Hindus should not marry Sikhs in a Sikh Temple. You should not drink in front of a Muslim. You should not eat pork in front of a Jew, or Muslim. You should not eat beef in front of a Hindu. Agree? Disagree? What if your conduct causes me religious offence because of my sincerest beliefs. What if my beliefs are not valid, according to you, but I still hold them, and am offended by you?
This past week armed police surrounded a Sikh temple in which a Hindu was marrying a Sikh. Back in 2010 a problem was reported of the serving of meat and alcohol at various Temple premises around the UK. Let as look at common ground:
1. We can agree that a reasonable person can disagree with another reasonable person.
2. It is reasonable for a Sikh to hold the view that an inter-faith marriage should not happen in a Sikh Temple. It is also reasonable for a Sikh to hold the opposing view.
3. Arguing over religious texts and their factual basis, would not change the views of either set of Sikh groups.
There is law, and there is morality.
Under the law those getting married had broken no law. Those trying to stop them were arrested for ‘causing racially aggravated fear or provocation of violence by words’.
Let’s see what else we can all agree on:
a. That civil disobedience is an entrenched part of British political culture
b. That breaking the law with provocation of violence is probably outside civil disobedience
c. Some of those protestors may well have broken no law on the basis of civil disobedience – certainly a jury will probably think no law was broken.
When it came to same-sex marriage the law states that if the relevant institution agrees and a priest agrees, then it may be conducted. On the basis that a mixed religion marriage is as offensive to Sikhs as same sex marriage to many Christians, the solution may be that where the religious institution agrees and a priest is willing to conduct it, it ought to be permitted.
Those offended would have the right of peaceful protest, and the right to free speech to convince the temple otherwise. They would not have the right to violence or intimidation to support their beliefs. There is no defence of provocation to assault. The law gives a clue to our cultural values and traditions in the UK.
