Ontario's helmet law discriminates against devout Sikhs, court told - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Cheese · 02-15-2008, 06:42 PM

Forcing a devout, motorcycle-riding Sikh to choose between his turban and a helmet is denying him the right to religious freedom, human rights lawyers argued Friday as Baljinder Badesha's fight against a $110 fine took on the character of a constitutional challenge.

Turban powered Harley

Eventually religious freedom is going to cost lives.

burn_this_city · 02-15-2008, 06:44 PM

My boss is a devout Sikh and he would disagree with this lawsuit completely.. Its the same story as trying to get on construction sites without a hard-hat.. Safety prevails over religious freedoms..

HotHotHeat · 02-15-2008, 06:48 PM

Natural selective freedom always wins

MarchHare · 02-15-2008, 07:46 PM

So long as my tax dollars are going to pay for his ER visit if he gets in an accident and suffers a head injury, he can wear a helmet like everyone else, religious freedom be damned.

Also, one must be really, really, really stupid to think it's a good idea ride a motorcycle with out a helmet anyway.

photon · 02-15-2008, 07:48 PM

I don't know much about the Sikh religion at all, but something doesn't quite make sense...

If a Sikh's turban was on fire, just for instance, would it be ok to take it off to save their lives? If yes, then isn't this the same thing (just a different degree)?

Dan02 · 02-15-2008, 07:54 PM

so don't ride a motocycle??

photon · 02-15-2008, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fotze

This is a business opportunity. Make special turban compatible helmets.

Lol I had that exact same thought.

Stranger · 02-15-2008, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fotze

This is a business opportunity. Make special turban compatible helmets.

Or helmets and hard hats that look like turbans, just like the cowboy hat hard hats.

FlamesAddiction · 02-15-2008, 08:02 PM

Make it legal for everyone then.

They should just make it so that people who suffer head injuries when not wearing a helmet are not covered under OHIP.

Red · 02-15-2008, 08:13 PM

Makes you wonder how this guy got his license and insurance.

Ford Prefect · 02-15-2008, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarchHare

So long as my tax dollars are going to pay for his ER visit if he gets in an accident and suffers a head injury, he can wear a helmet like everyone else, religious freedom be damned.

Also, one must be really, really, really stupid to think it's a good idea ride a motorcycle with out a helmet anyway.

Actually, taxpayers and health care probably come out alright on these guys. Natural selection probably results in them not being a burden on the system in their old age since they're don't attain old age. Darwinism is a beach that way.

HOZ · 02-15-2008, 10:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

My boss is a devout Sikh and he would disagree with this lawsuit completely.. Its the same story as trying to get on construction sites without a hard-hat.. Safety prevails over religious freedoms..

Common sense would agree. But should a personal choice be legislated? Rhetorical question.

Vulcan · 02-15-2008, 11:53 PM

Bikers have been lobbying hard to make helmets optional for years with some success in some states. If he wins, I'd like to see the Angels wearing turbans to get around the law. That would be a ssight.
Me, I'll stick with my helmet.

Sample00 · 02-16-2008, 08:48 AM

I am a biker, would never consider riding without wearing a helmet.

Dirty Mr. Clean · 02-16-2008, 09:04 AM

The reason the Sikh wear a turban is that they believe their hair should be covered. Can't a helmet provide the same thing?

bluejays · 02-16-2008, 09:19 AM

Who cares about this ruling? It seems quite obvious this rebellion is one against the principle of Sikh's having to wear a helmet, but the reality is most of these people will anyway. It's one of those things just to sh!itdisturb based on your principles, but when it comes down to it, nobody's going to flock to ride without a helmet. Much like the topless tirade that occured years back where women lobbied to have the ability to show their mammies in public. Where the hell are all those women now after they got their freedom? <---- this ruling I liked very much, but then reality hit.

Cheese · 02-16-2008, 09:52 AM

Is riding a bike a "right"? If not then ce la vie...drive a convertable.

Got Miikka? · 02-16-2008, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheese

Eventually religious freedom is going to cost lives

lol, "eventually"?

HotHotHeat · 03-06-2008, 10:02 AM

BRAMPTON, Ont. -- A judge has ruled Ontario's helmet law does not discriminate against a turban wearing Sikh motorcyclist.

Baljinder Badesha's fight against a $110 fine for not wearing a helmet took on the character of a constitutional challenge, with the Ontario Human Rights Commission intervening on his behalf.

The commission argued the provincial helmet law discriminates against Badesha because it violates his constitutional rights.

Ontario Court Justice James Blacklock ruled against that argument today.

Blacklock says allowing Badesha and other Sikh motorcyclists to ride without helmets would put "undue hardship'' on the province because of safety concerns.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...hub=TopStories

Now go act normal like everyone else.

Phaneuf3 · 03-06-2008, 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarchHare

So long as my tax dollars are going to pay for his ER visit if he gets in an accident and suffers a head injury, he can wear a helmet like everyone else, religious freedom be damned.

so completely ban cigarettes and liquor and red meat. to hell with everyones freedoms if it might cost me money.