[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Valmy]

Nobody understands what exactly the Sikhs believe, besides the fact they wear turbans, so Singh is probably safe.

[Malthus]

Nobody understands what exactly the Sikhs believe, besides the fact they wear turbans, so Singh is probably safe.

Interestingly, there appears to be no specifically religious prohibition to gay marriage in Sikhism.

The Sikh holy book, the Guru Granth Sahib, details what behaviour is expected of all Sikhs. It frequently encourages a married life.[clarification needed] Marriage in Sikhism is seen as a union of souls, and the soul is seen as genderless, with the outward appearance of human beings (man, woman) being a temporary state. Same-sex marriage advocates refer to this as support for marriage equality in Sikhism.[3] The Laavaan, the main part of Anand Karaj, are read at Sikh weddings for the union of two souls through marriage. In these hymns there is no mention of gender, but rather the participants are regarded as souls that are genderless. Marriage is seen as a spiritual journey to achieving lasting happiness through committing to the faith.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikhism_and_sexual_orientation

The issue is complex: the religion itself does not forbid it, but most of the authoritative practitioners live in India, in which homosexuality is socially denigrated, and their leader has simply announced it isn't proper. Thus, a split has developed, with many Sikhs in places like Canada arguing that if it isn't religiously prohibited, it ought to be allowed. 

Giani Joginder Singh Vedanti of the Akal Takht (the temporal Sikh authority in India) has condemned homosexuality. In March 2005, he told visiting Sikh-Canadian Members of Parliament (MPs) that they had a religious duty to oppose same-sex marriage: "The basic duty of Sikh MPs in Canada should be to support laws that stop this kind of practice [homosexuality], because there are thousands of Sikhs living in Canada, to ensure that Sikhs do not fall prey to this practice".[1]

The divide between supporters and opponents of LGBT rights has become increasingly clear, creating a largely generational rift between older conservatives and younger liberals. Many Sikhs believe there is nothing wrong[2] with being LGBT or supporting LGBT rights more generally, including same-sex marriage. These Sikhs believe that the view of some preachers in the Akal Takht is flawed.[3][4]

[viper37]

Nobody understands what exactly the Sikhs believe, besides the fact they wear turbans, so Singh is probably safe.

Interestingly, there appears to be no specifically religious prohibition to gay marriage in Sikhism.

The Sikh holy book, the Guru Granth Sahib, details what behaviour is expected of all Sikhs. It frequently encourages a married life.[clarification needed] Marriage in Sikhism is seen as a union of souls, and the soul is seen as genderless, with the outward appearance of human beings (man, woman) being a temporary state. Same-sex marriage advocates refer to this as support for marriage equality in Sikhism.[3] The Laavaan, the main part of Anand Karaj, are read at Sikh weddings for the union of two souls through marriage. In these hymns there is no mention of gender, but rather the participants are regarded as souls that are genderless. Marriage is seen as a spiritual journey to achieving lasting happiness through committing to the faith.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikhism_and_sexual_orientation

The issue is complex: the religion itself does not forbid it, but most of the authoritative practitioners live in India, in which homosexuality is socially denigrated, and their leader has simply announced it isn't proper. Thus, a split has developed, with many Sikhs in places like Canada arguing that if it isn't religiously prohibited, it ought to be allowed. 

Giani Joginder Singh Vedanti of the Akal Takht (the temporal Sikh authority in India) has condemned homosexuality. In March 2005, he told visiting Sikh-Canadian Members of Parliament (MPs) that they had a religious duty to oppose same-sex marriage: "The basic duty of Sikh MPs in Canada should be to support laws that stop this kind of practice [homosexuality], because there are thousands of Sikhs living in Canada, to ensure that Sikhs do not fall prey to this practice".[1]

The divide between supporters and opponents of LGBT rights has become increasingly clear, creating a largely generational rift between older conservatives and younger liberals. Many Sikhs believe there is nothing wrong[2] with being LGBT or supporting LGBT rights more generally, including same-sex marriage. These Sikhs believe that the view of some preachers in the Akal Takht is flawed.[3][4]

Ah, so, some principles and interpretation of the Faith can be ignored, depending on where & when...  I see...

[Malthus]

Ah, so, some principles and interpretation of the Faith can be ignored, depending on where & when...  I see...

More like the faith simply doesn't address homosexuality at all. So those who are from places where being gay is a problem, attempt to assert their personal authority to prohibit it; while those from places that are more liberal refuse to accept that, and point to te faith (in this case, their holy book) as proof that they are correct.

There is an interesting dynamic here.

[viper37]

Ah, so, some principles and interpretation of the Faith can be ignored, depending on where & when...  I see...

More like the faith simply doesn't address homosexuality at all. So those who are from places where being gay is a problem, attempt to assert their personal authority to prohibit it; while those from places that are more liberal refuse to accept that, and point to te faith (in this case, their holy book) as proof that they are correct.

I got it the first time, you know...

There is an interesting dynamic here.

Yes, it is happenning in many religions.  See, Scheer and Pence are Catholic, like most of the population in Quebec still considers itself Catholic.  You'd have trouble finding a random Catholic with similar views over here.  Even for those who still practice the religion, most of these views appear antiquated, and since the last Bishop got a nomination to Rome, the new one has never been very vocal about abortion or gay marriage.

