When I first started my undergrad, I often wished that there was an elective history course that explained how Europeans became the most influential group of people in the course of human civilization's progress. I recently got a decent answer sort of answer after reading Guns, Germs and Steel. Now I find myself wishing for a short course on the consistent development of patriarchy throughout all of earth's cultures. It's good that we discuss the current problems in today's society, but I am a curious person and always want to know why?
I'm currently reading an article on protective head-wear and turbans at work. It's interesting how it ties in with the Sikh issues in France that I was talking about yesterday. Here's an excerpt from the watershed 1985 Supreme Court of Canada ruling of K.S. Bhinder and the Canadian Human Rights Commission v. The Canadian National Railway Company:
"The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that where a bona fide occupational requirement can be proven to exist, an employer does not have a duty to accommodate the worker and the worker must meet the requirements in order to hold employment. Discrimiation, as defined in human rights legislation, did not apply in this circumstance but the employer had to be prepared to justify the requirement."
While the idea of making a Sikh man remove his turban makes me uncomfortable, I ain't letting anyone go down into a coal mine or a pulp & paper mill without a hard hat on. It's a case where my desire for human safety outweighs my desire to uphold religious traditions. I guess the same could go for my thoughts on how abortion laws are proceeding in South Dakota. At the least, there should be a point where human safety outweighs religious traditions. But there's a whole lotta difference between a turban and an abortion. And even then, when you argue with a Sikh man over whether he can wear his turban or not, at least you are arguing within the context of his religion. The decision made affects will affect other Sikhs. When the religious right argues about outlawing abortions, maybe they should argue that point on the behalf of Christians. They shouldn't foist religious beliefs on non-Christians as well, it strikes me as unethical. Plus, it just doesn't make sense.
Back to the issue of Sikh headgear, one thing I found interesting from the case is that the article states that Mr. Bhinder "was forbidden by his religion to wear anything on his head except a turban". But I used to know this Sikh guy back in undergrad and while his head was always covered, some days he would come to class with a touque instead of a turban. My reaction to this move was something like, "Heh, nice shortcut!" because stressed, sleep deprived students are all about making life easier by whatever means possible. I mean, according to my religion (or is that my caste?) on certain religious holidays I shouldn't eat onions or eggs. Lord knows what religious holiday that rule comes from! I have no flipping idea. But I bet Hindus living in India do. I guess when you're not immersed in the culture of your religion, it's easier to live life with loose rules.
Okay, now I'm just rambling like a crazy rambling thing. Ending post... now.
No comments:
Post a Comment