Silence at Remembrance Day ceremony disrupted by protestors

[Lone Star]

I think I can see Happiness' point of contention here.

In this day and age of 'political correctness', we're allowing our customs and practices to be slowly disintegrated in the name of 'not offending' immigrants and other minority groups.

I believe the point that she was trying to make about the RCMP officer and the turban was simply that the RCMP has a long tradition and their uniforms are unique to only them. To change that tradition in the name of 'religious acceptance' is absurd.

In the United States, the proper show of respect for our flag and national athem is to stand and face the flag, while you place your hand over your heart (remove your headdress and hold it over your heart) when the national anthem is played. You would be offended (as would any American) if someone remained sitting or turned away from the flag and gave a Nazi salute.

The point she was trying to make echoes the long held adage, "When in Rome, do as the Romans". The long standing traditions of the RCMP should NOT be usurped in the name of any religion.

If you're going to emigrate to another country (for whatever reason you choose), it's not an unrealistic expectation that you try to assimilate yourself into the customs and practices of your host country.

No one has suggested that you trade your own customs and practices for those of your host country, but do NOT expect that your host country HAS to accept and accomodate them.

Here in the United States, there has been a shift to bending over backwards to accomodate everyone else's traditions and customs, that we are losing our own customs and traditions in order to 'make peace'. (Look at how we're not suppose to wich each other "Merry Christmas" because it offends some minorities. We are now only allowed to wish each other "Happy Holidays" and "Seasons Greetings", and Christmas is now being referred to as "Winter Holiday". We're not even supposed to refer to the symbol of the decorated tree as a 'Christmas Tree'.)

As a minority, I don't care if you wish to observe and practice Yom Kippur, Hanukkah, Tet, Kwanzaa, Cinco de Mayo or whatever holiday (religious or otherwise) you wish to observe; but do NOT expect me to change MY right to observe the holidays and Holy Days I hold dear just because you find them 'offensive'! The same goes for customs and practices.

[Happiness]

Really? What is it then, because what I got was, "Turbans are foreign, therefore shouldn't be allowed, even if the person is a natural born Canadian Citizen." Would you have a problem with a Jew wearing a yarmulke or a Christian wearing a crucifix? All are parts of religious dress (albeit the crucifix is the least strong as nothing I know of in Christianity, and definitely Catholicism, compels wearing one, unlike the Sikhs and Jews with the turban and yarmulke respectively), so either all should be allowed or none allowed provided it doesn't interfere with job performance. Well you didnt get what I said comming from the above babble. It is to ME disrepectful to ask a country to change something (like the uniform of the RCMP)that has been a part of the culture as what they were saying (what I got out of the op)by protesting against Rememberance Day services and the Minute of Silence. I do realize that you said you think its deplorable and thats good.

So how do you feel when the other European immigrants (regardless of if they were born in Canada or not or when their family immigrated) who don't pay heed to First Nations culture?All I get out of the above is you didnt really like my answer to your original question so you have decided to ask another

Thank you Lone for say that, you have nailed it.

Edited November 13, 2010 by Happiness

[JPINFV]

I think I can see Happiness' point of contention here.

In this day and age of 'political correctness', we're allowing our customs and practices to be slowly disintegrated in the name of 'not offending' immigrants and other minority groups.

However customs and practices are always changing. The customs and practices of today is different than it was 50 years ago or 100 years ago. That's not necessarily a bad thing nor is it just due to immigration. However some change is do to the influence of immigrants, which is not de facto bad either.

I believe the point that she was trying to make about the RCMP officer and the turban was simply that the RCMP has a long tradition and their uniforms are unique to only them. To change that tradition in the name of 'religious acceptance' is absurd.

Only as absurd as it is to say that one religion can wear religious garb but not another. What would your response be if the RCMP ordered an officer to remove a visible crucifix?

In the United States, the proper show of respect for our flag and national athem is to stand and face the flag, while you place your hand over your heart (remove your headdress and hold it over your heart) when the national anthem is played. You would be offended (as would any American) if someone remained sitting or turned away from the flag and gave a Nazi salute.

Going off the above about customs and practices, may I present the Bellany salute circa 1892-1942.

Hell, that was changed because of a specific foreign government. Let's return to it since we shouldn't let foreigners change our customs and practices!

The point she was trying to make echoes the long held adage, "When in Rome, do as the Romans". The long standing traditions of the RCMP should NOT be usurped in the name of any religion.

Sure, but then that prohibition needs to be for all religions, not just the Muslims. Similarly, even the Romans incorporated foreign culture into Roman culture. You don't think that all that conquering didn't change Roman culture, do you? Look through out history at countries like Japan and China and look at the differences between when they were more open to foreigners or more closed off.

