speak punjabi. In fact, most second generation Indo's I know have a hard time speaking Punjabi.

Point #3 The dude in the rice rocket would either be a landed immigrant or a citizen. They wouldn't be claiming "refugee status" if they were already here. Your comment makes no sense. However, I do agree if a landed immigrant commits a crime, they should be deported. However, someone cannot claim refugee status if they are already here.

[Gurps]

By the way Guru, whether you like it or not, Canada and it's traditions have and always will change. The will of the majority always wins. We live in a democratic society. Whether you like it or not, that is the way it is.

[johnnybluenose]

Originally Posted by Gurps

Point #1 If a snowboarder ski's out of bounds, then he should have to pay his medical bills as well. As should smokers. The list could go on.

Point #2 I don't know about your teacher friend. I know that every third generation Indo I have met has always spoken english, and does not speak punjabi. In fact, most second generation Indo's I know have a hard time speaking Punjabi.

Point #3 The dude in the rice rocket would either be a landed immigrant or a citizen. They wouldn't be claiming "refugee status" if they were already here. Your comment makes no sense. However, I do agree if a landed immigrant commits a crime, they should be deported. However, someone cannot claim refugee status if they are already here.

Point #1- Totally Agree. Just that Skiing and snowboarding has sweet Fcukall to do with this topic.
Point #2- This friend of mine was on about how "indo this and indo that" and was appalled that this child could not speak english well enough to communicate with all of the children as the childs language in the home was junjabi. This is just one incident I have been told. I am just relaying it to show why one thing can lead to stereotyping. I am in no way stating this is always or even generally the case
Point #3- The guy that ran the old man over some time ago (to the best of my knowledge) was neither a landed immigrant nor a citizen. He was to face deportation but pleaded for immigrancy as he was up on serious charges in which he was to face a death penalty for. I may be mixing two news items up, but you catch my drift where people see incidents reported by media/news and it fuels the ignorance and stereotyping.

[Gurps]

I also agree, Bruce Allen does have the right to say what he wants. I have no issue with that. Just like I have the right to challenge any laws I deem unfit.

[Gurps]

Johnny, I do see your points, and do agree with may of your points.

Ignorance is bliss. People just read the province, and take everything they read as fact, and apply sterotypes to a whole group of people.

Interesting that the no one has commented on the fact that I, as a Sikh, cannot say Merry Christmas, or have my future children experience the joy of being in a christmas play as i did as a child, due to the lobbying by certain members of Jewish community, and all of the Jehovaws witness community.

[johnnybluenose]

It is a double edged sword though Gurps.

Bruce Allen may have truthfully an dhonestly believed a certian thing and then let his emotions carry him off to somewhere he may have not intially intended to go. He is easily baited and because of his brash persona, he now has no choice but to stick to his guns, or he loses ALL Credibility.

There are a lot of groups out there that ruin good fun, traditions etc for everyone in the name politcal correctness and politicking. I remember back in the mid80's when I was in elementary school we still (at that time!) sand Oh Canada and said the Lords Prayer every Monday morning. The Lords Prayer is a prayer to God (which god is up to debate as the prayer is a wholesome peace preaching prayer asking for blessing. It is not asking for Salvation, it preaches no doctrine)

Considering that most (recognised official) religions that hold a God refer to the same being or entity in Principal- Jews, Christians (Catholics and Protestants) Muslims, Sikh's (Ishameal being Abrahams Eldest son, after his wife gave her maidservant (Hagar) to Abraham in an effort to have a child)
The Fathers of the "GOD" religions start here. Abraham had two sons, both from God one to Sarah, one to Hagar. Issac (Jew) Ishmael (Father of Islam)

again all of this based on what doctrines you have been umm. er.. indoctrinated with.

So for one, the Lord's Prayer was simply a way to (theoretcially) have some form of goodwill, or whatever.

Our National Anthem states "God keep our land, Glorious and free"

Most religions preach and teach tolerance and peace, not hatred and ignorance.

The seperation of Church/State/Education is a topic for a different day and a differnt thread...And you always hear the Bruce Allen's the Dave Pratt's the (usually considered) Right Wing conservative guys always championing the cause for non-PC, but usually for the right reasons. Such as the Jews and JW's lobbying for no Merry Christmas and just to state "Seasons Greeting" or Nothing at all.

