Jump to content
Guest London jwaan

Discrimination against disabled people in gurdwara

Recommended Posts

Guest London jwaan   
Guest London jwaan

www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/39029675?

This got to court!! Er really?? Where in the gurus teaching was this advocated? I think somewhere a jagsaw interpretation has been applied.

In a similar vein should elderly people with knee/hip issues be banned from darbar halls because they can't sit on the floor? Or are they not sikh if they sit on a chair?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jagsaw_Singh   
Guest Jagsaw_Singh

There's been a thread about this for 5 days on this forum but........there is no way in hell Guest London Jawan could resist. The excitement of being able to show Sikhs as extremists got too much for him. £5 note threads yesterday and this one today. This Indian viewpoint muppet gets blindness when opportunities like this come along.

Benti to Admin and Mods:   London Jawan Singh's account obviously hasn't been approved yet so now is the time for you to look at his behaviour and base your decision on that. In his first 2 weeks as a guest on this forum every single one of his posts have been either attempts at showing Sikhs as taliban type extremists or provoking fights and arguments through insults. If a man can come through the moderation process after acting like that really would render the moderation process pointless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jkvlondon    3,536
On 23/02/2017 at 9:07 PM, Guest London jwaan said:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/39029675?

This got to court!! Er really?? Where in the gurus teaching was this advocated? I think somewhere a jagsaw interpretation has been applied.

In a similar vein should elderly people with knee/hip issues be banned from darbar halls because they can't sit on the floor? Or are they not sikh if they sit on a chair?

this was settled out of court and it is clear from reports that 5 people were suing for compensation of 150,000 pounds , that is not about establishing equality but lining pockets of the charitable trust's money.

Edited by jkvlondon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest London jwaan   
Guest London jwaan

Regardless of that do you think it was correct to do that in the first place? 

Do you think elderly people sitting on chairs is beadbi?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest London jwaan   
Guest London jwaan
On 24/02/2017 at 11:41 PM, jkvlondon said:

this was settled out of court and it is clear from reports that 5 people were suing for compensation of 150,000 pounds , that is not about establishing equality but lining pockets of the charitable trust's money.

Not only factually incorrect, that's a pretty ignorant interpretation jkvlondon.

Where in our religion does it say that you section off disabled members of the sangat like lepers??

Actually they brought the court case to remove this discrimination.

What they were awarded was costs. For the benefit of your mental limitations, what that means is legal costs incurred in bringing the case to the court. What the definition of costs NEVER includes in the UK is compensation. By indicating that they were money grabbers is an outrageous example of you talking right out of your jagsaw.

In addition, it wasn't settled out of court, a proposal by the gurdwara on how this would be stopped was presented to the court and agreed. 

So all in all, a pretty ignorant post by you. Fake sheikh type reporting springs to mind. 

It would be helpful if you could actually get your facts straight before commenting.

http://www.expressandstar.com/news/2017/02/22/calls-for-sikh-temple-boss-to-quit-after-legal-battle-with-disabled-worshippers/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jkvlondon    3,536
On 10/03/2017 at 11:53 AM, Guest London jwaan said:

Not only factually incorrect, that's a pretty ignorant interpretation jkvlondon.

Where in our religion does it say that you section off disabled members of the sangat like lepers??

Actually they brought the court case to remove this discrimination.

What they were awarded was costs. For the benefit of your mental limitations, what that means is legal costs incurred in bringing the case to the court. What the definition of costs NEVER includes in the UK is compensation. By indicating that they were money grabbers is an outrageous example of you talking right out of your jagsaw.

In addition, it wasn't settled out of court, a proposal by the gurdwara on how this would be stopped was presented to the court and agreed. 

So all in all, a pretty ignorant post by you. Fake sheikh type reporting springs to mind. 

It would be helpful if you could actually get your facts straight before commenting.

http://www.expressandstar.com/news/2017/02/22/calls-for-sikh-temple-boss-to-quit-after-legal-battle-with-disabled-worshippers/

 

I read the actual people's accounts  and yes it was settled out of court because the gurdwara agreed to install an external lift to the building and remove the boards .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest London jwaan   
Guest London jwaan
3 hours ago, jkvlondon said:

I read the actual people's accounts  and yes it was settled out of court because the gurdwara agreed to install an external lift to the building and remove the boards .

