What's new

Inter-faith wedding in Southall, UK, crashed by extremists

TSA321

Tape Ball Captain
Joined
Oct 18, 2013
Runs
1,230
This seems to be happening more and more frequently.

A group of men have stormed a Sikh temple in London to stop an inter-faith marriage, forcing the couple to cancel their wedding day.

Members of the Sri Guru Singh Sabha Gurdwara, in Southall, said the final preparations were underway on Friday when the men arrived.

Sohan Singh Sumra, vice-president of the temple, told The Independent a group of up to 22 people arrived shortly after 8am.

“They were all thugs,” he added. “None of them were recognised by any of the Sikh groups here.

“It was because it was a mixed marriage…they just came here to spoil it and intimidate us.”

Mr Sumra said police were called to remove the “threatening” men and that the gurdwara, which was inaugurated by Prince Charles, is now considering hiring private security.

He said the men had threatened to stop the wedding (Anand Karaj), between a Sikh woman and her white, non-Sikh, fiancé in a phone call the night before.

Members of the Havelock Road gurdwara contacted the bride’s family and they chose to go ahead, he said, but they could not continue after the temple was stormed on the wedding day.

“I've been in this temple since 1994 and I've never seen this sort of thing,” Mr Sumra said. “We will always listen to people’s suggestions but there was no reasoning with them. It was a sad day.”

Mr Sumra said he had attended many marriages between couples of different religions and races, and that the vast majority of the Sikh community had no issue with it.

“We are living in this country and we work with couples – if they are happy we’re fine with it - Sikhism is a liberal religion,” he added, despite acknowledging the existence of “splinter groups”.

“We had a meeting with local temples on Saturday because we don’t want anything like that happening to any other couples.”

Sunny Hundal, a freelance journalist and author, originally reported on the incident on Friday and posted videos on Facebook appearing to show the “hypocritical and fanatical thugs” arguing with fellow Sikhs inside the gurdwara.

“I'm raising (this issue) because I want people to realise what is happening under our noses before it gets too late,” he wrote, saying wedding “disruptions”, were becoming increasingly common.

“This gang-mentality puritanism will end up with the Sikh version of the Taliban and destroy the community. Don't tolerate it.”

In October last year, the UK's Sikh Council released guidelines on inter-faith marriages saying that gurdwaras must ensure the "genuine acceptance of Sikh faith" in both partners, proposing the use of signed delarations.

Update:

A statement released on Wednesday on behalf of the protesters by the Sikh Press Association said the men were conducting a peaceful protest.

“Some gurdwaras in the UK are simply ignoring rulings by Sikh authorities, so protesting is our only option,” protester Jaspal Singh said.

“Blocking the wedding is always our last resort…people of all faiths and backgrounds are always welcome in any gurdwara.

“However, it has been made clear the Anand Karaj (marriage ceremony) is specifically for Sikhs.

“We have no grievances with any of the couples, nor any problem with mixed race or inter-faith marriages. Our issue is with those in charge of our gurdwaras.”

The Sikh Council UK is holding a meeting of UK gurdwaras on 23 August on the issue and said it wants to develop a “consistent approach towards marriages where one partner is not of Sikh origin”.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...opped-by-thugs-at-london-temple-10450476.html
 
Why do people in inter-faith marriages bother with getting married in traditional religious ceremonies in a religious place of worship?

The ceremony is meant to tie together two people who believe in Sikhism (or whatever religion for that matter). Civil marriages exist for a reason.
 
"genuine acceptance of Sikh faith"
On a side note, the Sikhs, just as the Jews, have convinced the UK authorities that they are a 'race' and thus covered under the Race Relations Act (1976) (now subsumed by the Equalities Act).

On that basis, were the white, non-Sikh, fiancé to convert to Sikhism, he would actually be changing his race in terms of being covered as a Sikh under UK law.
 
I don't get the problem

If gay marriages were allowed in mosques you would get the same uproar
 
"This issue now is becoming quite serious because ceremonies have been disrupted. I am hearing about once a month, sometimes twice a month ceremonies are being disrupted. People are getting scared," he said.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21721519
 
There was another episode where sikhs were protesting in a cinema against some film.
 
For bad for the couple for them to have this kind of thing happen on there wedding day, but then again if it was me marrying someone out of my race I'd defiently keep it quiet.
 
On a side note, the Sikhs, just as the Jews, have convinced the UK authorities that they are a 'race' and thus covered under the Race Relations Act (1976) (now subsumed by the Equalities Act).

On that basis, were the white, non-Sikh, fiancé to convert to Sikhism, he would actually be changing his race in terms of being covered as a Sikh under UK law.

Sikhs had a lot of clout in the early days as most of the early immigrants came from Punjab, but with the changing demographics and diversified nature of immigrants since the 70's onwards their voice is less influential. Southall is one of their last strongholds where they can get away with such thuggery, but as the microscope intensifies on other religions, so will Sikhs find it harder to get away with such double standards.
 
Sikhs had a lot of clout in the early days as most of the early immigrants came from Punjab, but with the changing demographics and diversified nature of immigrants since the 70's onwards their voice is less influential. Southall is one of their last strongholds where they can get away with such thuggery, but as the microscope intensifies on other religions, so will Sikhs find it harder to get away with such double standards.

Sikhism is declining in it's birthplace punjab soon they will be a minority in Indian punjab, many sikhs are being absorbed into a mix of sikhism and Hinduism And the youth are removing their turbans, looks like Sikhism will meet the same fate of Buddhism in India, absorbed into Hinduism gradually.
 
