Turban Wearing Biker Loses Challenge In Court

jjdwoodman wrote:

If he cracks his head open and can pay for life support himself, Yee Haw! Otherwise, bury him.

This is one of those times when our universal health-care works against us. If he's on life support, we're paying.

This guy has 2 helmets on under that turban! Also 3 Camels, 6 dung beetles, a ivory Masterdon tusk and a dozen top flight golf balls! Don't tell me it can't be done!!!

Locozuna wrote:

This guy has 2 helmets on under that turban! Also 3 Camels, 6 dung beetles, a ivory Masterdon tusk and a dozen top flight golf balls! Don't tell me it can't be done!!!

If only he had remembered to pack a suppository in there!:pinch:

Believe me, Colin, the motorcyclists of Alberta are watching this one, too. This whole thing is so phony it makes me want to gag. Those people think they are back on the block in Bombay where all they have to do is slip the cops a few rupees and everything is okay.
This guy CHOSE to ride where the cops would see him without his helmet and thus the traffic ticket and traffic court appearance, rather than appearing in front of the so-called human rights tribunal.

On the other hand, I would think that to have a law changed on the basis that it encroaches on his religious beliefs, he would have to prove that his religion forbids the wearing of helmets AND requires that he ride a motorcycle. Since he can choose not to ride a motorcycle and still not sin and also not break the law, he is not being persecuted.

That pretty much covers how NORMAL logic would apply, jjdwoodman, but the wanker, apparently, is going to appeal this up the chain. If the human rights people get involved, your logic will be turned on its head somehow. I can pretty much guarantee that outcome.

KZDon wrote:

jjdwoodman wrote:

If he cracks his head open and can pay for life support himself, Yee Haw! Otherwise, bury him.

This is one of those times when our universal health-care works against us. If he's on life support, we're paying.

Does your health system also care for fat a$$es? It would seem your country should ban twinkies and fast food; for the good of the tax payers. Universal health care means as a nation your support everyone, (which i think is good, until you use it as a reason to remove freedoms from people).

I would never ride without a helmet, but I would also never force another person to wear one. A nation can not legislate its people into making every correct choice, it is a god given right to be foolish.

I do however agree with the idea that one mans beliefs should not be enough to over turn a nations laws.

This is really tangent to the subject, but healthcare truly should not even be an issue here.

The entire concept of modern healthcare is fundamentally flawed. When a human is born he is born onto a slippery slope out of this world, and yet modern healthcare preys on the fears of men who are afraid of leaving this world "too soon".

We have all met people who died at a very young age, yet they used the time they were alotted wisely and left an indelible mark onthe people around them, and we have all known bitter deperate old men who have spent all their alotted time complaining that it wasn't enough. It is enough to have lived and been given our chance. Let nature have her course, get out of the way for a new life's chance, use the time you are naturally given as if you understand that it is a gift, teach your young to do the same, and LOVE MIGHTILY. Life is not treasure you can hoard up and soon becomes a burden when you try to extend it past it's natural course. Death will never be overcome. Even if medicine could double or triple the lifespan of men, how long would it take before we used up the whole earth? Ease the suffering of the living if you will, but let the dying die.

And if you insist on squandering what you have by poisoning yourself/abusing yourself, at least have the courtesy to look up into the rain and drown like the rest of the turkeys!

a

Health care is an oxymoron as we seldom do anything of the sort. In actuality it is more accurately described as illness care.

Now, as for this guy, is that a motorcycle peeking out of his left sleeve? :lol:

A lot of laws were broke in the past just to get a change in law enacted. Sometimes it takes more than a petition to get a audience. Human rights especially has taken demonstration to prove it's popularity and worthiness when you would think that common sense would have it covered. It could very well be said that there is always a FIGHT for rights.
Now personally.....I cannot comment on this particular thing cause I am seriously non-religious but we do have a history of making religious specific laws. ie the blue laws. No selling liquor on Sundays. Problem is here in USA there are many (and growing) religions.
Religion is not the only problem in this arena. Sex specific laws(Sufferage), geographically specific laws(watch the water wars ignite soon) and even economic specific laws(class war) complicate the picture even more. These kinds of fights are perpetual. Unfortunately. I also believe that it is the unwillingness to bend on both sides keeps the "us against them mentality" in the front row.
Maybe his lawyer wears a turban. I think if I was going to fight for a right to ride motorcycles I would look for a motorcycle riding lawyer. I just hope he doesn't ride a Harley! :ohmy:

It simply amazes me how people these days push the limits of their "rights" to the point of absurdity.

Mess with the bull and you're gonna get the horns.


Ha! Ha!

Good points, Loco.

As far as blue laws and such, in the distant past they were enacted stirctly on a local basis--city or county wide and even unlikely at a state level. Now every special interest group runs straight to federal court in the hopes af making it to the Supreme Court and getting their pet peeve set as the law of the land. Since the "progressive era" about a century ago, this has become the MO that has gotten us all sorts of national edicts that bypass the legislative process and are handed down to the governed from on high, exactly the reverse of the methods of enacting law intended at the founding of the USA.

Canada, of course, has their own laws and procedures that special interests use to bend the system to their will.