I would suggest that the peoples own accounts didn't state that they were looking for compensation of 150,000 pounds as you have stated.

You have a lot to learn if you believe that covering legal costs and sing for compensation are the same thing.

What your effectively doing is suggesting that they were in the wrong for bringing legal action against being discrimination. The 150k costs is the fault of the committee for making up their own rules and interpretation of sikhi.....much like you and our resident behvkoof jagsaw....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest London jwaan   
Guest London jwaan

www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/39029675

Have a read of the link. It clearly states that "The terms of the settlement were approved during a hearing at Birmingham County Court on Monday"

That is not an out of court settlement. An out of court settlement means both parties agreed to a compromise that did not involve further court involvement. This is not it.

Please elaborate on your source that shows "it is clear from reports that 5 people were suing for compensation of 150,000 pounds "

clear. Do you understand the meaning of the word clear? Actually is not clear at all. It is an entirely fabricated conclusion by you based on distorting the true facts. Nice one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest London jwaan   
Guest London jwaan
On 13/03/2017 at 9:46 AM, jkvlondon said:

I read the actual people's accounts  and yes it was settled out of court because the gurdwara agreed to install an external lift to the building and remove the boards .

No you didn't. As the actual people's accounts would not have said that "Yes we are seeking 150,000 pounds in compensation". The only thing that is clear, is that you are talking right out of your jagsaw, and have slandered members of the sangat who were discriminated against in direct contravention of sikhi.

And the following link clearly shows that a proposal was taken to the court and agreed by the court. An out of court settlement is one where both parties agree on a compromise that requires no further from the court. The link below states :

"The terms of the settlement were approved during a hearing at Birmingham County Court on Monday."

How is that an out of court settlement, Einstein?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/39029675

Whats your counter argument? That the facts are misreported by the BBC as it's an Abrahamic institution that is pro Indian govt  and against sikhi? And you know better? That's the typical nonsense presented by both you and jagsaw. 

And to be clear, this is not about a lift. This is about hiding disabled members of the sangat behind screens to ostracise them. 

There would have been no issue or financial damage to the gurdwara had the committee not been pigheaded and removed the screens in the first place. So the fault is that of the committee, not of the sangat who took it to court, who you have tried to tar as money grabbers.

If their accounts oppose that, please quote your source. Benti to you to not make stuff up and post it as if it was fact.

Otherwise we can assume that based off evidence I have provided, that you have not, you were in fact talking out of your jagsaw......

Waheguru JI ka Khalsa, Waheguru JI ki fateh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I just wanted to make a quick point because Sant jarnail Singh khalsa bhindranwale is not shaheed he is in chardi Kala this was uttered by Mahapurakh Sant baba thakur singh Jee who was a complete soul and gurmukh
    • the fact that he was given an offer of one arb Dollars and guaranteed citizenship of ANY nation along with any or all of his folks if he  would only vacate and leave Harmandir Sahib complex to the army i.e. to let them do what they will ...this offer was delivered by soldiers and every single one decided to stay with Sant ji when he refused the offer ...this was explained in the dusht Brar's book so must be true as why would he do Sant ji any favours? Sant Kartar SIngh ji Bhindrawale knew what was to happen and would have made his proteges all strong in parchaar and told them to take hosh as well as josh path 
    • Who else agrees that the Gurmukhi encoded script is in desperate need of work? By work I mean proper encoding of the script for web use. Working on various fonts and having a standard font system et al. I see Arabic/Devanagari done so well, but of course their populations exceed ours. However, even Hebrew has been done so well.

      I thank the Sikhs and Unicode who have initially encoded the Gurmukhi script, but I personally think we need to develop it further with different styles and expressing it through various forms if we want to keep it alive. I guess tackling this issue will involve some cleaning up of the alphabets themselves (why have the alphabets become so rounded?) - we can do this by taking some inspiration from Sharada/Lahnda (parent systems from which Gurmukhi has evolved from) and also Devanagari. Also the sehari/behari placement needs designation as well, its all over the place from all the fonts I've seen. We would also need to designate a font for several writing styles e.g., cursive, standard header, body text, calligraphic - because we clearly have no output for Gurmukhi at the present moment in the mentioned styles.  If there are any computer programmers and designers among us, I'm willing to join in and help develop new fonts/styles for the Gurmukhi script.
    • The analogy is so true! Great introspection man.
×