I am all for religious freedom and tolerance as long as religious beliefs, including religious symbols, do not interfere with the freedom and safety of others.
I can’t see a problem with hijabs or a cross around the neck. There is no danger in those things to others.

But under no circumstance should pupils or adults be permitted to carry daggers to schools or workplaces, in the street or on public transport.

” There are Controls of Weapons Acts in various States of Australia, prohibiting the carrying of a dagger. An Exemption is included where such an article is carried for religious purposes or is part of a religious dress code. ”
I do not agree with this exemption. People who carry weapons DO interfere with the feeling of safety of others even if they do not intend to use these weapons.

” To take away the kirpan from a Sikh is to violate his/her religious freedom.”
Well, that’s too bad- the alternative is that their religious symbol violates the feeling of safety and freedom of others. People involved should be able to come up with some reasonable suggestions that can be acceptable.
Perhaps a reasonable compromise can be made, such as kirpan symbols made of soft plastic- not a bad suggestion from Shocka. I’m not fond of toy weapons either, but I’m more in favour of compromising than of rigidly banning all other suggestions.

Children are certainly not mature enough to be in the possession of daggers.
Whether there have been kirpan attacks in the past or not is, for me, not the point. The point is that all weapons carry a potential danger and the idea people (regardless their race, religion or sex) carry daggers will have the effect that others won’t feel safe around them.

To the ones who mentioned racism; this has nothing to do with racism- I do not care what the race is of people who want to carry daggers and I do not care about their reason for wanting to carry them either. Daggers should not be carried, full stop.

savoir68: "Go on have a whinge white (or olive) men.
Why did you leave Northern (or Southern) Europe anyway?"

We didn't (Most of us, going several generations back, were born here).
And not all anti-multiculturalists are white (Ever wonder what Aboriginals think of multicultural immigration? No, never crosses your mind.) or men.

Australians, black and white, male and female, are concerned about the consequences of multiculturalism.
To dismissively label it as just "white male" resentment is pathethic and lazy.
And even if it were predominantly white men "whinging", don't our opinions count?

botheration: "Horus wrote: 'PS: I am reminded of the small knives the 9/11 hijackers are said to have used to commandeer their aircraft'
Really? Is it the completely different religion or the completely different situation that's reminding you?"

No, it's the fact that prior to 911, nobody considered it a *risk* for passengers to carry small knives on planes!
Just like you are arguing there's little risk in kids taking kirpans to school.
And like 911, all it will take is a kirpan "incident" to change everybody's mind.

CJ Morgan: "Culture isn't fixed. No culture is static."

The Kirpan was made compulsory for baptised Sikhs after a religious commandment given by a guru in 1699 AD!
Over *300* years ago!
Sounds pretty static to me.

Do we still live by the proclamations of William III of England?
Do we still wear powdered wigs and bustle dresses?
If we can move on, so can the Sikhs.
Alternatively, if Sikhs are permitted to carry weapons, so should everybody else.

Q&A: "We have Australian laws"

And each law, which is supposed to apply to everybody, has 100 pages of *exemptions* based on the "needs" of special interest groups.

If we can't write a law without 100 pages of exemptions, then maybe that law shouldn't exist.

To all arguing it doesn't matter about religious symbols in schools, what do you think of Satanists wearing inverted crosses, a symbol specifically designed to show disdain for another religious group, the Christians?

Ban it and we're "discriminating against" Satanists.
Permit it and we're "vilifying" Christians.

Is this ‘debate’ the worst ever? From a news item about re-affirming an existing Labor/Coalition endorsed law about initiated Sikh students being allowed to carry a small, ceremonial sheaved knife at school we've traversed the following miscellany of twaddle:

• ‘madness’ created by ‘difference’;

• predictions of ‘more of this crap now we have a Labor Government’;

• ‘setting a precedent for all children to be armed with concealed weapons’ including weapons like AK47s, marijuana (sic), bowie knives, machetes, children ‘armed to the teeth after being initiated in a pig hunt with dogs’, the ‘small knives’ of the 9/11 hijackers;

• extensions to Christians wearing large Crusader crosses across their chests, young German migrants wearing (shout) SWASTIKA's as 'religiously significant' and Satanists wearing crosses;

• extensions to other (mostly illegal) practices: Governments allegedly turning ‘a blind eye to FGM, forced arranged marriages, cultural peadapjillia (sic) and incest’, eating dog meat or dolphin, Islamic polygamy, predictions of ‘Poso/Ambon’ massacres in ‘a pressure cooker of seething resentment’, cruelty to animals;

• 13 year-old Jewish children free to skip school;

• ill-informed dissertations on race;

• equally ill-informed allegations that ‘all aspects of all cultures are worthy of practising and preserving except ours’, santas everywhere allegedly banned from saying “Ho Ho Ho” and "When our culture is gone it is gone forever", ‘another example of the minority dictating to the majority how we live our lives’;

• the usual array of abusive names for those who disagree – ‘Mexicans’, ‘moonbats’, ‘cretins’ and ‘Why did you leave Norhern (sic) (or Southern) Europe anyway?’

This so-called 'debate' plumbs the depths of ignorance of the existing law, inability to think logically and hysterical scare mongering.

One poster takes us back to the issue of exemptions of the law ‘based on the "needs" of special interest groups’.

The Control of Weapons Act (Vic) allows knives and swords to be carried by the following exempted people: members of the scouts, masons and other lodges, Scottish dancers, martial arts clubs, sporting fencers, theatrical & opera players and the RSL. No problems?

Is there a real issue?

Of course there isn't a real issue Frank, this is a BOAZY thread. Good to see some uncommon sense around here though.

Nice summation Frank. The scouts! Dib dib dib indeed.

High five.

Good point about the scouts- are they allowed to bring their knives to school though?

I've been thinking about this a bit more and when searching for more information about these kirpans, I have the impression that these kirpans do not have to be sharp, and are, in many cases, blunt objects.

If they're blunt then I take back the objection I had because the argument of 'other people's safety' won't stand.
Children use scissors at school- although they don't carry them around with them all day.

I can't see any danger in blunt objects, especially when they can be worn in a safe, secure and concealed manner.

These kirpans are meant to be symbolic rather than functional so bluntness of the blade could be a very reasonable and acceptable compromise.