Last edited:
Sikhism is declining in it's birthplace punjab soon they will be a minority in Indian punjab, many sikhs are being absorbed into a mix of sikhism and Hinduism And the youth are removing their turbans, looks like Sikhism will meet the same fate of Buddhism in India, absorbed into Hinduism gradually.

The only Sikh who spoke up when questioned about Sikhs being described as Hindus in the Indian national constitution actually endorsed it despite trying to lamely present themselves as a separate religion. They are a dying breed and as they are consumed abroad, so shall they be at home.
 
The only Sikh who spoke up when questioned about Sikhs being described as Hindus in the Indian national constitution actually endorsed it despite trying to lamely present themselves as a separate religion. They are a dying breed and as they are consumed abroad, so shall they be at home.

True, I have a few Sikhs around me, none of whom wear any turbans
 
I don't get the problem

If gay marriages were allowed in mosques you would get the same uproar

And that's okay?

If the authority of the mosques agree to it, and the people desire to have it, there's nothing you can do about it. I'd suggest moving to Jalalabad if it really gets to your nerves.
 
The only Sikh who spoke up when questioned about Sikhs being described as Hindus in the Indian national constitution actually endorsed it despite trying to lamely present themselves as a separate religion. They are a dying breed and as they are consumed abroad, so shall they be at home.

How do you conclude this? Sikhs in Canada are thriving. Their community is very strong here. Even in the US they band together.

Even when they marry outside sikhism they mantain their cultural links unlike muslims who veer off after marrying a nonmuslim...and then their kins come burying them walking with shoes all over mosques cause they have no idea what islam is other than something their dad/mom said was nice.
 
I have seen these cases before too. Why do these Sikh Women prefer to get married in a Gurudwara when they have chosen a Non-Sikh partner ?

Too much show off. Marrying White and Black men in Gurudwaras to show that they still care about their religion.
 
I think this is the sort of thing which made the film director Gurinder Chadha produce films like Bhaji on the Beach where Sikh males were not portrayed too kindly. She was brought up in Southall as it happens.
 
I really feel sorry for UK , the whites particularly, the south asians there seem to be a lost cause irrespective of their religion . Rarely see such things coming from US and other western countries .
 
Sikhs had a lot of clout in the early days as most of the early immigrants came from Punjab, but with the changing demographics and diversified nature of immigrants since the 70's onwards their voice is less influential. Southall is one of their last strongholds where they can get away with such thuggery, but as the microscope intensifies on other religions, so will Sikhs find it harder to get away with such double standards.
At least we haven't seen a repeat of something like this recently.
 
And that's okay?

If the authority of the mosques agree to it, and the people desire to have it, there's nothing you can do about it. I'd suggest moving to Jalalabad if it really gets to your nerves.

I doubt there will be many more inter races at this particular faith temple
 
Kindly stop insulting Sikhs or Sikhism the thread is about a few people who wanted to make sure both the partners marrying according to Anand Karaj are Sikhs.Nothing wrong in that.If they wanted inter-faith marriage they could had gone to registrar and done the same without religion being an issue.

And Sikhs aren't going anywhere as a community they have got absorbed in most places from UK to Africa , Italy to Canada.They are always going to carry on with their identity.
 
I agree with the posts asking why they are getting married in a religious place in the first place...

Theres a fake Muslim scholar who does interfaith marriages where he marries Muslim women and non Muslim men...these nikkahs are invalid frankly...if they want to get married they should just get married at a registry office and have a party after...

Same here...a Sikh wedding surely requires two Sikhs...

Nothing 'extreme' here really unless you believe religion itself to be nonsensical...if anything its an affront on the religion...
 
However, it has been made clear the Anand Karaj (marriage ceremony) is specifically for Sikhs.

If this is true then protests seem fair...and also the fact that the target of their protests are the gurdwaras themselves whose responsibility it is to uphold religious tenets...

I would expect similar protests at any interfaith wedding where the faith states that both parties must be of the specified faith...
 
If this is true then protests seem fair...and also the fact that the target of their protests are the gurdwaras themselves whose responsibility it is to uphold religious tenets...

I would expect similar protests at any interfaith wedding where the faith states that both parties must be of the specified faith...

In which case the question needs to be asked, why are non-Sikhs going to the Sikh temple to get married? Why does it take a large group of men to physically block the couple from getting married, and why have the girl's family and friends all endorsed the mixed faith ceremony in the first place? There does appear to be quite some confusion that leads to these situations erupting in the first place.
 
And that's okay?

If the authority of the mosques agree to it, and the people desire to have it, there's nothing you can do about it. I'd suggest moving to Jalalabad if it really gets to your nerves.
I agree with the posts asking why they are getting married in a religious place in the first place...

Theres a fake Muslim scholar who does interfaith marriages where he marries Muslim women and non Muslim men...these nikkahs are invalid frankly...if they want to get married they should just get married at a registry office and have a party after...

Same here...a Sikh wedding surely requires two Sikhs...

Nothing 'extreme' here really unless you believe religion itself to be nonsensical...if anything its an affront on the religion...
[MENTION=137672]filthyfulltoss[/MENTION], I suggest you digest [MENTION=133972]shaykh[/MENTION] 's post. Considering that Islam doesn't allow gay marriage, then any imam who agrees to conduct such a 'marriage' (not recognised in Islam), inside or outside a mosque, is going against the laws of the very religion he is supposed to preach. Hence it's an ignorant comment by [MENTION=137672]filthyfulltoss[/MENTION] that clearly shows his lack of knowledge on the topic.
 
