Religeous intolerance

Suziewoozie, at age 14 the children are old enough to be taught that discretion is sometimes the better part of valour.

JaneJudge the representation of the human face in Islam is forbidden because they consider that it may lead to idol worship - worshipping the image and not the person behind it.

That is the first reason why this cartoon was offensive to Muslims in this classroom. Secondly reason it was offensive was because the Islamic fath has very strong views on basphemy, far stronger than any other faith, so this cartoon is offensive on two grounds as it also represented Mohamed, and in an insulting way..

This is not an event where there are two sides right or wrong. This is an event where both sides are in the wrong. A teacher who shows a bit of paper in a class, where he knows it will outrage the religious beliefs of many of those present is in the wrong. I do not know what the topic under discussion in this classroom was, but tolerance is about respecting people's beliefs where they are not harmful and condemning them where they are.

For exaample, I would always respect a muslims desire not to see representations of their prophet's face in a drawing or cartoon, while condemning the persecution of Christians in Pakistan, a muslim counry, under their murderous blasphemy laws.

I think this teacher was stupid and disrespectful of his pupils. I think the demonstrations were completely unwarranted, and as always nowadays, within an hour or so, taken over by extremists with no involvement with this school.

A delegation of the parents, as there were so many, should have contacted the school and spoken to the Head teacher about this issue. There was no suggestion that the head Teacher was unsympathetic or did not take the subject seriously.

The scenes of that ranting mob outside the school, refusing to even give the Police the courtesy of listening to the statement issued made me very angry. Religious tolerance is a mainstay of a civilised society, and from what I understand, the teacher concerned was leading a discussion on blasphemy and what it means to different religious groups. If the outcome wasn't so chilling, the irony would be laughable. As for the headteacher, I will give him the benefit of doubt by thinking that he was trying to defuse the situation, but in truth I thought him weak and mealy mouthed. These people, ignorant people, are trying to impose their own narrow minded opinions on others, are denying their own children the opportunity to discuss and understand what blasphemy means to different religions, I wonder why they have even bothered to allow their children to attend a grammar school when they obviously are not interested in the children having a broad based education. As for these 'community leaders' who the hell are they, and who appoints them to the position?

Thank you for explaining Monica

Gill well to start with they are all men so very representative of the community. They are not imo interested in proper dialogue but just waiting for something to protest about . It would be interesting to know about the composition of the governing body and the parent governors.

^that poor teacher ^ I really can't sympathise with him he must have known what sort of reaction showing the cartoon would elicit. Of course I don't agree with the protesters but with things being fraught over pandemic issues there was no need to light the blue touch paper. He has put his school, his family and himself in danger.
I thought the issue was around showing an image of the prophet, not sure if that's correct though.

Sorry just seen you said the same thing MOnica about the image of the prophet.

Things aren’t fraught because of the pandemic - surely you remember the same scenes two years ago over same sex families being acknowledged? It’s about a relatively small group of male religious fundamentalists who thrive on sowing dissent and conflict and have no interest in any resolution just getting their own way.

It is my understanding that it is offensive in Islam to have any depiction of the prophet Mohammed which is why the parents have reacted the way they have.

However, the difference with the Charlie Hebro cartoons is that those cartoons were mocking, this teacher was attempting to teach the differences between religions and whilst his actions may have been misguided I think the parents should accept his apology and move on.

I wonder whether this is being used as an excuse by some to prevent the children being taught about the different religions

It also concerns me that the parents spokesman is calling for an "independent" enquiry but wants himself and some of the parents to be on the board of that enquiry - how independent would that be

I think this has been put under the wrong subject. It is news and possibly politics but it is not about religion. Rather it is about a group of people deciding something offends them. In this country we do not have a law (or a rule on GN as far as I know) that says you may not be offended.

We want children to learn to think critically and to do that they must learn to question all traditions. We do not come under the laws of any religion and I think it was a slippery step to take for the school to appologise.

The people should not be collecting outside the school under covid regulations. I agree with those who say we do not want the rule of the mob.

I stand by what I said about things being fraught Suziewoozie People are more on edge than usual and worrying more. We have seen it even on GN. Of course there are always those who want conflict as you say.

If we didn't live in a liberal country where people weren't free to believe in whatever they choose then in all likelihood we would still be burning people to death for thinking differently on religious matters. I think that if we accept that then we should also accept that others can and will make statements that we find upsetting. And that is that.

I find it really really upsetting that people think there are certain things that cant be discussed. It goes against everything I hold dear and believe in. Can I protest because the actual removal of the discussion offends me. People have no idea what you are giving away here.

