Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Opinion

Turbans vs. Motorcycle Helmets. Religious Freedom vs Safety?

Published

5 minute read

Should safety trump religious freedom?
That sensitive topic may need to be visited by our Alberta provincial government if it prepares to debate making turban-wearing Sikhs exempt from current motorcycle helmet laws. They will likely need to discuss exemptions for motorcycle riders and also side-car occupants. There are jurisdictions that have these exemptions. Sikhs are allowed to ride without a helmet in British Columbia and Manitoba.
Ontario, after serious study, decided not to allow turban-wearing Sikhs to ride a motorcycle without wearing a helmet, a decision the Canadian Sikh Association called “deeply” disappointing.
Premier Kathleen Wynne of Ontario had also struggled with striking the right balance between public safety and religious accommodation. A bill was brought to the Ontario legislature years ago requesting an exemption. After much thought and consultations it was not supported.
“After careful deliberation, we have determined that we will not grant this type of exemption as it would pose a road safety risk,” she wrote in a letter to the Canadian Sikh Association. “The association has been a strong advocate for an exemption and presented “compelling arguments,” Wynne wrote. “However, the Ontario government has carefully monitored, and considered, the soundness of accommodating your position, drawing on relevant academic research, key legal decisions, and consultations with caucus and the community.”
“Ultimately, the safety of Ontarians is my utmost priority, and I cannot justify setting that concern aside on this issue.” The same would be said in Alberta.
The mandatory helmet law is based on extensive research that shows the high risk of injury and death for motorcyclists who ride without a helmet. Mortality rates have gone down 30 per cent and head injury rates down 75 per cent in jurisdictions with such laws.
Courts have also found that Ontario’s law doesn’t infringe on the Charter of Rights and Freedoms or the Ontario Human Rights Code, so Alberta would not have to worry, then, if a court challenge was to be launched.
So should safety trump religious freedom? That is a tough one, but so is the rights of individuals as a whole. There is a fine line between the wishes of the few versus the needs of the community.
The turban issue is also complicated by it’s history and it’s geographical relevance. If the turban can be altered to identify nobility, carry small weapons and for various castes and events, why could it not be altered for safety measures.
I found this information on the internet’s wikipedia: All Sikh Gurus since Guru Nanak have worn turbans. However, covering one’s hair with a turban was made an official policy by Guru Gobind Singh, the tenth Guru of the Sikhs. The main reasons to wear turban are to take care of the hair, promote equality, and preserve the Sikh identity. Sikh women may wear a turban if they wish.
Sikhs do not cut their hair, as a religious observance. The turban protects the hair and keeps it clean. As Sikhs only form 2% of India’s population, their turbans help identify them, also. When he institutionalized the turban as a part of the Sikh identity, Guru Gobind Singh said, “My Sikh will be recognized among millions.”
If a turban was institutionalized as a personal hygiene measure and as an identification and recognition factor then it should allowed to be covered temporarily for safety factors, but I am not an expert, but just as a questioner.
How our current provincial government deals with this issue could set off some debate beyond the rights of religious rights. How about human rights? Should I be ordered to wear a helmet because I am not of a certain religion?
There will be discussion about allowing the exemption on smaller highways and urban streets, but a head injury at 60 km/h is still severe. An exemption to an exemption, would make less sense. If they wear a helmet on Hwy 2 then they can wear a helmet on residential streets.
If the facts bear out that helmets do not prevent or lessen head injuries and mortality rates then do away with mandatory helmet laws. But if the facts show they do prevent or lessen head injuries and mortality rates then no exemptions.
That is just my thoughts.

conflict

Biden Caves, Allows Ukraine To Use US Missiles For Long-Range Strikes Inside Russia

Published on

From the Daily Caller News Foundation 

By Hailey Gomez

President Joe Biden officially authorized Ukraine to use U.S.-supplied long-range missiles Sunday for strikes inside Russia, according to multiple outlets.

For more than two years, the war between Ukraine and Russia has cost the United States billions in aid, as the Biden administration has sought to support Ukraine in its fight. In February, U.S. officials began considering sending the longer-range Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) to help Ukraine target Russian-occupied territory.

By September, funding for Ukraine became unlikely with the GOP majority Congress, leading Biden officials to, again, look for alternative choices which included loosening weapons restrictions and allowing Ukraine to strike inside of Russia, The Washington Post reported.