[MENTION=137672]filthyfulltoss[/MENTION], I suggest you digest [MENTION=133972]shaykh[/MENTION] 's post. Considering that Islam doesn't allow gay marriage, then any imam who agrees to conduct such a 'marriage' (not recognised in Islam), inside or outside a mosque, is going against the laws of the very religion he is supposed to preach. Hence it's an ignorant comment by [MENTION=137672]filthyfulltoss[/MENTION] that clearly shows his lack of knowledge on the topic.

What's in and what's outside of one's faith is for the person practicing that faith to decide. If there was a universal Islam, you wouldn't have the hundreds of sects and disagreements - this means that different people hold different opinions and ideas even within Islam. I like how I'm the ignorant one here, but it's probably less ignorant to respect other people's differences. There are numerous people that claim to be both homosexuals AND Muslim. Whether you agree with that or not gives you no right to infringe upon their rights in a democratic country. Go cry about your sensibilities being offended in a corner somewhere. The big world does not care about whether one person's opinion is in sync with what YOU hold to be true.
 
What's in and what's outside of one's faith is for the person practicing that faith to decide. If there was a universal Islam, you wouldn't have the hundreds of sects and disagreements - this means that different people hold different opinions and ideas even within Islam. I like how I'm the ignorant one here, but it's probably less ignorant to respect other people's differences. There are numerous people that claim to be both homosexuals AND Muslim. Whether you agree with that or not gives you no right to infringe upon their rights in a democratic country. Go cry about your sensibilities being offended in a corner somewhere. The big world does not care about whether one person's opinion is in sync with what YOU hold to be true.

Gotta correct you here...

Being homosexual and Muslim is one thing...trying to get a nikkah as two homosexuals is invalid...there is no such thing...just as there is no such thing as a nikkah for a Sikh man and a Muslim woman in Islam...Muslim women are not allowed to marry non Muslims...

It's not about individual disagreement...or what I hold dear...its about what a faiths tenets are...if two Muslim homosexuals want to get married in a democratic country then they should do so at the registry office...no-ones infringing on those rights...but there is no such thing as a gay marriage in Islam...as there isnt in most faiths...

These aren't extreme views of the faith...its just religions are homophobic for the most part...asking the religions to violate their position is futile...if you don't want to abide by the tenets then go elsewhere...
 
What's in and what's outside of one's faith is for the person practicing that faith to decide. If there was a universal Islam, you wouldn't have the hundreds of sects and disagreements - this means that different people hold different opinions and ideas even within Islam. I like how I'm the ignorant one here, but it's probably less ignorant to respect other people's differences. There are numerous people that claim to be both homosexuals AND Muslim. Whether you agree with that or not gives you no right to infringe upon their rights in a democratic country. Go cry about your sensibilities being offended in a corner somewhere. The big world does not care about whether one person's opinion is in sync with what YOU hold to be true.
Gotta correct you here...

Being homosexual and Muslim is one thing...trying to get a nikkah as two homosexuals is invalid...there is no such thing...just as there is no such thing as a nikkah for a Sikh man and a Muslim woman in Islam...Muslim women are not allowed to marry non Muslims...

It's not about individual disagreement...or what I hold dear...its about what a faiths tenets are...if two Muslim homosexuals want to get married in a democratic country then they should do so at the registry office...no-ones infringing on those rights...but there is no such thing as a gay marriage in Islam...as there isnt in most faiths...

These aren't extreme views of the faith...its just religions are homophobic for the most part...asking the religions to violate their position is futile...if you don't want to abide by the tenets then go elsewhere...

[MENTION=137672]filthyfulltoss[/MENTION], I suggest you read, and this time digest, the highlighted parts of [MENTION=133972]shaykh[/MENTION] 's post before you start showing your ignorance again.
 
Gotta correct you here...

Being homosexual and Muslim is one thing...trying to get a nikkah as two homosexuals is invalid...there is no such thing...just as there is no such thing as a nikkah for a Sikh man and a Muslim woman in Islam...Muslim women are not allowed to marry non Muslims...

It's not about individual disagreement...or what I hold dear...its about what a faiths tenets are...if two Muslim homosexuals want to get married in a democratic country then they should do so at the registry office...no-ones infringing on those rights...but there is no such thing as a gay marriage in Islam...as there isnt in most faiths...

These aren't extreme views of the faith...its just religions are homophobic for the most part...asking the religions to violate their position is futile...if you don't want to abide by the tenets then go elsewhere...

Thanks for feeling the need to correct me but you completely miss the point. I don't care what Islam teaches - for me it's important to respect the beliefs of another individual as long as they are within the legal limitations provided. No one cares what these people believe - how "inaccurate" their beliefs are by the scripture of Islam, etc - there is no universal message of Islam not that it matters regardless. I'm not defending their right to do this within the legal frame work of Islam, I frankly don't give two hoots what Islam says. In Britain, it doesn't matter what Islam says either, what matters is what the law of the land is and that it should be respected as should the desires of the people within that country who likely also don't give two hoots what your belief is - that's the essential point. If two people want to pretend that Islam allows gay marriage (or reach that conclusion from serious inquiry) that's none of my business nor should it be. If a congregation of Islam offshoots from orthodoxy and engages in this practice, do you have ANY right to obstruct their practice? The fact is that you don't.
 
Let's remember the context of my original argument: If an Imam, at his place of worship, feels that it is okay for two men to marry - that should be tolerated (at the very least). If people feel that is wrong then they can join another congregation as is their right. They have NO right to disrupt the proceedings of the congregation that they disagree with.

Does this argument really care whether the sensibilities or the historical practice of Islam is offended or negated? It really doesn't, it's entirely irrelevant.
 
