America's Hypocracy When it Comes to Equality

Today I want to write on a Sikh issue which raises more issues than Vogue Magazine. 

This is the notion that it is illegal to be a practising Sikh and work in the US army; by definition of fairly new uniform restrictions on beard and turban presence. 

In total there are three Sikh men who have been granted an exception to this rule and allowed to practise; most notably is Kamaljeet S. Kalsi. However, even Kalsi required legal aid from advocacy group Sikh Coalition to be allowed. The exception is not widely available to everyone. Another, notable point regarding the Kalsi case is that he was a doctor, pursuing a medical role on the army. 

Sikhs have never been restricted from being doctors and thus there actually exists no logical reason for Kalsi to be denied entry to the military on the grounds of his appearance. Furthermore, there is no safety concern either. Some argue that the turban gets in the way of a helmet. Besides the fact that turbans have done a better job at protecting individuals as history shows; doctors are not required to wear a helmet, so why would Kalsi?

The first issue the restriction is why are Sikhs being determined as "exceptions". Wherever Sikhs are present, they are known for being deeply integrated in Society. In the UK, for such a small group, Sikhs are disproportionately present in; politics, as judges, as barristers, as CEOs and on national TV programmes, to name a few. We have never been a society to sit on the fringes of society or scared to apply to European or American lifestyles while maintaining a strong faith. I believe just the notion of being an "exception"; sets a subconscious separation of the Sikhs from the wider community. This in-fact disintegrates society as opposed to integrates. 

The second issue is that this restriction is fairly recent, only coming into form in 1981. The European bans on turbans in education institution is also fairly recent; France being 2004 and Belgium 2013. This seems to be a new trend developing. I recognise, that laws are created, modified and destroyed as a reflection of societal needs. It was Erhlich, who said the true law is the "living law", what people practise and that is one which is organic and not static, continually developing and changing with people's behaviours and attitudes. However, as I have discussed previously, currently there is no present need to bring in such changes. The issue of terror is misinformed. The issue of integration is merely a hypothesis. And finally, the issue of safety is simply not true, just see historical wars. Furthermore, I doubt that without any basis Sikhs would gain such a reputation in the military field and so it is clear that that they have successful in military armies in the past. 

The third issue is that America boosts of its constitution which is secular and thus equal to all individuals regardless of their religion  Throughout the world, this model is become known as a healthy and fair model over Islamic legal systems or Christian influenced ones such as the English system. However, at this occasion it seems that America is being bias and even racist rather than, fair and equal. Essentially, they allow anyone of any faith to work in the military bar those who cannot wear a helmet or have a beard. This singles out quite clearly Sikhs as all other religions would permit hair removal. Singling out a group, which in the UK at least counts as an ethical group, is against race relations legislations and is simply immoral. 

The final point is refers back to the notion of Sikhs having to be exceptions in the army. If we ignore for a moment, all the problems associated with being an "exception", it raises another issue and that is that why is it so lengthy and costly to receive. Why did Kalsi require legal assistance? This is problematic from a policy perspective because individuals with less education or resources will be unable to find legal aid and apply for an "exception"; making the argument that Sikhs can still participate if they apply for an exception, mere puffs. 

Woes, Worries & Wandering

Hello Folks,

Today, I write this blog post simply to relieve my churning stomach and restless mind. 

I am about to embark on a journey of my life this week. One which is full of uncertainty and mystery.

On Friday, I depart solo to Singapore, where I will be living for a fortnight alone. Here I will be exploring the city and indulging in the local specialities such as Singapore noodles. 

I am most worried about making this journey alone. The flight itself is 13hrs and I actually do not know very much about Singapore. Unlike in Ghana where I was in a village where everyone knows and cares for you, a city is much more different. What if any crime is made towards me? Who would care? 

I worry that loneliness will drive me insane. I am a social being and for those that know me well, know that I am always surrounded by people, writing my blog is the only solo time I get. How do I cope, having nobody especially in the first few days before I made friends.

After Singapore, I will be travelling to Cambodia avec mon amie pour six weeks (as Cambodia was once a French colony), I thought to include the odd French words I know!). Here, we will be volunteering in Human Rights project which is designed to empower local women. 

I have never been away from home this long, forget internationally -not even locally! I have got home sick on every single one of my international trips included a 4-day trip to Baltimore last year! How do I survive for 6 weeks? 

Cambodia, despite having UN, IMF & American support, is still a developing country covered by incredible humidity and medical issues such as Rabies & Japanese Encephalitis. 

What if I get these diseases, and become scarred for life?

I feel a slight sense of relief that I have a friend with me for this part of my 2013 adventure. However, I worry what if I become emotional with all these different things going on, our friendship is bruised? I could not think of a life without this friend, she has always supported me and given me that sense of self-belief in all I do.

I am only allowed 23kg for both trips, I can barely pack toiletries and what I really wanted to carry which was a portable kettle and instant coffee. What if I have issues finding my daily bits and bobs? 

