DB,
you’re showing a picture of a sharp kirpan and I’d be very concerned if Sikhs demanded that their kids bring these to school, but don’t you think that a blunt, smallish kirpan is a reasonable compromise?
If you think about it, a blunt kirpan is of no more concern to other people’s safety than random objects children could pick up from the classroom or playground. Scissors, calligraphy pens, sharp branches, chemicals from the lab, compasses, electrical cables, woodwork tools, etc can all be used as injurious objects that could do more damage than a blunt kirpan that is worn under clothing and in a secure way.

Talking about woodwork, I remember a couple of years ago some boys at an exclusive Anglican Sydney private school made a dildo in woodwork class, then used school ties to bind younger boys with and sexually assaulted them with the dildo repeatedly (75 or so accounts of sexual assault). We can now add school ties to the list of objects that can be a threat to others.

Foxy,
I don’t think it’s a bad thing for (Sikh) children to learn the art of Gatka. My husband teaches karate and there are quite a few kids in the higher grades who have excellent control over their mind and body. These are the children who’ve learned discipline and would only use their skill in self-defense.
Children with karate skills are welcome in public schools.

I agree with Frank that Freedom is not something that most people would want to give up easily. I believe that taking freedom away from people won’t do anything to our safety. If we look the people living under dictatorships or in theocracies- are they saver than the people who live in more liberal countries?
Are women safer in countries where abortion is illegal?
Are people safer in countries where drugs are illegal?
Are homosexuals safer in countries where homosexuality is illegal?

Shocka,
you make as much sense here as you did in the abortion thread.

I still don't see a basis for making an exception to the law on the basis of a religious belief. Why should religion be regarded as a more important reason for something than other reasons which don't happen to have a religious basis?

I don't see that religious teaching should be regarded as a better basis for trusting someone than other structures. I think that we head into very dangerous territory when we start to say "this religion is peaceful so we will trust all members of it in a way that we don't trust others" - should we then except the arguments put forward by some about muslims and have special laws restricting all muslims because some use their holy book as a basis for violence?

The statements I've seen regarding the purpose of the knife suggest that it is there for defensive purposes, other children are not allowed to carry a knife to school for that purpose. According to media reports one Qld student was recently suspended for doing just that in an attempt to deal with repeated physical assaults in and out of the school grounds.

People should be free to practice their religion within the bounds of the law but should not be granted freedoms which don't apply to all in society.

R0bert

Dear RObert,

Once again you've summed things up beautifully. I fully agree with your line of reasoning. If you want exceptions to be made for your child, send them to an appropriate school.

Frank Gol,

Wood work and cookery? Frank the kirpan is a weapon; that is the purpose for which it is designed. It doesn’t have alternative uses like a chisel. Whilst there is no doubt that a chisel can be dangerous it is not designed as a weapon, That is a fairly important difference. Another difference is that the kirpan is carried (concealed by the way) all the time. It isn’t just dangerous during woodwork classes when the children are supervised (like a chisel).

>> desperate to find any lame excuse to peddle their monocultural world view.

This is utter rubbish. How is it mono cultural to have laws which apply to everybody. It isn’t monocultural to ask migrants to change their behavior when it conflicts with our codes of conduct. I’m all for people of all cultures migrating to Australia. Only the ignorant and the brainwashed cling to the idea that the choice is between multiculturalism or no migrants at all. All we are asking for is a greater emphasis on fitting into our communities, rather than asking the vast majority of Australians to adapt so that minorities don’t have to.

Multiculturalism is a poisoned chalice. It was bequeathed to us by the hippy baby-boomers who’ve created many of the world’s current problems. Multiculturalism only requires tolerance or adaptation from Aussies. But multiculturalists bend over backwards to ensure that migrants don’t have to adapt or compromise.

Many of us believe that when you go to someone’s home you abide by their rules and customs. Why is there so much resistance to us asking new migrants to do the same. Certainly we are expected to observe the native customs whenever we go overseas.

I don’t have a problem with new migrants carrying on their usual cultural practices, all I ask is that where they conflict with ours they should be the ones who adapt, not us.

Why can’t the Sikhs adapt their cultural practices so they fit in with modern Australian norms? Why is that such an offensive request? After all, people keep telling me cultures aren’t static.

Paul.L,

Which is the more lethal in the hands of violent student, a ceremonial student kirpan or a chisel? Surely the chisel. Likewise, a knife in the cookery classroom is infinitely more dangerous in the hands of someone with bad intent than the typical student's kirpan.

None of these - chisel, carving knife and kirpan - is designed as an attack weapon. 9,999 times out of 10,000 they are used appropriately. The kirpan is designed as as symbol of a peaceful religion and I cannot find anywhere an example of it having being used inappropriately.

So the intended design of these three artifacts is not the issue. If it were, then screwdrivers, chisels and carving knives would be allowed on planes. It's their potential for misuse, to do harm, that's the issue.

While it's true that the kirpan is carried at all times and is concealed, we know that Sikh students are carrying it, so in that sense nothing is concealed because we know where it is. A chisel stolen from the woodwork room concealed from unsuspecting teachers and other students can lead to tragedy.

Australian laws, made by Australian parliamentarians, must be obeyed by all people in Australia. Laws, however, commonly have exceptions to make reasonable allowance for the fact that we are diverse peoples. You'll find exemptions in lots of our laws to cater for exceptional circumstances of people in rural areas, different genders, different income levels, religions, etc. Anglo-Australians benefit from these exemptions. That reflects the Australian way of life.

Your descent into anti-multiculturalism is melodramatic: "Multiculturalism is a poisoned chalice. It was bequeathed to us by the hippy baby-boomers who’ve created many of the world’s current problems." These words reveal a poor understanding of cultural interaction in Australia.

When I invite people to come into my house, I don't expect them to act exactly like me. If I did I probably wouldn't have bothered inviting them in the first place.

As for Anglo-Australians doing all the changing, you ought to get out and meet some migrants. It's just not like that.

As a footnote to all this, I was at a wedding yesterday where the groom and some guests were wearing kilts. One of them showed me that his sgean dhu was plastic as he had been told that to wear a proper one was viewed as carrying an offensive weapon.
So much for respect of culture - it's a one-way street.