Thanks for feeling the need to correct me but you completely miss the point. I don't care what Islam teaches - for me it's important to respect the beliefs of another individual as long as they are within the legal limitations provided. No one cares what these people believe - how "inaccurate" their beliefs are by the scripture of Islam, etc - there is no universal message of Islam not that it matters regardless. I'm not defending their right to do this within the legal frame work of Islam, I frankly don't give two hoots what Islam says. In Britain, it doesn't matter what Islam says either, what matters is what the law of the land is and that it should be respected as should the desires of the people within that country who likely also don't give two hoots what your belief is - that's the essential point. If two people want to pretend that Islam allows gay marriage (or reach that conclusion from serious inquiry) that's none of my business nor should it be. If a congregation of Islam offshoots from orthodoxy and engages in this practice, do you have ANY right to obstruct their practice? The fact is that you don't.

Then they can go and create their own congregation and call it whatever they want...and they are...like I said there is a fake scholar who marries off gay Muslims and marries off Muslim women to non Muslim men...however if they want to come to a Sunni or Shia mosque and expect an imam of one of those schools to do their nikkah then the mosque has a right to refuse...and if that mosque doesnt refuse then those who go to that mosque have a right to protest at the actions of that mosques imam...because those schools of thought dont permit these forms of marriage...

In the same vein...the protest in this case was at the actions of the gurdwara...ie based on the tenets that the gurdwara is founded on there is no such thing as a marriage which doesnt involve two Sikhs...the gurdwara is well within its rights to turn away people...and those who attend the gurdwara are well within their rights to protest against a religious establishment that is violating its tenets that it claims to uphold...

So you can pull the no universal Islam/Sikhism card all you like...but the fact is Imams and mosques do fall under a category...an Ahmadi for instance wouldn't be allowed to get married in a Sunni mosque cos Sunnis believe them to be non-Muslims...its not a valid marriage...you would be asking an Imam to commit what he believes to be a sin...

If you notice no-one is protesting about this gay Imam who marries off gay Muslims...its their corrupt offshoot...the issue is when they try and impose these offshoot beliefs on orthodoxy...
 
Then they can go and create their own congregation and call it whatever they want...and they are...like I said there is a fake scholar who marries off gay Muslims and marries off Muslim women to non Muslim men...however if they want to come to a Sunni or Shia mosque and expect an imam of one of those schools to do their nikkah then the mosque has a right to refuse...and if that mosque doesnt refuse then those who go to that mosque have a right to protest at the actions of that mosques imam...because those schools of thought dont permit these forms of marriage...

In the same vein...the protest in this case was at the actions of the gurdwara...ie based on the tenets that the gurdwara is founded on there is no such thing as a marriage which doesnt involve two Sikhs...the gurdwara is well within its rights to turn away people...and those who attend the gurdwara are well within their rights to protest against a religious establishment that is violating its tenets that it claims to uphold...

So you can pull the no universal Islam/Sikhism card all you like...but the fact is Imams and mosques do fall under a category...an Ahmadi for instance wouldn't be allowed to get married in a Sunni mosque cos Sunnis believe them to be non-Muslims...its not a valid marriage...you would be asking an Imam to commit what he believes to be a sin...

If you notice no-one is protesting about this gay Imam who marries off gay Muslims...its their corrupt offshoot...the issue is when they try and impose these offshoot beliefs on orthodoxy...

I agree with the bolded part, and I don't think I suggested otherwise anywhere........? I'm arguing for this being carried out by a congregation with an Imam that believes in these practices - there's nothing you can do about them.

And really, if we give two hoots about labels, I think Pakistani laws and state of Ahmadi affairs gives a good reason as to why that's a horrible idea.
 
And again. :(

The irony is that these people are so against mixed faith marriages they will resort to violence yet when two non practicing Sikhs get married in a Gurudwara they do nothing. This is just as much a race thing as it is a faith thing and there is also a massive element of sexism - a Sikh man marrying a non Sikh girl won't attract as much attention as if it was the other way around.

'Armed' men occupy temple in Leamington Spa, say police

A group of men believed to be carrying "bladed weapons" are occupying a temple in Leamington Spa, according to police.

Warwickshire Police said about 20 or 30 men entered the Gurdwara Sahib, at about 06:45 BST on Sunday.

Jatinder Singh Birdi, a former treasurer at the temple, said a marriage between a Sikh and non-Sikh couple was due to take place.

Officers are inside the temple on Tachbrook Drive negotiating with the group.
Mixed marriages

A force spokesman said it was being treated as "an aggravated trespass" from "the escalation of a local dispute" and was not a terror incident.

A police cordon is currently in force around the temple while officers and religious leaders try to end the stand-off.

Mr Birdi said mixed marriages has been a contentious issue in the local Sikh community, with a minority opposing using the temple for such services.

"There have been tensions that have been going on for a couple of years with some people objecting to mixed marriages in taking place in the gurdwara," he said.

"The general consensus is people are respectful of mixed marriages if the traditions are respected.

"Nothing has happened on this level before.

"This is meant to be one of the happiest moments of somebody's life - it shows a lack of respect."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-37332307
 
Good for the couple, but I would rather people find someone from their own faith. The more things you have in common, the better the understanding will be between the couple.
 
People complaining about "letting their children marry Muslims" and "Leamington is finished, finished. We got our kids saying its okay to marry white people, black people, it's a mess".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
People complaining about "letting their children marry Muslims" and "Leamington is finished, finished. We got our kids saying its okay to marry white people, black people, it's a mess".

