Terrorist attacks and beheadings in France

[Athos]

You're saying your pov trumps theirs. You're really rather fundamentalist yourself.

Don't you think the pov that people should be allowed to poke fun at Islam without being beheaded ought to trump the pov that those who poke fun at Islam ought to be beheaded?

 

[Spymaster]

Who was grossly offended here? the kids or the parents? If the parents, which parents, and what reasons do they give? Who else is shitstirring in the background?

Unimportant again. Do you accept that by telling a class with muslims in it that you are going to show some famously antagonistic cartoons and they can leave if they don't like it, the very high likelihood is that someone will be pissed off? Do you accept that a perfectly good discussion about freedom of speech could be had without showing the cartoons?

If I were a parent at that school, I'd be offended by the idea that the school refuses to deal with certain issues to do with freedom of expression for fear of offending religious fundamentalists.

If I were a parent there I'd be annoyed that a teacher was unable to deal with freedom of expression without deliberately antagonising half the class.

 

[Pickman's model]

Don't you think the pov that people should be allowed to poke fun at Islam without being beheaded ought to trump the pov that those who poke fun at Islam ought to be beheaded?

I think you should read the thread.

 

[chilango]

Don't you think the pov that people should be allowed to poke fun at Islam without being beheaded ought to trump the pov that those who poke fun at Islam ought to be beheaded?

...as it does almost all the time.

 

[Spymaster]

It is necessary to exercise the 'right' to say things some people find offensive, if it's not be too be eroded further.

Nonsense.

 

[bimble]

Once again, it's nothing to do with anyone being racist nor about kids needing protection. It's about a teacher grossly offending people intentionally and unnecessarily.

You think the teacher should have been sacked like some of the parents demanded?

 

[Pickman's model]

It is necessary to exercise the 'right' to say things some people find offensive, if it's not be too be eroded further.

So nazis parading in golders green or stamford hill find by you. Or would that be beyond the pale?

 

[Athos]

I think you should read the thread.

I have.

 

[Spymaster]

You think the teacher should have been sacked like some of the parents demanded?

No but I think there's space for him to have been told to find another way to discuss freedom of expression.

 

[Pickman's model]

Don't you think the pov that people should be allowed to poke fun at Islam without being beheaded ought to trump the pov that those who poke fun at Islam ought to be beheaded?

So you're saying this teacher was poking fun at Islam. That puts a different complexion on the matter than has been discussed so far

 

[Athos]

So nazis parading in golders green or stamford hill find by you. Or would that be beyond the pale?

No, not fine. Because Nazism does more than offend; it's not at all analogous.

 

[Athos]

So you're saying this teacher was poking fun at Islam. That puts a different complexion on the matter than has been discussed so far

No, the cartoons were.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Unimportant again. Do you accept that by telling a class with muslims in it that you are going to show some famously antagonistic cartoons and they can leave if they don't like it, the very high likelihood is that someone will be pissed off? Do you accept that a perfectly good discussion about freedom of speech could be had without showing the cartoons?



If I were a parent there I'd be annoyed that a teacher was unable to deal with freedom of expression without deliberately antagonising half the class.

Some, or one? One chosen specifically because it's mild - only 'offence' in it is that it depicts Muhammad, and again, before we get too precious about that, so have Muslims in various times and places across history.

Should he have been beheaded if he'd shown this image of Muhammad, painted by a Muslim? It's not really about the depiction of Muhammad is it? It's about the ridiculing of Islam. Although even then, the cartoon didn't do that. Instead, it ridiculed certain Muslims.

 

[chilango]

There's a danger here of slipping into a default of western liberal ideas being objectively superior.

 

[Pickman's model]

No, not fine. Because Nazism does more than offend; it's not at all analogous.

Just trying to find where your limits on free expression are

 

[Athos]

Nonsense.

That's how rights work. It's through them being exercised that they are become widely accepted. If they're not exercised, they wither.

 

[bimble]

No but I think there's space for him to have been told to find another way to discuss freedom of expression.

