Religeous intolerance

Katie59 You may say what you like about Catholics or Protestants but you shouldn’t because it doesn’t mean they are not offended. Whether religion is good or bad people do believe in it and you have to respect that and let them get on with it.

Some posters mention mob rule about people protesting outside the school but isn’t this our democracy that we are so proud of in action. At least for the time being we’re all allowed to protest. As for the teacher, I would like to ask why he couldn’t just refer to the cartoon as an example of religious intolerance rather than actually showing it.

I can say whatever I like about Catholics or Protestants or many other religions and nobody is going to say boo, as soon as I mention Islam or Judaism all hell breaks loose. As it happens I believe all religion is bad and way of controlling the population we can well do without.

Do you really think the teacher thought he would have to receive police protection though? presumably they think his life is at risk if he is receiving police protection. It does seem disproportionate, even though I accept having been explained to that is offensive.

Religious Studies hasn't been just about religion for a long time. I don't know if anyone read the link I posted but it about exploring conflict between morals and religion too and all sorts of complex scenarios and subject matters within that.

The teacher wasn't wrong, but he must have known what he would provoke. Should people rise to provocation, only by arguing their corner, certainly not by violence, but too often violence is often an outcome in opposing any sort of orthodoxy. From my own upbringing I know it's futile arguing against a "blind faith" IMO you have to live that raison d'etre to understand it. Entrenched beliefs are often taken to the grave. The children may not be fortunate enough to be able to critique their religion without that causing ructions in the home.

I don't know the background to this. If the teacher was using the cartoon amongst other items of material to have a sensible debate as to what could be acceptably described as "free speech", and how religious people should respond if they feel their beliefs are being disrespected, then to me it would seem a reasonable debate to be had.

Unfortunately, in the current situation where followers of Islam feel they are being unfairly marginalised and caricatured (and, in my view, there is some justification for them feeling this), it was unwise to use material that might be perceived as deliberately chosen to be offensive.

However, as it is said this teacher is now receiving police protection, I think that is an absolutely abhorrent situation. I do not believe that ridiculing somebody's beliefs is acceptable but I do think people should have the right to debate the rights and wrongs of all religions without being threatened and intimidated.

I said some posters. But I’m surprised you’re so sure the teacher was wrong already. Not one apology from the protesters about putting his name on Twitter, no regrets about the school being closed - just a belief in a god given right to get their own way regardless of the cost to others.

Honestly ! People must be waiting for the least whisper of anything, ready to pounce and make a big thing of it.
It's " freedom of speech " gone crackers, you daren't break wind for what someone knows about it.
I've got no time for any of it as it's become an excuse for the hordes to create unnecessary mayhem.

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.

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.

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

Has anybody on this thread said they do?

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.

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.

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.

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

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?

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

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