[Valmy]

More like the faith simply doesn't address homosexuality at all

Color me skeptical. I mean I get the union of souls thing but it is actually pretty rare for souls to have gender, the Mormons are considered pretty weird for embracing that concept and they definitely did it as something different from other western religions. And I can definitely see same sex marriage advocates would grasp that concept to try to make Sikhism and same sex marriage compatible. And I get what Wiki says...

However the idea that Sikhism "simply" says anything is a little troublesome. They have so many gurus and so many concepts in their religion, and this being India culture and religion are very closely related. The idea that somehow there is a "faith" and a "culture" that are distinct is I think a concept that might be potentially foreign to Sikhism. Maybe. I certainly do not claim to be some kind of expert, I certainly tried very hard to understand Sikhs and Hindus for awhile and generally just found it overwhelming. I was relieved to discover that Indians themselves find it all kind of overwhelming 

The fact that the leader of the Sikhs in India says differently is significant. I don't think it is a cut and dry issue that the "faith" (whatever that might mean in the Sikh context) is simple and saying nothing on this subject.

But every religion can by hippified and brought over to good 21st century values so it is certainly possible and it seems the groundwork to do that are already being made.

[Malthus]

More like the faith simply doesn't address homosexuality at all

Color me skeptical. I mean I get the union of souls thing but it is actually pretty rare for souls to have gender, the Mormons are considered pretty weird for embracing that concept and they definitely did it as something different from other western religions. And I can definitely see same sex marriage advocates would grasp that concept to try to make Sikhism and same sex marriage compatible. And I get what Wiki says...

However the idea that Sikhism "simply" says anything is a little troublesome. They have so many gurus and so many concepts in their religion, and this being India culture and religion are very closely related. The idea that somehow there is a "faith" and a "culture" that are distinct is I think a concept that might be potentially foreign to Sikhism. Maybe. I certainly do not claim to be some kind of expert, I certainly tried very hard to understand Sikhs and Hindus for awhile and generally just found it overwhelming. I was relieved to discover that Indians themselves find it all kind of overwhelming 

The fact that the leader of the Sikhs in India says differently is significant. I don't think it is a cut and dry issue that the "faith" (whatever that might mean in the Sikh context) is simple and saying nothing on this subject.

But every religion can by hippified and brought over to good 21st century values so it is certainly possible and it seems the groundwork to do that are already being made.

I dunno if it is really all that complex - as I understand it, Sikhism is embodied in the sayings of a line of divinely inspired Gurus, the last of which is a book incorporating their wisdom that is itself considered the last of the Gurus (sort of like Mohammad is the last of the prophets, I suppose).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guru_Granth_Sahib

If that is the case, the only religiously authoritative statements of the religion come from these Gurus, and in particular this book. They apparently say nothing about the gays.

Any Sikh leaders around today have no particular authority within the religion to add to these sayings. They are not themselves "gurus".

[PRC]

Don Cherry has been fired by Sportsnet over his recent "you people" comments.

[viper37]

So, after years of ranting against French Canadians and Europeans, Don Cherry has been fired for a silly comment about immigrants not being patritic enough for his taste.  Got to admit, English Canada is quick on the trigger to defend multiculturalism.  Which seemingly does not apply to francophones and white europeans.  Weird...

[Valmy]

I dunno if it is really all that complex - as I understand it, Sikhism is embodied in the sayings of a line of divinely inspired Gurus, the last of which is a book incorporating their wisdom that is itself considered the last of the Gurus (sort of like Mohammad is the last of the prophets, I suppose).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guru_Granth_Sahib

If that is the case, the only religiously authoritative statements of the religion come from these Gurus, and in particular this book. They apparently say nothing about the gays.

Any Sikh leaders around today have no particular authority within the religion to add to these sayings. They are not themselves "gurus".

Yes I am aware of that in theory. I certainly am no expert on the subject despite my best efforts

[Malthus]

Yes I am aware of that in theory. I certainly am no expert on the subject despite my best efforts

I know very little about Sikhism other than what I've read, but Sikhs have always impressed me as being, in some superficial ways, sort of like us Jews.

- Range the spectrum from hardcore traditionalists to ultra liberals
- No living religious hierarchy that is binding - it's all based on interpretations from books
- Has group stereotyped reputation for being unfriendly, hard working, business savvy, clever and clannish - others admire, envy and dislike them, depending 
- Wears funny headgear that makes the likes of Viper crazy for some reason (sorry, Viper  )

[HVC]

Wasn't sure whether to post this here or in the hockey thread, but don cherry got fired over comments in regards to immigrants and wearing a poppy. With obvious don cherry flair thrown into the comments.

[Valmy]

Wasn't sure whether to post this here or in the hockey thread, but don cherry got fired over comments in regards to immigrants and wearing a poppy. With obvious don cherry flair thrown into the comments.

Viper already commented that it seems Don Cherry could regard Francophones as subhumans forever but as soon as he says anything about immigrants oh now it is offensive

[Malthus]

Wasn't sure whether to post this here or in the hockey thread, but don cherry got fired over comments in regards to immigrants and wearing a poppy. With obvious don cherry flair thrown into the comments.

Viper already commented that it seems Don Cherry could regard Francophones as subhumans forever but as soon as he says anything about immigrants oh now it is offensive

I don't actually watch the guy (or sports for that matter  ), but I rather suspect the issue is that Don Cherry has played the loudmouthed right wing troll nutter for decades, but the tolerance for his sort of outbursts has decreased.

[HVC]

Be be fair he also shitted on Europeans, not just French Canadians lol