Turban vs Helmet Article Opinion
When two major laws, safety and freedom of religion go head to head on which is more important. When a religious Sikh man got a $110 fine for not wearing a helmet on a motorcycle. Now the community is facing a moral dilemma of what right should come first when looking at this situation. In this opinion piece I will discuss what I thought of the situation and why I believe he should’ve wore a helmet in this scenario. I feel safety is a main concern when riding a motorcycle that helmet’s protect you from head injuries and there are many other ways of transportation if one prevents you from a certain religion standard.
In my opinion, while reading this article I found it was hard to make up my mind on what
In 1989, plaintiff Joseph Benning was cited for a violation of § 1256 for operating a motorcycle without wearing approved headgear in Caledonia County, Vermont. The statue states that “No person may operate or ride upon a motorcycle upon a highway unless he wears upon his head protective headgear reflectorized in part and of a type approved by the commissioner.1 The headgear shall be equipped with either a neck or chin strap.1” The County State’s Attorney dismissed the citation because he deemed the statue vague and unable to establish the elements necessary to prosecute the crime.1 However, the plaintiffs filed suit against the state, seeking to have § 1256 declared unconstitutional.
The reasoning used by the Supreme court judges are based by the Oakes test. The main and sufficient objective according to the Quebec Court of Appeal and the Commission scolaire was the school safety; however, the Supreme Court found that the limitation went beyond the initial and intended objective set out by the Supreme Court and the Commission scolaire (Canadian Human Rights Reporter, 203). Judges McLachlin, Bastarache, Binnie, Fish and Charron JJ. also said that prohibiting Gurbaj’s right to bear the kirpan has more deleterious effects than salutary because it infringes on his freedom of religion. In addition, factor such as school safety is already at risk since there are other objects in school that could be “used to commit violence acts
In this instance the government regulation to keep the school safe is interfering with Rajiv’s fundamental freedom of conscience and religion stated in section 2 of the charter, and it is doing so unjustly. While the information given in the story was scarce, there were no reports of a Kirpan being used a weapon before, any problems with weapons, or any attempt to find an alternative instead of disallowing the Kirpan completely . In the case Multani v. Commission scolaire Marguerite-Bourgeoys The Supreme Court of Canada decided that the decision to prohibit the wearing of a Kirpan to be a violation of one’s fundamental freedom. This is important because a precedent has been set by the Supreme Court of Canada. After the Multani v. Commission scolaire Marguerite-Bourgeoys case the court decided that if that given the premise a student has not used the Kirpan as a weapon before, and sincerely believes that a metal Kirpan is essential in paying respects to their religion, it is within their rights to wear one. This important as it proves that the government regulation seized Rajiv’s Kir...
Millions of people all over the United States choose motorcycles over automobiles for the thrill, speed, and high performance capabilities. On the other hand, motorcycles are not at all the safest way of transportation. Motorcycles do not provide the passenger with the outer protection that cars provide, therefore, when one crashes, the results are usually much more serious. Injuries to the head are responsible for 76% of fatalities when dealing with motorcycle crashes many of which could have been prevented had the rider been wearing a helmet. For this reason, many states have adopted the motorcycle helmet law. The law states that every passengers must wear a helmet at all times when riding on a motorcycle. This law has created a great deal of controversy. One side supports the law, believing that it protects motorcyclists from danger and saves the economy a great deal of money. The other side argues that the law is unconstitutional and it violates our right to freedom. However, statistics show overwhelming support in favor of the motorcycle helmet law. Although wearing helmets cannot prevent motorcycle crashes, they can greatly reduce the number of deaths caused by head injury as well as lowering taxes, insurance rates, and health care costs. Therefore, the helmet law should be put into effect in every state across the United States.
...r a headscarf. The only way to reduce and eliminate these issues is to educate Americans on their faith and way of life. There is a long road ahead for the Sikh community, but I hope one day the ignorance will subside, and we can all live in a peaceful country.
What are the major points of the article and why do you think they are main
Opinionator. NY Times. 15 March 2012. Web. 29 April 2014.
In addition, this articles overall effectiveness was not what I was expecting. The article was overwhelming because of all the people she mentioned and then she tried elaborating what they all said after each interview! “For my most recent bo...
Equality and Human Rights Commission Guidance. Guidance on the wearing of Sikh articles of faith in the workplace and public spaces. 2010. Web. .
... the best decision that people can possibly make. People need and should be informed about this mistaken belief.
Furthermore, I will enter into the question how employers and employees should handle religious discrimination in the workplace. Since discrimination in the workplace cannot only cause costly lawsuits, but also has an impact on the moral of the employees, I will name some preventive measures. After that, I will switch to the employee’s view and give the reader an idea of what an employee should consider when filing a charge because of religious discrimination.
“Provisions of the International Religious Freedom Act.” Facts On File Issues and Controversies. Jan 21 2000:18.
Reading through the essay I felt that Bob Smietana the author was speaking as a reporter. Rather than offering his own opinion he throughout the essay presented opinions from both sides of the arguement.
Motorcycle riders argue that the choice to wear or not to wear a motorcycle helmet is a personal one and universal helmet laws, laws which require all riders to wear a helmet, are a violation of their civil rights. In lawsuits against states with universal helmet laws, high courts were divided. Some states ruled that the universal helmet law was unconstitutional, such as in Illinois and Michigan. In other states, such as Massachusetts and Florida, the courts upheld the law (Marian and Bayer 210-211). To be sure, personal choice is something to be taken into consideration, however, concerns over personal safety and the safety of others should outweigh the personal choice in this matter.
Did you have influences from other people to tell you to wear a head scarf?