Cambodia is known as the country of insects. It is home to tarantulas, cockroaches and mosquitos to name a few. I am actually terrified of these insects, how am I do deal with them. The thought of them is giving me a chilled spine just sitting here and typing.

I feel much better writing my worries. 

_________________

There is a God. And that one fact is what has given me confidence to go. Yes some of my worries may transpire into reality, but that is a challenge I have been given because God knows that is what I can handle and also NEED to handle in order to grow and develop.

Today, someone said to me you are going to find yourself. This is a load of nonsense to be honest. I already know who I am, without actively wanting to find myself, I learnt what is Komilla Chadha in my African Adventure last year.

The purpose of this trip is two-fold. The first is to use the resources available to me to do something for someone else, heal the world part by part.

The second is, my family, routine and home is my biggest strength. Ultimately, until two years ago (and even a bit now) without these frameworks in my life I could not go on. Thus, it seems my biggest strength is also my biggest weakness. I embarked on this project because just the thought of it had scared me and so I realised it was a challenge and one which would make a stronger woman. So the second reason is make me less dependant on these things.

This ties in with my spiritual beliefs. I came into this world without a family, routine & home. I had to learn the meaning of family and meet my family members, it was not part of me when I was born. This routine I prize so dearly of blogging, networking & studying has only been my life for maybe the last 4-5 years. My home has changed three times since I have been born, the thought of moving home actually upsets which is a sign of how attached I have become to something that again I was not born with. The idea and intention behind this trip is to reinforce that I am born alone which makes me free, which sometimes is hard to believe when one is so clouded by relationships (with people as well as things and emotions). 

I hope there is internet on my trip then I can share with you how things are going along.

I have found this post extremely cathartic and if you made it to the end of this post, then thanks!!

The Logical Fallacy of the Turban Ban in Schools

While interning for United Sikhs, I wrote this article for their Global Report 2013-14, enjoy.

The Logical Fallacy of the Turban Ban in Schools

The French 2004 amendment to the French Code of Education which left the Sikh community in turmoil, distress and anguish has been followed by the territories of Belgium. From September 2013, a new rule will make it a violation for Sikh boys to wear a turban within the Flemish G0! school network, affecting more than 9,000 domestic Sikhs.

The scale of the problem is not something to be dismissed lightly. An analogy can be drawn to The Holocaust; Hitler targeted those that did not fit in with the Aryan Race e.g. Jews, disabled persons and many more groups. Similarly, this ban targets turbans, kippas and headscarves i.e. those who do not conform to the so-called standard secular image. The rationale behind the rule can be explained through two distinct arguments; neutrality and security.

G0! CEO Raymonda Verdyck stated; “We facilitate pluralism and openness in our schools. That is why we have introduced the ban”2. Herein lies the first argument for the ban, the need to secularize and neutralize public spaces in order to promote equality, openness and interaction between different sects of society. This is a largely theoretical argument based upon the assumption that by removing religious artifacts, individuals will perceive themselves differently, mingling more with others and thus creating an integrated society. This leads us to the second argument. The 9/11 bombings left countries frightened and keen to increase security. At the discovery of the religious involvement in the attack, religion and religious symbology became a target. So by requiring turbans not to be worn in public places; (a) countries can be more secure by ensuring no bomb is hidden within the turban and (b) discourage religious belief which could potentially lead to similar events.

However, both these arguments are incoherent. With regards to the first argument, as mentioned before, it is theoretical. Therefore, the first weakness lies in the assumption that removal of religious clothing would bring oneness among society. Even if we accept this assumption, there are further difficulties.

Law is often misunderstood in the Western world as something which is distinct from moral and social factors. When in reality it is not simply a religious, cultural or international construct, but rather a combination. Therefore, a better way to deal with the segregations between society would be to allow individuals to uphold their personal and cultural laws e.g by allowing religious artifacts to be worn. This way, the state can still regulate the religious sphere while still treating the different ethnic minorities equally. By accepting cultural differences on a state level, people will be more likely to accept and respect other cultures. If the state sends out a message that individuals with a religious identity are a threat, then it seems unlikely that natives would be encouraged to mingle.

The second argument regarding security is also one which can be refuted. In the words of the Australian parliamentarian Victor Perton “We are at war with terror not young girls wearing scarves or (people wearing) crucifixes or skull caps” 3 . The 9/11 attacks were not caused or even motivated by the inclusion of of religious artifacts at schools, in fact not a single hijacker was an American or European national. This is of utmost importance because it shows that the 9/11 attacks cannot in anyway be used to justify unfairness towards ethnic minorities.