Very valid concern. The liberal agenda of promoting all these inter marriages only leads to causing friction between communities and spoils racial hygiene.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is hardly headline news, what about the sikh girl who smothered her devout sikh husband so she could continue her affair with his best friend? Did any sikhs protest about that?
 
This is hardly headline news, what about the sikh girl who smothered her devout sikh husband so she could continue her affair with his best friend? Did any sikhs protest about that?

she has committed a crime by killing a person and will be punished under the law. how sikhs are supposed to protest against it?
 
And again. :(

The irony is that these people are so against mixed faith marriages they will resort to violence yet when two non practicing Sikhs get married in a Gurudwara they do nothing. This is just as much a race thing as it is a faith thing and there is also a massive element of sexism - a Sikh man marrying a non Sikh girl won't attract as much attention as if it was the other way around.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-37332307

under sikhism anadkaraj ceremony is for two sikhs who believe in Guru Granth sahib whether they are practicing or not nothing to do with it
just as nikkah is for two muslims whether praticing or not, but yeah some hardcore do not protest when a non sikh girl marries a sikh man which questions the intentions of these people
 
It was peaceful protest every tom dick harry knows Kirpan is supposed to be carried by Sikh guys ,reporting them as armed men is wrong here.

Also inter faith marriage if wrong should be stopped for both guys and girls,but if both of them have accepted Sikhi i don't see the issue.
 
This is actually not so uncommon among the Sikh community here in Canada as well. I realized how much hate Sikh men possess for Muslims when I was dating my ex who was Sikh. Her mother even told her that she can marry whoever she wants as long as the guy isn't Muslim or Black. Her cousins and brothers also regularly threatened to kill me. I guess they couldn't stand a "Sulla" having fun with a Sikh. Sikh girls still love us though.
 
Last edited:
This is actually not so uncommon among the Sikh community here in Canada as well. I realized how much hate Sikh men possess for Muslims when I was dating my ex who was Sikh. Her mother even told her that she can marry whoever she wants as long as the guy isn't Muslim or Black. Sikh girls still love us though.

I really have good respect for my Pakistani friends and there are some great posters on this forum as well,my parents right now in GTA do as well but i swear some of them so cocky like your little statement there that i wish i can just put a sock in it.
 
I really have good respect for my Pakistani friends and there are some great posters on this forum as well,my parents right now in GTA do as well but i swear some of them so cocky like your little statement there that i wish i can just put a sock in it.

Looks like I touched a nerve. All of my Pakistani friends and I have had experiences with Sikh girls. I'm just telling from my experiences. And if you wanna talk about cockiness maybe you should look into your own compatriots, Sikh Jats regularly boast about themselves especially those losers in Brampton which has become the laughing stock of the GTA 😂
 
I really have good respect for my Pakistani friends and there are some great posters on this forum as well,my parents right now in GTA do as well but i swear some of them so cocky like your little statement there that i wish i can just put a sock in it.

Oh i never knew you are a sikh bro? So when are you visiting Panja Sahib (Hassan Abdal) give me a call :yk It's in my district and a large number of sikhs from india and other part of the world visit it regularly every time they visit Nankana Sahib they also come to Panja Sahib.
 
It was peaceful protest every tom dick harry knows Kirpan is supposed to be carried by Sikh guys ,reporting them as armed men is wrong here.

Also inter faith marriage if wrong should be stopped for both guys and girls,but if both of them have accepted Sikhi i don't see the issue.

exactly, it was the responsibility of the Gurudwara committee to ensure proper following of religious practices whether it is girl or a boy both must be sikh, if not they can happily marry anywhere they want
 
Saw many videos on fb and i see it so stupid that they covering their faces while protesting :facepalm:

They are so angry about inter-faith marriage but then he keeps talking about rights!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You have to respect the Sikh community, although small their faith is very important to them and they never allow their faith to be abused or to hide their faith from the world esp at a time when the turban and beard is seen by idiots as extreme etc.

Fair protest imo, if you can't adhere to the tenants of a faith don't go and get married in their holy place.
 
Looks like I touched a nerve. All of my Pakistani friends and I have had experiences with Sikh girls. I'm just telling from my experiences. And if you wanna talk about cockiness maybe you should look into your own compatriots, Sikh Jats regularly boast about themselves especially those losers in Brampton which has become the laughing stock of the GTA ��

First the ones in GTA aren't my compatriots the ones in India are and they are great protecting the borders and helping the country with free food in various Gurudwaras,also even the ones in Canada are making something of themselves (take a look at the number of MPs in your parliament).


Oh i never knew you are a sikh bro? So when are you visiting Panja Sahib (Hassan Abdal) give me a call :yk It's in my district and a large number of sikhs from india and other part of the world visit it regularly every time they visit Nankana Sahib they also come to Panja Sahib.

Lol no bro I'm a Hindu but some parts of my family are Sikhs plus my Parents visit Gurudwaras and attend the Paaths(reciting) at home.
 
My reading of your view is that Hinduism adapts and is superior, and this act shows lack of flexibility from the Sikh subsect of Hindustan. Which is fair enough and why it may be a correct observation that Sikhism and Buddhism will be eventually reinvented as Hindus of some description.

Sikhism and Buddhism irrespective of what RSS has to say are now distinct religions themselves. Its like some Jew who might start saying that Christianity and Islam are subsets of Jewism
 
Sikhism and Buddhism irrespective of what RSS has to say are now distinct religions themselves. Its like some Jew who might start saying that Christianity and Islam are subsets of Jewism

Sikhism , Buddhism and Jainism are all different religions , they are not Hinduism.
 