Galaxy

I find it really really upsetting that people think there are certain things that cant be discussed. It goes against everything I hold dear and believe in. Can I protest because the actual removal of the discussion offends me. People have no idea what you are giving away here.

I have to admit I was very suprised at some of the posts on this thread. We must be allowed to discuss and learn.

Hasnt there been or is about to be legislation/guidance introduced to ensure freedom of debate is allowed in universities.

Totally agree Galaxy and Suzie

It goes far beyond this incident. I find it very scary and fear for my children and grandchildren. I believe, as someone pointed out earlier, we’ve allowed things to go too far already and too late to pull back but we can’t keep giving away the freedoms we take for granted. I only have to look at the human rights abuses overseas and thank my lucky stars I live here.

I was talking to one of my sons a few days ago about the bravery of people that protest in the face of death, torture and harm to their families. We take it all for granted.

I consider myself to have very liberal attitudes. I think everything is up for discussion and nobody has the right not to be offended. I abhor no-platforming and the cancellation culture.

However, I (normally), stay off religious threads because I know my views are likely to offend many people, and possibly cause them to be upset. So I take responsibility for that.

If I was a teacher trying to teach children about tolerance and what constitutes blasphemy, would I use something that a fair proportion of my class was likely to consider blasphemous to make the point? Or would I have the conversation without showing things that they (presumably) consider to be obscene or sacrilegious?

I can't understand how anyone thinks its acceptable to show a class of 14 year olds something that they think is blasphemous and try to pass that off as discussion and learning.

Alexa

Suziewoozie, at age 14 the children are old enough to be taught that discretion is sometimes the better part of valour.

Would you have said to 14 year old black students in Alabama , don’t make a fuss, just go discreetly to the school for blacks down the road?

Dont show the depiction of Jews as used by Nazi Germany. Dont show the concentration camps. How will people learn.

The suspension of a staff member is usually seen as a neutral act, one that allows a full investigation to take place. The headmaster’s apology suggests a decision has been reached, before any full investigation could have taken place.

I can see the benefits of teaching comparative religions if for no other reason than to encourage young people to develop understanding of the impact of faith/no faith on individuals and communities. The news reports say some pupils were afraid to tell parents they’d seen an image of the prophet, others were crying presumably believing they had blasphemed.

I can see why some condemn the teacher for showing the image. We don’t know why/how etc. What I’m sure of, is the behaviour of the crowd is just plain wrong. Covid restrictions, living in a country with no blasphemy laws etc. I’m furious about the oppression the children and this teacher are being subjected to.

Of course this goes against the tenets of free speech, but the teacher, mindful of what has happened in France should have exercised some foresight. When the whole Charlie Hebdo cartoon debacle kicked off, I for one never thought the bloody aftermath was worth the loss of lives for what amounted to some puerile, insulting cartoons. With that in mind and thinking only about acting in the interests of the greater good, I now think awareness about cultural and religious sensitivities should be taken into account. Everybody else's are these days. For example, employees working at the publishing house responsible for publishing The Ikabog after finding JK Rowling's earth shattering assertion "that only women menstruate" too upsetting thereafter to work on her project. were told that they should not be forced to do so. It's pretty much common knowledge these days that many Muslims do not want to see images of their prophet in a cartoon so why are they not shown the same consideration as many other young people who do not wish to engage with people who may oppose their point of view.

Of course in an ideal world we should be able to criticise religion, after all much of it is brainwashing and a man made construct, I should know I was brought up a Catholic. When Richard Dawkins made that observation and singled out Catholics and Muslims as the worst examples of that he did of course have a point.

Read the story of brave little Ruby Bridges who at 6 years old, had to be escorted to school regularly by federal marshals whilst a mob of baying white Christian fundamentalists demonstrated outside. Did anyone see the poster during the last presidential election?

Rosa sat and Ruby walked so Kamala could run.

Religious fundamentalists of any creed or colour have no place at a school gate.

Religious fundamentalists of any creed or colour have no place at a school gate.

Has anybody on this thread said they do?

By implication yes, some posters are supporting the position that the teacher was wrong - that’s what the men at the gate are saying. As Iam said, the head has apologised, thus judging the teacher already.

suxiewoozie i totall disagree with your implication.

I both said that the teacher was wrong and quite explicitly said that I condemned the demonstrations at the gate.

Saying that one side of the argument is wrong does, not mean that the other side is right, so condemning the teacher does not in anyway, by implication, suggest support for the parents behaviour.

Both sides are quite uneqivocally in the wrong in this event.