Furthermore, Sikh religious belief has never endorsed attacks of terror. Hence, it is illogical, irrational and uninformed to attack the turban, a sacred piece of religious attire, on the grounds of security. In addition, schools are places of education, a prime opportunity to be educating children on tolerance and other religions. Education is more likely to lead to openness, oneness and tolerance within society more so than such a ban.This becomes evident when you compare the UK to the USA. In the UK, Sikhism is part of the national curriculum and is taught every year till the child leaves school. As a result, individuals in the UK have a better understanding and tolerance of the turban than in the USA.

There is also the ubiquitous argument that Sikhs are immigrants within the Western world, they originated in Punjab and thus have no right to infringe the rules of the place. This argument is largely ignorant for several reasons. For example, wearing a religious artifacts is not imposing a foreign law as it is in no way suggesting that non-sikh persons should do so. Neither has it thus far infringed any existing law, bar the 2004 French amendment and now the 2013 G0! rule.

Another matter of concern is the level of public controversy in the Belgium issue is less than that of France. This could be because the rule in Belgium affects a smaller area than France or simply that we are becoming comfortable with such “neutrality” and so called “equality- enhancing” rules. This is worrying, as it seems the problem is spreading e.g. the recent fiasco involving a Sikh bus driver Gill Sukdarsharan Singh who has been banned from wearing a turban to work in Finland. And it is at this time, we need public support the most.

In conclusion, the need for a restriction grew out of an irrational and uninformed response to the devastating 9/11 attacks. This is clearly seen in the poor justifications put forward for the ban. Thus, these new policy need to be reassessed and rectified.



1 Anon “Belgium Bans Turbans in Schools.” The Sikh Times, September 5 2005. http:// www.sikhtimes.com/ news_090505a.html

2 Anon “Kippas, headscarves and turbans banned” Flanders News, February 2 2013. http:// www.deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws.english/news/1.1539315

3 Murphy, M. “PM rejects headscarves ban” The Age, August 30 2005. http:// www.theage.com.au/news/ national/pm-rejects-headscarves-ban/ 2005/08/29/1125302511538.html

Beautifully Bogus; A visit to Bognor Regis

Hello all! I am back in my hometown London after a crazy month in New York. 

Recently, I went for a short weekend trip to the small seaside town of Bognor Regis, located in the South coast of England. The town neighbours bigger towns like Portsmouth and Sussex.

Bognor Regis was like other seaside towns, in that it was predominately a fishing town. You can see  the fishing functionality of the town alive today as it was alive historically. The only difference is that today the fishing is recreationally as opposed to previously when it was conducted for commercial purposes. The town was, however, converted into a resort which fits well with the area for two reasons. The first is that the town is known as the most sunny spot in England (that's what led me there!). Secondly, the town is home to Butlins, an all inclusive holiday camp still popular with tourists today. 

I would describe the town as beautifully bogus, as my title suggests, and recommend that those planning to visit there go for a day trip and not longer (unless you are going solely for Butlins).

The town is beautiful because the seaside has the most refreshing breeze, which if you go on a sunny day is absolutely magical! The tide goes extremely low at night. If you visit the seaside at night you can walk as far as the pier stems because the tide goes really in! The pebbles are not unique but the way the pebbles incline up is quite impressive and something to see. At some points,  the beach can be tricky to  walk up because it is so steep and the pebbles can be a little slippery. 

So bar the tide and steep incline of the beach, what is so beautiful about the Bognor Regis coast?

What I loved about it, is that it was so quiet. I don't think it would be wrong to say that we were the only tourists there! The lack of tourists adds to the tranquility that the refreshing breeze that hits you with. 

Also, I noticed more so than I have seen before,  there were many disadvantaged groups of people. For example the beach was full of young children, in the restaurant there was a group of disabled individuals having a meal by the sea and walking in the town centre ,a number of senior citizens indulging a purchase of a bouquet of flowers or an ice cream. I loved seeing these minority groups enjoy the sun and the perfect breeze; it left my heart feeling warm and fuzzy. 

So for me the demographic, beach structure and weather, made Bognor Regis a beautiful and uplifting getaway from the city!

However, at the same time I found the town to be quite bogus, as after one day, it left us heading to Portsmouth for the next day.

The town centre is extremely small and consists of about 5-6 stores including Iceland as the biggest store. As a city girl, you can imagine this leaving me quite perplexed about how people live there all their lives. 

It is so small that we thought that the town centre was elsewhere and ended up driving around the centre again, which despite the one way lanes was accomplished in 9minutes!

Furthermore, if you plan to eat at the top restaurants such as Lobster Pot you have to book in advance and be there early (around 7ish) as restaurants shut fairly early. This again was hard for me to deal with, as living in London, I am used to everything being available 24/7.

That is why after day one, as a tourist you don't have anything else to do except for escape to the nearest town.

In sum, for me the trip was a great break from city especially as most of my time in New York was spent living in Manhattan which is even more busy and claustrophobic (more so because of the sky scrapers than the people) than London, I really prized the coastal landscape but would go insane if I had to stay longer!

As usual photos attached below :)