If you're going to emigrate to another country (for whatever reason you choose), it's not an unrealistic expectation that you try to assimilate yourself into the customs and practices of your host country.

No one has suggested that you trade your own customs and practices for those of your host country, but do NOT expect that your host country HAS to accept and accomodate them.

However this gets sticky when you start dealing with early generations. A 1st generation citizen is not an immigrant and their country of citizenship is not a host country. They are a citizen, with all of the rights and responsibilities that comes with it, even if people who's families immigrated earlier dislike it.

Here in the United States, there has been a shift to bending over backwards to accomodate everyone else's traditions and customs, that we are losing our own customs and traditions in order to 'make peace'. (Look at how we're not suppose to wich each other "Merry Christmas" because it offends some minorities. We are now only allowed to wish each other "Happy Holidays" and "Seasons Greetings", and Christmas is now being referred to as "Winter Holiday". We're not even supposed to refer to the symbol of the decorated tree as a 'Christmas Tree'.)

As a minority, I don't care if you wish to observe and practice Yom Kippur, Hanukkah, Tet, Kwanzaa, Cinco de Mayo or whatever holiday (religious or otherwise) you wish to observe; but do NOT expect me to change MY right to observe the holidays and Holy Days I hold dear just because you find them 'offensive'! The same goes for customs and practices.

For a country with supposedly no national religion, we Americans sure are a funny bunch when it comes to promoting religious holidays. Especially a holiday that most people don't understand the history of and has become disgustingly commercialized. After all, the roots of Christmas are Pagan in origin.

However, if someone wished you a merry Hanukkah, would you be offended? I was going to say Kwanzaa, but that's not a real holiday anyways.

[Lone Star]

I can only speak for myself on this. I'm watching our customs, policies, rites, traditions, and observances slowly being eroded in the name of 'accomodation' of minorities...some who can't even be bothered to become citizens before they start demanding we change OUR ways to suit them.

While we have no 'national religion', how is it that the minorities can expect their religious beliefs to be more important than those natural citizens of this country? How are our established policies, customs and practices suddenly 'less important' than those of the immigrating minority?

How many of YOUR customs, traditions and religion are you willing to give up to make other's happy? Don't you have that RIGHT in this country as well as the minorities do? Where are YOU willing to 'draw that line' where you will not back up from?

As a Catholic, I do not feel that my religion is better or superior to the Baptists, the Pentecostals, the Lutherans, the Buddhist, the Muslim, the Wiccan, the Scientologist or any other religious group, but I will NOT compromise MY religion to accommodate theirs as 'superior' or 'more important'!

This country may only be a couple hundred years old, but guess what? Some of our traditions are that old as well, and 'thats the way we do things here'. To expect me to turn my back on over 200 years of traditions, customs, etc; just because you think YOUR ways are more important will probably meet with more than just a wee bit of resistance!

The consitution states that 'all men are created equal' which to me means that no one person/group's ways of doing things should interfere, limit or otherwise negate the others!

If you were to move to Iraq (as a matter of example) do you REALLY think you would be in a position to DEMAND that your traditions, religion and customs would be welcomed? I think the United States has been more than accomodating in that respect, and its about time that OUR ways of doing things are accomodated as well! It IS after all, OUR country that they came to!

[tniuqs]

Really? What is it then, because what I got was, "Turbans are foreign, therefore shouldn't be allowed, even if the person is a natural born Canadian Citizen." Would you have a problem with a Jew wearing a yarmulke or a Christian wearing a crucifix? All are parts of religious dress (albeit the crucifix is the least strong as nothing I know of in Christianity, and definitely Catholicism, compels wearing one, unlike the Sikhs and Jews with the turban and yarmulke respectively), so either all should be allowed or none allowed provided it doesn't interfere with job performance.

So how do you feel when the other European immigrants (regardless of if they were born in Canada or not or when their family immigrated) who don't pay heed to First Nations culture?

If you were to move to Iraq (as a matter of example) do you REALLY think you would be in a position to DEMAND that your traditions, religion and customs would be welcomed? I think the United States has been more than accomodating in that respect, and its about time that OUR ways of doing things are accomodated as well! It IS after all, OUR country that they came to!

Bravo !

Edited November 13, 2010 by tniuqs

[JPINFV]

I can only speak for myself on this. I'm watching our customs, policies, rites, traditions, and observances slowly being eroded in the name of 'accomodation' of minorities...some who can't even be bothered to become citizens before they start demanding we change OUR ways to suit them.

While we have no 'national religion', how is it that the minorities can expect their religious beliefs to be more important than those natural citizens of this country? How are our established policies, customs and practices suddenly 'less important' than those of the immigrating minority?