Sikh's have been screaming for the past 500 years that "we are neither Hindu's nor Muslim's". Seems as if they are still having trouble in trying to convince people or establish there own identity. We don't hear people from other religions tell the world we are not this or that!
 
Sikh's have been screaming for the past 500 years that "we are neither Hindu's nor Muslim's". Seems as if they are still having trouble in trying to convince people or establish there own identity. We don't hear people from other religions tell the world we are not this or that!

What are you on about?They are declared as a race in UK and have all the rights there.
 
What are you on about?They are declared as a race in UK and have all the rights there.

Declared as a race not religion! I am talking off their religious identity they have been unable to establish in 500 years hence "we are not Hindu's or Muslim's!". None of these two groups claim them as their own. Go to any Sikh website and the first few pages are on about them not being Hindu's or Muslim's.
 
So if the Gurudwara bird accepted the girl and guy's application to let them get married in a Sikh ceremony why does anyone has to resort to violence? If the board did not accept and the couple decided to marry without permission then they can file a complaint with police and put a stop on the wedding?
 
So if the Gurudwara bird accepted the girl and guy's application to let them get married in a Sikh ceremony why does anyone has to resort to violence? If the board did not accept and the couple decided to marry without permission then they can file a complaint with police and put a stop on the wedding?

The issue is the wedding ceremony (Anand Karaj) should only be between two Sikhs and all other Gudwaras use this policy which was agreed last year but this one bent the rules.

After speaking to a Sikh earlier, I now feel this protest was pointless, there will always be some mosque, temple or gudwara which does something different.
 
The issue is the wedding ceremony (Anand Karaj) should only be between two Sikhs and all other Gudwaras use this policy which was agreed last year but this one bent the rules.

After speaking to a Sikh earlier, I now feel this protest was pointless, there will always be some mosque, temple or gudwara which does something different.


So this Gurudwara has different rules of Sikhs have any issues with that they can challenge the Gurudwara board and get them replaced? Or all other Gurudwara's can unanimously give a decision to not count this particular Gurudwara as a Gurudwara or Sikh place of worship..

Why go and harass in a marriage ceremony of someone when they have the permissions with them to carry out the ceremony?

It's UK so I hope the people who did it are booked and sent to jail..
 
So this Gurudwara has different rules of Sikhs have any issues with that they can challenge the Gurudwara board and get them replaced? Or all other Gurudwara's can unanimously give a decision to not count this particular Gurudwara as a Gurudwara or Sikh place of worship..

Why go and harass in a marriage ceremony of someone when they have the permissions with them to carry out the ceremony?

It's UK so I hope the people who did it are booked and sent to jail..

App the committee wasn't responding to the calls of the protesters so they felt the need to enter by the dozens with their faces covered. App all Gudwaras in the UK agreed to this policy of only performing this ceremony for two Sikhs not performing it if only one of the couple was a Sikh which was the case here.

So the protesters believed this Gudwara was breaking a contract it had made along with all others in the UK (for money).

Nobody will be jailed, no crime was committed, they were free enter, it's open to the public. The police came to search them and found only religious daggers (kirpans) as far as I'm told.
 
Sikhs are very open to interfaith marriages, Yuvraj Singh's mom is a Hindu, Dad a Sikh (Jatt or Rajput). It's very common. My neighbor Bibi is a Muslim, she got separated from her family in 1947. Gadar movie story in real life. A Jatt Sikh married her, today she has 6 grandsons.

Protesters are against performing Anand Karaj (Sikh marriage) for non Sikh bride or groom.

It's a non issue, technically they are right. How can you perform Sikh wedding for non Sikh couple?

But such marriages are taking place daily in Punjab, don't know why UK Sikhs are too rigid in this regard.

What armed? They are carrying Kirpans. British tabloid media.

Couple should go to court and register their marriage, nobody can stop them.
 
App the committee wasn't responding to the calls of the protesters so they felt the need to enter by the dozens with their faces covered. App all Gudwaras in the UK agreed to this policy of only performing this ceremony for two Sikhs not performing it if only one of the couple was a Sikh which was the case here.

So the protesters believed this Gudwara was breaking a contract it had made along with all others in the UK (for money).

Nobody will be jailed, no crime was committed, they were free enter, it's open to the public. The police came to search them and found only religious daggers (kirpans) as far as I'm told.


But they disrupted a wedding right? Let's say you book a farm house and people wearing masks come and stop you from your wedding wouldn't you want action taken against those guys??

I mean I don't see any mistake of the people who were getting married here why give them the shock and horror of it on their wedding day..

Anyways I guess if that's the rule all Gurudwara's have agreed to I assume all Sikh's in UK would be aware of the rule so might as well follow it and prevent such incidents on their wedding day..
 
Itd have been a peaceful protest if they had stayed outside the building and demonstrated in a calmful manner

As soon as they entered the building in large number with the intention of disrupting the wedding whilst covering their faces it clearly became un peaceful and threatening and the police was rightly called
 
Wrongly so.

I believe in India they are classed as a sect of Hindu's? The Sikhs should protest there.

Not anymore they have their own marriage act ,the inheritance laws although are similar as Hindus are they are ok with that.
 
Sikhs are very open to interfaith marriages, Yuvraj Singh's mom is a Hindu, Dad a Sikh (Jatt or Rajput). It's very common. My neighbor Bibi is a Muslim, she got separated from her family in 1947. Gadar movie story in real life. A Jatt Sikh married her, today she has 6 grandsons.

Protesters are against performing Anand Karaj (Sikh marriage) for non Sikh bride or groom.

It's a non issue, technically they are right. How can you perform Sikh wedding for non Sikh couple?

