I’m not saying we should kowtow to religious fanatics, or ban all criticism of a certain religion. I’m saying it’s dumb for people to be setting the table for an endless culture war (in a secondary school, of all places!) when there’s no tangible benefit to starting the argument in the first place, and the only real ‘opponents’ are irrelevant cranks who are desperate for one to start.
We make compromises and trade-offs on our free speech all the time - the aim is that it makes our society safer, fairer and more respectful. Not making pictures of Mohammed part of the secondary school RE curriculum might be another one. So what’s the great cost to society here? Is it so crucial to our kids’ educations that it’s worth the ensuing shitshow? Is the offense it causes to a minority so irrelevant to us that we’d rather fire up the outrage machine every six months than just skip it and get on with our lives? I know there are some free speech purists on here who want to puff out their chests (it’s the internet after all) but I just don’t see it as some massive capitulation.
We have managed for decades to show Nazi propaganda in History without protest from the Jewish community. If it is found that in the lesson he insulted Islam then sure, throw the book at him. But I get the impression he made the same ‘mistake’ as the French teacher by wanting to engage students in the ultimate example of free speech debate.
Those at Charlie Hebdo didn’t deserve to die, nor did the French teacher and this one does not deserve to lose his job.
Well he did something which many Muslims find to be an insult to their religion. I’m not saying I share their feelings (I obviously don’t think it justifies murder!), but had it been me planning the lesson, I probably would have taken that into account, and girded myself for the consequences if I thought it was still worth it. If I’m a caterer who makes excellent bacon sarnies, I wouldn’t expect to serve them at a Jewish wedding and keep my job for very long, however delicious I thought they were.
Well he did something which many Muslims find to be an insult to their religion. I’m not saying I share their feelings (I obviously don’t think it justifies murder!), but had it been me planning the lesson, I probably would have taken that into account, and girded myself for the consequences if I thought it was still worth it. If I’m a caterer who makes excellent bacon sarnies, I wouldn’t expect to serve them at a Jewish wedding and keep my job for very long, however delicious they were.
That analogy only works if this was a Muslim faith school - it isn’t is it?
What annoys me with this is the underlying assumption that he didn’t seriously think about what he was doing. If you look at the support plans and notes about individual students a teacher already has to factor in to their delivery of the curriculum you’d appreciate why I’m getting a bit irritated here.
I don’t believe so, but I think I read most of the pupils are Muslim?
I’m sure there are RE teachers up and down the country who have shown pictures of Mohammed in schools with no Muslim pupils at all, and I don’t really have an issue with that at all.
Why do you have an issue anyway - the issue surely is with the protests - other religions have moved onto to at least attempt to be in this century not still in the 15th. The religion is pretty bigoted and it’s not the first time we’ve seen these scenes outside a U.K. school is it?
Obviously I haven’t seen those - what kind of things are you talking about?
Why do you have an issue anyway - the issue surely is with the protests - other religions have moved onto to at least attempt to be in this century not still in the 15th. The religion is pretty bigoted and it’s not the first time we’ve seen these scenes outside a U.K. school is it?
They will be support plans for those with conditions ranging from autism to physical disabilities. They can also be more acute, for instance teaching a story where a character drowns and someone in your class lost a parent in the same way. Support plans around learning difficulties are a legal obligation that the school and thus the teacher has to adhere to.
So if this is already in a teacher’s mindset it is very unlikely they will have planned this lesson without thinking of the consequences. I think the way forward is similar to what we already do for sex education in that parents can opt their children out of the classes but it is not pulled off the curriculum.
My issue is with the protests. They’re disruptive and divisive. I can tell from the rest of your anti-Islam dribble that your preferred method of preventing them is an endless culture war waged from the safety of your keyboard. I think there’s an easier way.
My issue is with the protests. They’re disruptive and divisive. I can tell from the rest of your anti-Islam dribble that your preferred method of preventing them is an endless culture war waged from the safety of your keyboard. I think there’s an easier way.
Anti Islam
So what happened here, in your opinion?
Such a bullshit argument. There is a lot of islamophobia, which is obviously awful, but this isn’t it.
Such a bullshit argument. There is a lot of islamophobia, which is obviously awful, but this isn’t it.