First off, I don't recognize a difference between a natural born citizen (blood or birth) and a naturalized citizen in terms of customs, polices, or practices. Either your a citizen, which includes all of the rights and responsibilities, or you're not a citizen. It's not a "Born here first, then citizen by blood, then citizen by naturalization" hierarchy. Additionally, I honestly believe that naturalized citizens have more reason to be proud of their citizenship than natural born citizens. My citizenship in this great country has been handed to me on a silver platter because I was lucky enough to be born here and kept because I can't be half-assed (nor do I have the time) to explore other valid options (no, Mexico doesn't count as a valid option. Neither does Iraq.). I'm willing to argue that the vast majority of natural born citizens fall into that category. That is completely different than someone uprooting themselves, and possibly their family, moving to a strange land, and earning citizenship. They have a right to be proud to be an American. Most of us have no reason to be proud (and, note, not being proud is NOT the same as being ashamed) to be an American. It's just something we are. No different than anything else we have no control over, be it skin color, ethnicity, or sex. Additionally, any citizen, regardless of earning citizenship or getting lucky in the lottery of life, has a right to petition the government and attempt to change the society that they are a member of. That's part of the right of being a citizen. Other citizens have the right to oppose that petition, and all citizens have the right to pass personal judgment on the merits and motivations of both sides. Neither the natural born citizens or the naturalized citizens get a pass in this.

How many of YOUR customs, traditions and religion are you willing to give up to make other's happy? Don't you have that RIGHT in this country as well as the minorities do? Where are YOU willing to 'draw that line' where you will not back up from?

None, but I neither ask, nor require, permission of others for me to practice my own customs. Similarly, I don't expect others to gain my consent provided it is all done in a lawful manner. I may not agree with what someone is doing, but that doesn't mean I think the government should step in and stop it.

As a Catholic, I do not feel that my religion is better or superior to the Baptists, the Pentecostals, the Lutherans, the Buddhist, the Muslim, the Wiccan, the Scientologist or any other religious group, but I will NOT compromise MY religion to accommodate theirs as 'superior' or 'more important'!

Who's asking you to accommodate their religion as superior? Does your Catholicism really hinge on wishing someone a merry Christmas? So what if they don't like it, they don't have to. You're well within your right to wish them a merry Christmas as much as you want. Similarly, they are free to pass what ever judgment they'd like. Of course, why would you want to keep friends with someone who's so uptight that they get mad over a greeting like that? I'm Catholic, and I don't see how I would be offended if a Muslim greeted me with the traditional greeting for Ramadan, but my religion doesn't depend on the approval of others.

However, there are plenty of examples of Christians in general acting like our religion (all sects included) are somehow superior to all other religions in this country.

If you were to move to Iraq (as a matter of example) do you REALLY think you would be in a position to DEMAND that your traditions, religion and customs would be welcomed? I think the United States has been more than accomodating in that respect, and its about time that OUR ways of doing things are accomodated as well! It IS after all, OUR country that they came to!

No, but I always assumed that the United States was a significantly better country than Iraq. I have been wrong about these things before, and since you're making that argument, you obviously think that Iraq and the United States are apparently somewhere near the same level in terms of governance.

[rock_shoes]

First off, I don't recognize a difference between a natural born citizen (blood or birth) and a naturalized citizen in terms of customs, polices, or practices. Either your a citizen, which includes all of the rights and responsibilities, or you're not a citizen.

Exactly. If you are a Canadian citizen you have the responsibility to respect the Canadian tradition of honouring those who have chosen to serve Canada. It really is that simple.

At what point do we tolerate ourselves out of existence? Race, religion, sexual preference, political views, I could care less. Do not disrespect those who serve the country. If you don't like the way soldiers are deployed protest those government policies. Soldiers don't choose where they're deployed. Politicians do.

[tniuqs]

Exactly. If you are a Canadian citizen you have the responsibility to respect the Canadian tradition of honouring those who have chosen to serve Canada. It really is that simple.

At what point do we tolerate ourselves out of existence? Race, religion, sexual preference, political views, I could care less. Do not disrespect those who serve the country. If you don't like the way soldiers are deployed protest those government policies. Soldiers don't choose where they're deployed. Politicians do.

Edited November 13, 2010 by tniuqs

[JPINFV]

Acceptable and legal are two different questions. Acceptable? No. Something that should be illegal? Not if you value freedom of speech.

[Lone Star]

JP, you're being intentionally obtuse just for the sake of an argument. I'm not going to get into a long drawn out affair over this.