But such marriages are taking place daily in Punjab, don't know why UK Sikhs are too rigid in this regard.

What armed? They are carrying Kirpans. British tabloid media.

Couple should go to court and register their marriage, nobody can stop them.

Why do you think metal objects are banned from airports and prison environments? Even a blunt metal object can be plunged into a person's throat and cause fatal injury. The sikh right to carry the kirpan needs to be seriously called into question.
 
Considering the views from ppers here, specially the ones from UK, no wonder the society has become messed up there.

Even the uneducated, below poverty lines people in india has more tolerance than these people living first world country.

The couple has no problem. The authority has no problem. Who made you thakedar of the faith?

Surely immigrants indeed have disturbed the UK.
 
Why do you think metal objects are banned from airports and prison environments? Even a blunt metal object can be plunged into a person's throat and cause fatal injury. The sikh right to carry the kirpan needs to be seriously called into question.

In their own Gurudwaras?Are you kidding? It might as well be called for carrying in airports or schools but why shouldn't they carry it to the Gurudwaras.
 
But Islam doesn't allow these business


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
In their own Gurudwaras?Are you kidding? It might as well be called for carrying in airports or schools but why shouldn't they carry it to the Gurudwaras.

Because it can be used as a lethal weapon in a tense stand off. This sounded like a situation where there was enough tension and threatening behaviour that the police were called.
 
'I never thought I'd be terrorised by my fellow Sikhs at a wedding'

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ed-by-my-fellow-sikhs-at-a-wedding?CMP=twt_gu

The ceremony in Leamington Spa is a lot smaller than the newlyweds had hoped. Just close family and friends – those they can really trust. The marriage takes place in secret, on a Friday afternoon.

It’s a beautiful, bright day at the town’s Gurdwara Sahib temple, but there is an anxiety in the air that is more than typical pre-wedding jitters: the young couple have been forced to marry under “oppressive circumstances” after previous weddings were disrupted by protesting religious men who do not want Sikhs to marry out of the faith.

The protesters dress in hoods, cover their faces and intimidate guests at the temple. Yet they are Sikhs – a religion readily associated with peace and inclusivity.


The stories you need to read, in one handy email
Read more
“I have got through the days of being called a **** and a nig-nog,” the registrar Bhopinder Singh tells the Guardian. “I never thought that the day would come when I would be frightened and terrorised by people of my own faith.”

The most recent incident at the Sikh temple was on 11 September when women, children and committee members feared for their safety after 55 men with their faces covered in black cloth flooded into the temple. The temple was held under siege and the couple who were due to marry were forced to cancel their nuptials.

Among those trying to keep the peace that day was the 79-year-old Green party councillor Janet Alty, who was questioned under caution for allegedly calling one protester a terrorist. No further action was taken against Alty. Those who run the temple say protests have become an unfortunate recurrence during the wedding season.

Eventually the disrupted wedding did take place under a shroud of secrecy the following Monday, but the protest has sent shockwaves through the close-knit community.

When an interfaith marriage now takes place, the temple is forced to hire security guards to protect couples and their families. To avoid trouble, some couples are choosing to get married on weekdays, which are less likely to be disrupted.

Five weeks after that last protest, the Guardian was invited along to the temple for Friday’s secret wedding.

The bride is a follower of Jainism, an ancient Indian religion similar to Buddhism, and her groom is a Sikh. The couple do not want to be identified for fear of repercussions.

At the temple, volunteers cook sabzi and chapattis in the kitchen, preparing to feed the forty or so people of every faith who will walk through its doors to attend the wedding.

Upstairs, in one of the prayer rooms, the couple – both 29-year-old professionals - and their relatives are anxious.

The bride says she received a phone call that morning and was told her wedding would have to be a day sooner than planned, for her own safety.

“We have been educated here and are moderate and should be free to marry whomever we wish,” she says. “I had to rush up from London – this is no way to be. There is a fundamental problem with the way [the protesters] are behaving and it will not be accepted.”

Her new husband says: “We have had to get married under oppressive circumstances. We were forced into this. The other option was to have a bigger wedding but hire security and we didn’t want to do that.

“These guys have a wicked PR machine and they post videos of supposed ‘peaceful protests’ online all the time. But they are not peaceful – they are threatening. They come with hoods on, with larger than normal kirpans [Sikh daggers] and act in an abusive manner.”

One relative, Simon Gronow, a Christian solicitor from London, married into the groom’s family 12 years ago. “This temple has decided to welcome interfaith marriage, but there is a group who want their way to prevail and there is an inevitable conflict,” he says.

“I have always found Sikhism a welcoming religion and I am still Christian but also take part in Sikh traditions. It has never been an issue before and this is a new thing for all of us to come to terms with.”

Mota Singh, a councillor and former mayor of Leamington Spa, calls the protesters “fundamentalists”. Singh, 77, says because of his moderate outlook he has received repeated threats from the group online and in person and has even had a brick thrown through his window.

He was present at the temple on the morning of the protest on 11 September. He said the protesters arrived at the temple at 6.30am, forcing their way past hired security guards into the main atrium. The couple were warned and did not attend. Armed police eventually cleared the protesters, all of whom were arrested on suspicion of aggravated trespass.

Warwickshire police said no further action would be taken against 50 of the 55 people arrested. A 28-year-old man from Coventry was given a caution for religiously aggravated criminal damage. A 39-year-old from Birmingham and two men aged 33 and 36 from Coventry have been re-bailed until the end of November. No further action was taken against a 31-year-old from Oldbury.

