Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
National identity and their importance
Effects of society on our identity
Cultural identity and belonging
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
We live in a world that is made up of many different types of people races religions etc. we do not live alone, borders are open you can travel and meet people from all around the world. This allows us the opportunity to get to know many people, which allows us to realize that we are all different and to respect one another all must be very tolerant.
Each religion has a different set of fundamental rules and rights. When moving from one place to another we tend to bring our ideologies and beliefs with us we do not leave them behind. There are many different cases as Will Kymlicka mentions in his books Multicultural citizenship, which I will be referring to throughout this essay. As humans we have certain types of needs one of which is the need to belong. Belong to a family, community, group or nation.
Belonging to a certain nation means that this government has the capability and capacity to protect your rights as a citizen of that country. For a government to provide everyone with what they need is impossible. None will be satisfied 100%. All must make compromises. A government that will please everyone will never exist. Why? Because human are unique and diverse. If I may make a certain example, the population is a salad made up of different vegetables and the sauce is the constitution and law, the salad might be mixed but the sauce might not cover everything equally but we are all in the same bowl.
Now whether you want the country to protect your rights as individual (one lettuce leaf) or a member of a group (all the lettuce in the bowl) is the whole issue.
Here, we end up with two different visions of society. One, the communitarian, the second is the liberal. The communitarian would view the individual as being part of a...
... middle of paper ...
...hts. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995. Print.
Walzer, Michael. Spheres of justice a defense of pluralism and equality. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1983. Print.
F.F Mansvelt Beck, ed. Liberalism,Minorities and the Politics of Societal Diferenciation Web. 2 Feb. 2014. .
McQueen, Paddy. Social and Political Recognition. Northern Ireland: .
Equality and Human Rights Commission Guidance. Guidance on the wearing of Sikh articles of faith in the workplace and public spaces. 2010. Web. .
CHUNG, AMY. "Turban vs. hard hat." Sikh takes discrimination case before human rights tribunal. 27 JANUARY 2007: n. page. Web. 2 Feb. 2014. .
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...
Violence like this is very common. Also, they have had their fare share of discrimination. According to The Sikh Coalition many have reported employment discrimination. Sikh Awareness.(2010). Retrieved from http://www.sikhcoalition.org/ .Most recently, Frank Singh was called a terrorist and fired by an AutoZone ...
Mamma Jo’s Pizza should accommodate their employee, Ahmad, and his need due to the fact that he wears his beard specifically for religious reasons. For discrimination based on religion, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, Mamma Jo’s Pizza has the duty to “reasonably accommodate” employee’s “sincerely held” religious practices unless doing so would cause undue hardship to Mamma Jo’s business. If wearing a beard is a sincerely held religious practice for Ahmad, then Mamma Jo’s should make reasonable adjustments to the work environment that will allow him to fully practice his religion as long as these adjustments are not more than mere inconvenience. An example of an accommodation that Mamma Jo’s could make is a job reassignment. Mamma Jo’s no beard policy can be argued to be a business necessity for employees dealing with the food, so Ahmad could possibly do other tasks away from the food such as working at the cash register, answering the phone, or other clerical work.
We all need to belong somewhere and feel comfort in our lives. We as human beings need to open our eyes and see we can all belong together and live in one society without dropping our culture but before this can happen we need to end racism and stereotyping. These are the two main factors that push people, more commonly native people, into the loss of belonging the loss of their culture and the loss of the core of their identity.
Marotte, B. (2013, 06 16). Sikhs celebrate reversal of Quebec’s soccer turban ban. Retrieved from www.theglobeandmail.com: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/sikhs-celebrate-reversal-of-quebecs-soccer-turban-ban/article12593818/
Reasonable accommodation is a policy of changing the way things are traditionally done to accommodate someone of a different religion, culture, race, etcetera. Canada has a put funding towards a policy of reasonable accommodation. This policy allows people from all walks of life to feel acceptance and belonging within their community and can help to ease cultural divisions. Reasonable accommodation is an important factor in reconciling contending loyalties. An example of this would be the example of Baltej Singh Dhillon. In 1989 he was offered a job with the RCMP, but only if he would remove his turban, cut his hair and shave his beard. He refused, and started a legal battle. Over 90,000 Canadians signed a petition against changing the traditional uniform, the flat-brimmed Stetson hat. It became a great political controversy. However, in 1990 Brian Mulroney and his government announced new changes would be made to the uniform, and Dhillon was allowed to wear his turban. In 2016 the RCMP made changes to its uniform again to allow muslim women to wear a hijab while serving, which was also the source of much controversy. However these small changes helped to reconcile contending nationalist, Canadian, and non-nationalist, religious, conflicts. Another example of reasonable accommodation was for British bus drivers in 1969. During this time there were divisions growing among the people,
Turner, Jack. "American Individualism And Structural Injustice: Tocqueville, Gender, And Race." Polity 40.2 (2008): 197-215. Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson). Web. 31 Oct. 2013.
Rawls, J. (1999). A Theory of Justice (Rev. ed.). Cambridge, Mass: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Takaki, R. (1999). The myth of the “model minority.” In D. M. Newman (Ed.), Sociology:
Walzer, M. (1983). Spheres of justice: a defense of pluralism and equality. New York: Basic Books.
Living in a diverse world should be something a person should be proud of. Getting to know a person’s culture and their beliefs should be a wonderful ability. Respecting one another is important, even though a lot of people still disregard that, which should discontinue. We should all start to learn how to make this world a better place,
Britain is and always has been a mixed race society. Gradually over the years, millions of people all over the world arrive either through past invasion or come as an immigrant to escape their own country’s famine, persecution and seeking for better economic opportunities in the UK (Zafra, 2007). The history of immigration and invasion has produced today’s diverse community. However, for the past few years, there has been a dispute concerning whether multiculturalism has obstruct the goal of attaining a peaceful community and instead causing extremism in the UK. According to Michelle Wilkinson (2011), this is resulted by the notion that multiculturalism promotes segregation and different groups having different beliefs leading to heavy tension and radicalization. On the other hand, multiculturalism has also been praised for advancing equality and social recognition (Caroline Howarth & Eleni Andreouli, 2013). In the light of this controversial issue, both aspect of the pro and cons of Multiculturalism to the society will be covered in this essay, exploring as a whole whether the ideology of Multiculturalism in enforcing equality has worked in Britain or not.
Contemporary Readings in Law & Social Justice, 5(2), 454-460.
Our world is constantly changing and it requires a society that is well versed in understanding the problems deriving from culture differences and tolerance of one another’s beliefs and perceptions. We are dealing with systemic problems in education, economic, government, religion and culture differences.