First off, I don't recognize a difference between a natural born citizen (blood or birth) and a naturalized citizen in terms of customs, polices, or practices. Either your a citizen, which includes all of the rights and responsibilities, or you're not a citizen. It's not a "Born here first, then citizen by blood, then citizen by naturalization" hierarchy. Additionally, I honestly believe that naturalized citizens have more reason to be proud of their citizenship than natural born citizens. My citizenship in this great country has been handed to me on a silver platter because I was lucky enough to be born here and kept because I can't be half-assed (nor do I have the time) to explore other valid options (no, Mexico doesn't count as a valid option. Neither does Iraq.). I'm willing to argue that the vast majority of natural born citizens fall into that category. That is completely different than someone uprooting themselves, and possibly their family, moving to a strange land, and earning citizenship. They have a right to be proud to be an American. Most of us have no reason to be proud (and, note, not being proud is NOT the same as being ashamed) to be an American. It's just something we are. No different than anything else we have no control over, be it skin color, ethnicity, or sex. Additionally, any citizen, regardless of earning citizenship or getting lucky in the lottery of life, has a right to petition the government and attempt to change the society that they are a member of. That's part of the right of being a citizen. Other citizens have the right to oppose that petition, and all citizens have the right to pass personal judgment on the merits and motivations of both sides. Neither the natural born citizens or the naturalized citizens get a pass in this.

Whether you recognize a 'heirarchy' or not, there IS a problem in this country of the rights of the 'natural born citizens' and 'legalized citizens' being trampled by the minorities (some of who refuse to enter this country legally). The point is, this country was founded on certain values, customs and traditions. Others have been formed later. To move to this country and demand that these customs, values and traditions be changed because you, the immigrant find them 'offensive' is absurd. That's the bottom line. America has no problem with the immigrant bringing their customs, traditions and values with them, but you MUST respect the ones of this country as well. If you don't like the celebration, holiday or other tradition or rite...then don't participate; but do NOT demand that we stop because you. the GUEST find it contrary or offensive to your way of life. No one asked you to come to this country, and we as the host country shouldn't be expected to change our ways of life to suit you!

Just because I was lucky enough to be born in America does not preclude me from being a 'proud American'. If you're not a 'proud American' then feel free to exercise your right to the freedom of choice as you find another country that you CAN be proud of!

As far as not earning your citizenship in this country, it is a federal crime to enter this country illegally and to stay in this country illegally. To change this 'illegal status' is to become a citizen. If you cannot be bothered to become a citizen, then you have no place in this country, and you have no voice in it's policies, its practices, or it's traditions.

None, but I neither ask, nor require, permission of others for me to practice my own customs. Similarly, I don't expect others to gain my consent provided it is all done in a lawful manner. I may not agree with what someone is doing, but that doesn't mean I think the government should step in and stop it.

Are you willing to give up your traditions, customs and practices because someone finds them offensive? We already ARE doing just that. Haven't you noticed that we aren't supposed to use the word 'Christmas' in December any more? It's now referred to as a 'winter holiday' and our Christmas tree is now called a 'holiday tree' all because non-Christian minorities found the reference to Christ as offensive.

Who's asking you to accommodate their religion as superior? Does your Catholicism really hinge on wishing someone a merry Christmas? So what if they don't like it, they don't have to. You're well within your right to wish them a merry Christmas as much as you want. Similarly, they are free to pass what ever judgment they'd like. Of course, why would you want to keep friends with someone who's so uptight that they get mad over a greeting like that? I'm Catholic, and I don't see how I would be offended if a Muslim greeted me with the traditional greeting for Ramadan, but my religion doesn't depend on the approval of others.

Why should I refrain from my Christian beliefs because someone finds them offensive, and yet I still have to honor their traditions (look at the woman in FL who raised such a stink about not being able to have her veil on for her driver's license photograph). The whole purpose of having your picture on the license is to be able to identify you as the legal holder of that license. If you're not showing your whole face, then how do you expect it to be VALID form of ID?

However, there are plenty of examples of Christians in general acting like our religion (all sects included) are somehow superior to all other religions in this country.

Show me where non Christian religions are being restricted in their practices. Show me one 'non Christian religion' that is having their holidays renamed because the mere mention of them is 'offensive'....you can't because it's not happening to them!

No, but I always assumed that the United States was a significantly better country than Iraq. I have been wrong about these things before, and since you're making that argument, you obviously think that Iraq and the United States are apparently somewhere near the same level in terms of governance.

It's not that I think those two countries are similar in governance. In Iraq, you can be put to death for not conforming to the Muslim religious ways. Which means that if you hold Christian values, you either turn your back on them, move out of the country or die....you can't even practice your Christian rituals in private. This is a strict DEMAND of the 'host nation' should you decide to move there. You either 'fit in' or you leave/die. No questions, no argument, no compromise.