Hindu’s can’t eat beef but they aren’t going mental that schools are selling burgers.
Muslim’s find images of the prophet to be blasphemous but that isn’t a crime in this country and so long as nobody was forced to see the images then there should be no issue.
I think the whole thing is insane
Just found it funny In that statement he mentioned the 2 things Muslims love the most ... the LGBT community and Israel(but we can probably narrow Israel down to just Jewish people In truth )
If he’d mentioned he was going to show it in advance, there would have been kick off about that, and I would have expected the subject leader to at the very least have a conversation about it.He was probably naive in not forewarning the Muslims in the class about what he was going to show next lesson. I don’t think his actual lesson delivery would have been insensitive. I also would find it difficult to believe he hadn’t mentioned it with the subject leader in advance.
I for one am truly shocked I tell you that the 2 outlets giving these clowns a platform are the guardian and independent ...shockedWell yes again I’m sure this was the schools fault as well. So insensitive
‘We can’t give in’: the Birmingham school on the frontline of anti-LGBT protests
Protests by Muslims against teaching about gay relationships at their children’s primary came to a head last week. We meet the people caught between activists and the lawwww.google.co.uk
Lol “my anti Islam dribble” - your whole argument is based on a fact the guy who didn’t break the law is somehow responsible for the subsequent fall out, if you want an analogy that’s like blaming a girl for dressing inappropriately and blaming any consequential action on her.
It’s century 21 - as for the safety behind the keyboard take a look in the mirror
If he’d mentioned he was going to show it in advance, there would have been kick off about that, and I would have expected the subject leader to at the very least have a conversation about it.
Pretty much everything offends followers of this particular faith though...they are very fragileThere’s a genuine and justifiable reason to be offended by someone insulting your religion, deliberately or otherwise. You might disagree personally with that, and it doesn’t subsequently justify crimes of retribution from those who were offended of course. But protections for them nevertheless exist, which is why there are often consequences (legal or otherwise) for those kinds of provocations.
By contrast there is no genuine or justifiable reason for a woman’s outfit to provoke offense or inspire a crime against her. So quite rightly there are no consequences for a woman who chooses to dress a certain way. In both cases, those backward men who would look to exploit a situation by threatening others are the people I’m concerned about stopping, but don’t be surprised if there isn’t a one-size-fits-all approach to doing so.
Pretty much everything offends followers of this particular faith though...they are very fragile
Most religions themselves depict their own god themselves. Islam doesn’t depict either god or the prophet Muhammad. That’s the major difference here. It isn’t blasphemy to depict god, Jesus, the Virgin Mary etc in Christianity. In fact go into any church anywhere in the world of any domain of Christianity and it’s full of images especially of Jesus on the cross and the Virgin Mary. You don’t see any images of anybody in a Mosque, to Muslims it’s blasphemy to depict them. If you’re going to compare eggs you need to compare them with eggs.Are for example ..all religious children so shocked or offended by cartoon pictures of their god ...there's over 500 gods so obviously the choice is vast when deciding which sky fairy to love the most..
OK..blasphemy isn't illegal though here ,most people don't really care that they are offended ,as Stephen fry would say ....so fucking whatMost religions themselves depict their own god themselves. Islam doesn’t depict either god or the prophet Muhammad. That’s the major difference here. It isn’t blasphemy to depict god, Jesus, the Virgin Mary etc in Christianity. In fact go into any church anywhere in the world of any domain of Christianity and it’s full of images especially of Jesus on the cross and the Virgin Mary. You don’t see any images of anybody in a Mosque, to Muslims it’s blasphemy to depict them. If you’re going to compare eggs you need to compare them with eggs.
The common law of blasphemy was abolished, doesn’t mean you can’t be trialled for blasphemy as a hate crime. So what you say is only partially true.OK..blasphemy isn't illegal though here ,most people don't really care that they are offended ,as Stephen fry would say ....so fucking what
The common law of blasphemy was abolished, doesn’t mean you can’t be trialled for blasphemy as a hate crime. So what you say is only partially true.
I for one am truly shocked I tell you that the 2 outlets giving these clowns a platform are the guardian and independent ...shocked
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?