With today's current climate I do think it is better to have all church and religion out of school, the only exception being that all schools should have (in the later grades Maybe Junior High) classes outlining and showing what world religions are really about. Education is not a bad thing, thrusting belief systmes on others is.

[Regs]

Gurps,

I would have never allowed you to enter the TTP NFL pool a couple of years ago if I knew you were Sikh!

[johnnybluenose]

I would also like to point out that religion really has nothing to do with people groups and races of peoples. Just beacause one is white does not mean they are a Christian or Jew, and just because on eis Brown does not make them a Sikh, Hindu, or Muslim.

I think that is another area of concern that could be discussed at length.

[Gurps]

Now I know why it was cancelled! I blame it on TS, once he came along, the number of Sikhs in the football pool exceeded the quota!

[guru]

Originally Posted by Gurps

A few quick points:

lets respond to your inaccuracies....
1) What has the Sikhs fighting for the British gov. got to do with the Canadian legion? ? Canadians died fighting as well, and you can bet your sweet ass none of these Canadians are bitching about the rules set out in any of these other countries when they visit the memorial sites. You can bet your ass all of them remove their hats when they pray for their fallen comrades. It's a traditional belief. I'm not suggesting that Sikhs do the same, they have their own beliefs, and if that means keeping their head gear on, then so be it, but "When in Rome"...

Let me refer you back to when the USA hosted the world cup. The US host committee wanted to "change" the rules for soccer to accommodate the daft American attention span. They wanted to divide the game into quarters, and put in stop time for commercials... that the American public wouldn't sit and watch unless the "rules" changed... remember that?!?! FIFA laughed and told them this wasn't going to happen. If they wanted to host the games, they were going to have to live with the way the rules were set up by FIFA.

2)I laugh at this as well... Change is good when human rights are violated, or when there is a better way. Change is not good when it's just to appease a faction for no other reason than religion. Religion is faith, not fact. Religion is belief, not science. To change something based on the preference of a group, and not for the betterment of all is ludicrous. Because I'm an agnostic, I don't hold any power when it comes to changing any law or tradition that I don't like. If my personal belief was that I spit on the statues of the fallen at the legion, they'd kick the crap out of me, but because someone else has a recognized religion, they can oppose any tradition or rule based on the charter of freedoms blah blah blah.
I have no problem with Jehovah's coming to my door. I actually believe it's their duties within their faith to convert people. I have no problem with that, but they do not impose their beliefs on the laws and traditions set out. They simply make themselves available for people who are seeking a religion. If a Sikh showed at my door I would respect his religious belief, and either talk to him (as I've done to many Jehovah's) or politely decline his conversation. Jehovah's don't "push" their religion, they offer it. I've never been forced into listening to any of them, nor have they ever been belligerent with their talks. They are polite, courteous and well mannered. To say they "push" their beliefs is a great over statement, and usually made by narrow minded people who are more concerned with nursing their hangover from the previous night. Likely brought on by drinking too much and trying to "push" themselves onto some poor woman at the bar.
3)This isn't a discussion on how "good" Sikhs are. They can be the most wonderful people in the world. The discussion here is about whether religion should supersede law and tradition. I believe they shouldn't.
4) Again, I am not blaming the Sikhs FOR ANYTHING, I am blaming the system that allows factions to supersede laws and traditions because it's "politically correct" to do so. It wins votes, or because "we don't want to seem closed minded" even if we don't like it.
5) I'm not suggesting he chose his words correctly, I agreed with him in principle. He's not the most articulate fellow, but his principles are in order, and he isn't afraid to speak out, where others are afraid. There is no doubt we should keep our laws accountable, and it's our duty as citizens to create or remove laws in order to keep our society safe and just. We need to amend these laws if they go against basic human rights. There is no question about that. But to change laws and traditions based on group/sects/factions/religions.... if we do this, every one of these would be calling laws into question and because you let one group change it, you have to let all groups have equal say. Obviously you can't kick out 2nd or 3rd generation, or longer. To suggest that is ridiculous, but also, if a person migrates to the country, he/she should live within the laws and boundaries set forth. He may not agree with them, but these basic principles are the reason it was attractive to move here. Our country is based on people migration from every other country. We are a mosaic, and are free to practice what ever religion you want, WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE LAW. To change these laws based on religion is tantamount to anarchy. It's a slippery slope to failure and total social collapse. The most important thing about 2nd generations and so on, is that you are born into these laws and traditions, so you grow up with them. I fail to understand how anyone who is born into them is encouraging change to them. They, as well as you, are part of the tradition.