However, despite previously opposing the use of such missiles, U.S. officials reportedly confirmed to The New York Times that the weapons would be used against Russian and North Korean troops to help defend Ukrainian soldiers in the Kursk region of western Russia, the outlet reported.Biden Caves, Allows Ukraine To Use US Missiles For Long-Range Strikes Inside Russia

The shift in Biden’s position comes after North Korea sent an estimated 10,000 troops to Kursk in October to assist Moscow in retaking the region, which had been seized by Ukraine, according to The Washington Post. A U.S. official told the outlet that the decision to approve the weapons was partly aimed at deterring North Korea from sending additional troops, warning North Korean leader Kim Jong Un that the initial deployment of aid to Russia was a “costly” mistake, The Post reported.

Biden’s decision comes almost two weeks after President-elect Donald Trump won the 2024 election, campaigning on a platform focused on ending the foreign conflicts that began during the Biden administration. On Nov. 7, Trump warned Russian President Vladimir Putin during a phone call not to escalate the conflict with Ukraine, reportedly reminding him of the sizable U.S. military presence in Europe, according to The Washington Post.

Continue Reading

Daily Caller

Smugglers Reportedly Telling Migrants To Hoof It Toward Border Before Trump Takes Office

Published on

From the Daily Caller News Foundation 

By Jason Hopkins

Human smugglers are reportedly urging migrants to rush into the United States before President-elect Donald Trump comes back into power, according to the Wall Street Journal

Migrants across Latin America are being told by smugglers that the time is now to reach the U.S. southern border before Trump enters office and embarks on his hardline immigration agenda,  according to a report by the WSJ. Officials on the U.S. side of the southern border told the Daily Caller News Foundation that they are bracing for the possibility of a last-minute migrant surge before inauguration day.

“I am deeply concerned about the potential for a surge at our southern border as we near the end of President Biden’s term,” San Diego County Supervisor Jim Desmond, who represents a district by the California-Mexico border, stated to the DCNF. “With the Trump Administration signaling that it will prioritize stricter immigration enforcement, many individuals seeking to enter the U.S. illegally are likely to try to do so before those policies are enacted.”

“Right now, we are already seeing 800 to 1,000 people entering our region daily, creating a massive strain on our resources, services, and communities,” Desmond continued. “The influx is overwhelming local infrastructure and endangering the well-being of residents.”

Close to the Darien Gap — a vast jungle region spread across the Panama and Colombia border where thousands of U.S-bound migrants cross every year — migrants were told by a smuggler that he anticipates more deportations under the Trump administration, according to a WhatsApp group message reviewed by the WSJ.

“There were four WhatsApp groups in which hundreds of migrants coordinated their departure on U.S. election day,” Luis Villagrán, a Mexican migrant advocate who helps organize caravans in Tapachula, told the WSJ.

“As soon as Trump’s victory became clear, messages spreading fear began to appear,” Villagrán said.

In a statement to the DCNF, a Customs and Border Protection (CBP) spokesperson said the agency is remaining vigilant to ever-changing migration patterns, and urged migrants to “not believe the lies” of smugglers.

“The fact remains: the United States continues to enforce immigration law. Individuals who enter the U.S. unlawfully between ports of entry will continue to be quickly removed,” the CBP spokesperson said.

Upon entering office, President Joe Biden undertook 296 executive actions on immigration, with 89 of those orders specifically reversing or beginning the process of reversing Trump’s immigration policies. The Biden-Harris administration went on to undo a number of major Trump-era initiatives concerning border security, such as ending border wall construction and shutting down the Remain in Mexico program.

The aftermath was a historic flow of illegal immigration across the southern border. The number of illegal border crossings in fiscal year 2024 were the second worst in U.S. history — only surpassed by fiscal year 2023, according to data tracked by CBP.

There were about 8.5 million migrant encounters along the U.S.-Mexico border during the four fiscal years of the Biden-Harris administration.

Trump, who is set to return to office in January, was very clear about his immigration enforcement platform while on the campaign trail.

The president-elect has pledged to continue building the U.S.-Mexico border wall, revive the Remain in Mexico program, hire more border patrol agents and embark on the “largest deportation program in American history.” He has also pledged to put an end to birthright citizenship for those born on U.S. soil by illegal migrant parents.

The incoming administration appears poised to follow through this hardline agenda given the picks so far to lead top immigration enforcement roles. The White House transition team has tapped former Immigration and Customs Enforcement  acting director Tom Homan to serve as border czar, Stephen Miller to serve as deputy chief of staff for policy and South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem to lead the Department of Homeland Security.

Human smugglers and migrants south of the border appear to be paying attention to the American political scene. At least some migrants are now reportedly ditching the idea of booking an asylum appointment with U.S. officials and joining northbound caravans to the border.

“More than 20 friends decided not to wait for an appointment and joined the caravan,” Alfonso Meléndez, a 24-year-old Venezuelan national who arrived in southern Mexico in late September, stated to the WSJ.

“I’m very worried that they will throw us out when Trump takes office,” he continued.

Continue Reading

Trending

X