Bit late now isn’t it but no doubt all the other teachers who still have heads should take note and be careful not to upset anybody whose parents might have friends in the axe murder business.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

There's a danger here of slipping into a default of western liberal ideas being objectively superior.

And the danger in that line of thought is that you just abandon the dissenting voices within the 'othered' communities that you don't dare to interfere with.

I don't think this is anything to do with 'liberalism' tbh. If anything the confusion comes from a liberal idea that somehow all positions are valid.

 

[Pickman's model]

No, the cartoons were.

I'm not sure why you're bringing up poking fun at Islam if that's clearly not what happened.

 

[Spymaster]

Should he have been beheaded if he'd shown this image of Muhammad, painted by a Muslim?

Yet again, not one person on this thread has come anywhere close to suggesting that he should have been beheaded. Why do you keep falling back on this?

 

[Athos]

Just trying to find where your limits on free expression are

I've not argued for any unfettered right to free speech; of course there must be limits. But offence didn't ought to be the point at which the line is drawn.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Yet again, not one person on this thread has come anywhere close to suggesting that he should have been beheaded. Why do you keep falling back on this?

Ok. Would he have been out of order showing that image in his class? Who decides?

 

[andysays]

No, the cartoons were.

Even that is questionable.

But this case is not really about whether anyone has some abstract right to "poke fun at Islam", it's about whether what this teacher did was a sensible and justified way to act in all the circumstances.

If the teacher was simply poking fun (I don't think he was, TBC), then that would certainly not be a sensible and justified way to act in all the circumstances, IMO

 

[Raheem]

Don't you think the pov that people should be allowed to poke fun at Islam without being beheaded ought to trump the pov that those who poke fun at Islam ought to be beheaded?

Why the fuck are you asking this?

 

[Athos]

There's a danger here of slipping into a default of western liberal ideas being objectively superior.

Frankly, whilst I'm no fan of western liberalism, it's ideas are superior to Islamic fundamentalism (though that's subjective, obviously).

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Why the fuck are you asking this?

Because that's the ultimate destination of an absolute relativism?

 

[Spymaster]

Bit late now isn’t it but no doubt all the other teachers who still have heads should take note and be careful not to upset anybody whose parents might have friends in the axe murder business.

Why shouldn't the teachers just resolve to teach effective lessons without pissing people off unnecessarily?

 

[planetgeli]

It's about a teacher grossly offending people intentionally and unnecessarily.

Where's your evidence for this being the case Si?

Particularly in the light of we're being told options were given to leave the class? If I wanted to intentionally and grossly offend you, I wouldn't give you an option to leave first.

You also said earlier "loads of muslim kids" were in the class. Where's your evidence for that? How many muslim kids were in the class? How do you know?

Or are you just using emotive language in a misplaced belief exaggeration will make your argument stronger? (It doesn't)

 

[Athos]

Even that is questionable.

But this case is not really about whether anyone has some abstract right to "poke fun at Islam", it's about whether what this teacher did was a sensible and justified way to act in all the circumstances.

If the teacher was simply poking fun (I don't think he was, TBC), then that would certainly not be a sensible and justified way to act in all the circumstances, IMO

IMO is always justified to reject the imposition of religious rules on non-believers, though clearly not that sensible!

 

[danny la rouge]

Let’s find a way of discussing biology without mentioning Darwin and evolution, because some people find it offensive. It’s perfectly possible to discuss biology without mentioning evolution.

The principle here is that religions are demanding a degree of delicacy that they really aren’t due. The more we behave the way some on here would have us behave, the more we abandon oppressed groups within certain cultures to increasingly reactionary and increasingly powerful fundamentalist oppression.

This thread is utterly depressing, and I’m fucking furious at the liberal cowardice on here that would just give the most reactionary elements within any culture exactly what they want. We are sleepwalking into a dire, dire future if that’s the way you folks want to play it, and it fills me with an dark, empty feeling of hopelessness and dread.