The protests had been organised by a group called Sikh Youth UK and were part of an increasingly active youth movement within the community.

Deepa Singh, who describes himself as a Sikh Youth UK co-ordinator, said the group had thousands of members including teachers, barristers and accountants. Others estimate membership to be in the low hundreds.

Another member, Shamsher Singh, previously told the Guardian: “More and more young people are becoming interested in the true interpretation of what it means to be Sikh.


“Now younger people want to reclaim Sikhism as a deeply spiritual, peaceful and encompassing religion and this is why we are seeing these protests.”

Mota Singh, the councillor, said he first became aware of two Birmingham-based groups who have been involved in protesting, Sikh Youth UK and the Sikh Federation, around six years ago. He claims that they have strong links to the Sikh Council, an organisation set up in 2010 to deal with issues affecting the Sikh community in Britain and Europe. The council denies any affiliation with the group, and say they have no involvement in the organisation of protests.

Shortly after the Sikh Council was formed, it issued an edict saying weddings between Sikhs and non-Sikhs could not take place in temples, arguing that the Sikh wedding ceremony, Anand Karaj, should be reserved only for Sikhs.

Marrying people of other faiths is acceptable, they say, but conducting that marriage in a Sikh temple is not. Non-Sikhs can only be involved if they accept the Sikh faith and change their name to include Singh or Kaur, the council insists.

Around 10 of the estimated 360 Sikh temples in the UK are thought to be affiliated to the council. However, many in the Sikh community are wholly opposed to these rules, saying Sikhism is a faith of acceptance and equality.

Mota Singh believes there has been a “cultural change” where young British-born Sikhs are “attracted by fundamentalism … They stick together and they want their own societies which exclude other groups.

“They have been born in Britain, have had a British education yet they don’t believe in democracy and free will and allow mixed marriages to take place. It has staggered some of the older generation. They are shunning the moderate way. Their fathers were clean-shaven and wanted to integrate. This is a whole new breed of Sikhs.”

The temple’s registrar, Bhopinder Singh, said he was pleased the wedding season was almost over for the year. “I have been in this country since the age of nine and have lived through the football hooliganism of the 1970s. These guys were far more scary than football hooligans,” he said. “They were foul-mouthed and intimidating and I have never experienced anything like this.”

Other temples across the country have been less robust under pressure from the protests groups and no longer hold interfaith marriages. But the temple committee in Leamington is adamant that they will continue. “On the face of it what they are protesting is against mixed marriage – but it is deeper than that,” said the temple trustee Jaswant Singh Virdee. “They want to control the temple with their own people and with their own extremist views.

“It is seems these protests apply only to England. Throughout the rest of the world this is not happening. Ultimately, it is a way to gain power.”

Balraj Singh Dhesi, the first Asian mayor of Leamington, said the protests were a British phenomenon. “Interfaith marriages have been taking place since the birth of Sikhism thousands of years ago. These prejudices, which are growing and are very concerning, will cause damage to British society. They are indigenous to this country but yet have an obvious disregard for integration.”

Friday’s wedding passed off without incident, but there is a grim irony in a couple spending the biggest day of their lives praying for it to be totally uneventful.
 
These disruptions of inter-faith marriage continue to go under the radar, presumably because it would dilute the unofficial campaign against Muslims. Really I don't see why there needs to be any differentiation, if you want integration, then it should apply across the board, Sikhs have been shown leniency for too long under the mistaken idea that carrying ceremonial daggers is somehow a peaceful symbol.
 
These disruptions of inter-faith marriage continue to go under the radar, presumably because it would dilute the unofficial campaign against Muslims. Really I don't see why there needs to be any differentiation, if you want integration, then it should apply across the board, Sikhs have been shown leniency for too long under the mistaken idea that carrying ceremonial daggers is somehow a peaceful symbol.

Even in Hinduism, there is a god (Natraja) that steps on a child and a female goddess that beheads the baddies. There is a Hindu festival where the goddess beheads the baddies, not sure what it is called but it is pretty famous and I've been to few of them. No one really takes them seriously to be honest. What makes you think bunch of nut jobs protesting inter-faith marriages has anything to do with dagger being a peaceful symbol or not ? No sikhs has used their dagger against someone in the name of their religion.
 
“These guys have a wicked PR machine and they post videos of supposed ‘peaceful protests’ online all the time. But they are not peaceful – they are threatening. They come with hoods on, with larger than normal kirpans [Sikh daggers] and act in an abusive manner.”

That quote is taken directly from the article above, pretty obvious that the moderate Sikh who gave it believes that these daggers are being used as a threatening and intimidating weapon. If it was a one off incident you could perhaps dismiss it, but this is clearly causing concern to those sikhs who wish to integrate fully within the host nation without being subjected to threat or intimidation.
 
These disruptions of inter-faith marriage continue to go under the radar, presumably because it would dilute the unofficial campaign against Muslims. Really I don't see why there needs to be any differentiation, if you want integration, then it should apply across the board, Sikhs have been shown leniency for too long under the mistaken idea that carrying ceremonial daggers is somehow a peaceful symbol.

The difference is that Sikhs don't go around killing people with their kirpans in the UK whereas we have seen muslims beheading a soldier with a knife. A truly barbaric event.
 
I don't know if Sikhism allows it's women to marry non-Sikh men but Islam does not. Going in to this is another debate that I'd rather not open. However, since Sikhism has rural and village background it's believers are also very sensitive in their women marrying non-Sikh men, especially Muslim ones. Hinduism on the other hand seems happy in letting their women marry non-Hindu men. Just look at all the Hindu-Muslim Bollywood marriages.
 
Back
Top