We are all immigrants from somewhere, if you go far enough down the line. To infer that people who have lived here for generations leave because they don't like something is ridiculous, but I doubt he meant that. What he meant was that for people who are first generation immigrants that want to come here and make immediate changes... that 'This is the way it is here, if you don't like the place, why did you come here'. For subsequent generations he mean 'this is the way it was when you were born, and your elders found it ok to be here (or should have) the way it was, so why are you trying to change things' ..... I mean this in that if it's not a human rights issue, then leave it as it is, if it's a faction issue, it's not up for discussion.

"Bottom Line is that: Most politicians are idiots, and we rely on these idiots to run the country. Voting in another self serving idiot does not serve us well. As I said before, politicians direct their efforts towards the minority factions to swing the electorate. They don't care what lies they preach, as long as they're elected so they can get a sizable pension in 6 years...

Originally Posted by Gurps

P.S LOL at Guru calling himself "as left wing as they come."
Do you even know what being left wing means?
Left wingers are open to change, hence why they are not conservative(right wing), who are not being open to change.
You are not open to change guru, so stop calling yourself as left as they come.

You have no clue.... you are stereotypically wrong. If there was a party that would end all private ownership, eliminate the monetary system, eliminate religion, then I'm there at the head of the line. A totally socialist system where "each to his own needs, each to his own ability" is the order of business.... (I didn't make that up by the way). how far left is that theory.... I dare say further than the person who wrote it. Change is fine when it's not stepping others toes for the sake of select factions and their beliefs... We're not talking about blacks not being allowed at the front of a bus, or women not being allowed to vote here. That's a human rights issue. Those were in essence saying some humans have lesser value than others. (and incidentally, these laws were laid out by Christian beliefs). We're talking about religious beliefs and their ceremonial garb. These are not human rights issues, they are BELIEFS.

[Gurps]

My point is that many of the so called changes, such as not being able to say Merry Christmas, are blamed on immigrants, when in fact, they have nothing to do with the changes, yet they get blamed for it.

The majority of Jews and jehovaws witnesses are white born Canadians.

[johnnybluenose]

The whole Legion thing by Guru should not be an issue,
- Spitting on a memorial for the fallen is a lot different than a Sikh veteran who sports a turban walking into a legion. Wearing a turban for a sikh is akin to a catholic praying with a rosary or wearing a crucifix. it is a demonstration of their choice of religion/belief structure.

Maybe one of the Sikh TTP'ers can help me with this though, and belive me when I say I am not trying to point out hypocracy, as every religion has it's cross to bare when it comes to this...but I was under the impression that of the Sins-as dicatated by Sikh law...that of the sins leading to a loss of the caste system drinking of wine was one of them, along with desecrating the bed of the Guru and causing abortion and one other that isn;t coming to mind fast enough.

Why is it okay for a Sikh man to go to a legion for a beer, but not remove his headdress?

Just looking for clarification...not trying to start anything as evidenced by my previous posts in this thread.

[Gurps]

Originally Posted by guru

lets respond to your inaccuracies....
1) What has the Sikhs fighting for the British gov. got to do with the Canadian legion?

Already been answered.

2)I laugh at this as well... Change is good when human rights are violated, or when there is a better way. Change is not good when it's just to appease a faction for no other reason than religion.


Like how we cannot say Merry Christmas to appease the Jewish and jehovaws witnesses?


I have no problem with Jehovah's coming to my door. I actually believe it's their duties within their faith to convert people. I have no problem with that, but they do not impose their beliefs on the laws and traditions set out.

Like how we cannot say merry christmas due to JW's?

They simply make themselves available for people who are seeking a religion. If a Sikh showed at my door I would respect his religious belief, and either talk to him (as I've done to many Jehovah's) or politely decline his conversation. Jehovah's don't "push" their religion, they offer it.

LOL at people knocking at your door ten times a day not pushing their religion.

I've never been forced into listening to any of them, nor have they ever been belligerent with their talks. They are polite, courteous and well mannered. To say they "push" their beliefs is a great over statement, and usually made by narrow minded people who are more concerned with nursing their hangover from the previous night. Likely brought on by drinking too much and trying to "push" themselves onto some poor woman at the bar.


