absent.canadian

… and here’s my candidate for the day:

WRAL.com: Roanoke Rapids Charity Denies Turban-Wearing Donor

Very briefly: a Sikh man wearing a turban attempted to deliver a donation check to a mission in Roanoke Rapids, North Carolina.  He was turned away because he would not remove his turban, since the mission facility has a policy against men wearing head coverings.

I did some research and learned a bit about why men remove their hats inside buildings.  In medieval times, men would remove their hats (or helmets) to demonstrate friendly intent when they entered a building.  This is also where the act of saluting came from; it is a symbolic gesture similar to the raising of the face shield on one’s medieval jousting helmet.

It’s a bit ironic that one should be expected to remove a head covering in a house of worship; many religions have their authority figures wearing hats, and some even have their parishioners wearing head gear (I’m thinking of the Jewish kippah or yarmulke; I’m sure there are many other examples).  And it’s fine to have a policy in a house of worship against hats – but are we really going to lump religious head dresses together with cowboy hats and baseball caps?

What is so deeply offensive about this article isn’t the obvious about Mr. Khera’s head dress having nothing to do with medieval armament; it’s the eschewing of a wonderful opportunity to demonstrate acceptance and tolerance (two very Jesus-like traits) because of someone’s pedantic adherence to a rule they probably don’t understand.

Allowing Mr. Khera to wear his turban inside the mission would reciprocate the respect his donation demonstrated (and the donations he made in previous years).  It would have been a plainly visible display of mutual respect, and it would have set a wonderful example for the community that this mission likely purports to serve.

The concern should not revolve around his turban; it should instead focus on a rule that is both well-intentioned and too broadly worded.

The saddest part about this story is the lose-lose scanario the mission workers created for themselves.  They defeated their own “mission” to help others, and they did it in an entirely un-Jesus-like way, by turning away someone acting entirely within their intended spirit – to give unto others.

This story may seem a bit “old-hat” (no pun intended) to my fellow Torontonians, who may recall the debate about whether a Sikh police constable could wear his turban.  This was back in the 1980’s – and by 1986, Sikh officers would be allowed to wear their turban.  Ditto for the RCMP in 1990.

Perhaps the Union Mission in Roanoke Rapids needs to read the line of scripture it quotes on its homepage; “Give to the LORD, O families of the peoples, Give to the LORD glory and strength” (Psalm 96:7).