Great articulate argument there!

3)This isn't a discussion on how "good" Sikhs are. They can be the most wonderful people in the world. The discussion here is about whether religion should supersede law and tradition. I believe they shouldn't.

Nothing wrong with having an opinion. I support your right to that opinion.


4) Again, I am not blaming the Sikhs FOR ANYTHING, I am blaming the system that allows factions to supersede laws and traditions because it's "politically correct" to do so. It wins votes, or because "we don't want to seem closed minded" even if we don't like it.

Once again, we the people elect the officials. If the majority of the people didn't like it, they would change their votes. Majority wins.

5) I'm not suggesting he chose his words correctly, I agreed with him in principle. He's not the most articulate fellow, but his principles are in order, and he isn't afraid to speak out, where others are afraid. There is no doubt we should keep our laws accountable, and it's our duty as citizens to create or remove laws in order to keep our society safe and just. We need to amend these laws if they go against basic human rights. There is no question about that. But to change laws and traditions based on group/sects/factions/religions.... if we do this, every one of these would be calling laws into question and because you let one group change it, you have to let all groups have equal say. Obviously you can't kick out 2nd or 3rd generation, or longer. To suggest that is ridiculous, but also, if a person migrates to the country, he/she should live within the laws and boundaries set forth.

Everyone Canadian citizen has the right to challenge any laws they deem unfit.

He may not agree with them, but these basic principles are the reason it was attractive to move here. Our country is based on people migration from every other country. We are a mosaic, and are free to practice what ever religion you want, WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE LAW. To change these laws based on religion is tantamount to anarchy. It's a slippery slope to failure and total social collapse. The most important thing about 2nd generations and so on, is that you are born into these laws and traditions, so you grow up with them. I fail to understand how anyone who is born into them is encouraging change to them. They, as well as you, are part of the tradition.


If I don't like a law, I will challenge it. I could care less what other's think. Times change, people change, the world changes.

We are all immigrants from somewhere, if you go far enough down the line. To infer that people who have lived here for generations leave because they don't like something is ridiculous, but I doubt he meant that.
What he meant was that for people who are first generation immigrants that want to come here and make immediate changes... that 'This is the way it is here, if you don't like the place, why did you come here'.

I think first generation immigrants are too busy trying to find jobs, and putting food on the table, to be lobbying government officials to be changing laws.

For subsequent generations he mean 'this is the way it was when you were born, and your elders found it ok to be here (or should have) the way it was, so why are you trying to change things' ..... I mean this in that if it's not a human rights issue, then leave it as it is, if it's a faction issue, it's not up for discussion.


Bruce Allen has nor right to tell me, as a Canadian born citizen, what laws I have the right to challenge, and which ones I don't. I will determine what i think is up for discussion.

"Bottom Line is that: Most politicians are idiots, and we rely on these idiots to run the country. Voting in another self serving idiot does not serve us well. As I said before, politicians direct their efforts towards the minority factions to swing the electorate. They don't care what lies they preach, as long as they're elected so they can get a sizable pension in 6 years...

You don't like the system, do something about it, instead of bitching on TTP.


You have no clue.... you are stereotypically wrong. If there was a party that would end all private ownership, eliminate the monetary system, eliminate religion, then I'm there at the head of the line. A totally socialist system where "each to his own needs, each to his own ability" is the order of business.... (I didn't make that up by the way). how far left is that theory.... I dare say further than the person who wrote it. Change is fine when it's not stepping others toes for the sake of select factions and their beliefs... We're not talking about blacks not being allowed at the front of a bus, or women not being allowed to vote here. That's a human rights issue. Those were in essence saying some humans have lesser value than others. (and incidentally, these laws were laid out by Christian beliefs). We're talking about religious beliefs and their ceremonial garb. These are not human rights issues, they are BELIEFS.

LOL, I did a double major at SFU in Business and Polical Science. You want to see extreme left, take political science up at SFU, then you will see what extreme left means. That is if you could actually get into University, or are on of those people who blames Asians and browns for taking up all the University seats.

Like I said, I support your right to an opinion, but the country has and always will continue to change. You either adapt, or fall behind. People like Bruce Allen are the minority in this country, deal with it.