ThisThis is going to be a wonderful thread full of balanced arguments, compassion and understanding.
A satirical cartoon can be offensive, yes. If it’s a good cartoon that’s a good thing. I would say it’s good for a teacher to not avoid controversial subjects. Especially when it comes to satirical cartoons.I'm unsure why a teacher would do this, surely it is obvious that it would cause offence and stir up trouble?
according to the Indie it was the previously published Charlie Hebdo cartoonsWhat class was it? Was it unacceptable for conventional reasons i.e sexual, racist etc.
If it was just a cartoon these people need to get a life.
We went through the whole thing in 2006 & 2007 in college on the topic of free speech where we saw and discussed both Jyllands posten and the Charlie Hebdo cartoons. Granted we had no muslims in our class. If I were a teacher and was going to the whole thing, I would give any muslims who don't want to join the option of being free to skip class.I'm unsure why a teacher would do this, surely it is obvious that it would cause offence and stir up trouble?
Slippery slope that logicSurely displaying cartoons of the Prophet is right up there with petting a chimp, uploading your private porno to the Cloud and joking about a bomb in your luggage, as things it's just best to avoid doing these days.
You might not be trying to be malicious but that doesn't stop you being a fecking idiot.
This.Surely displaying cartoons of the Prophet is right up there with petting a chimp, uploading your private porno to the Cloud and joking about a bomb in your luggage, as things it's just best to avoid doing these days.
You might not be trying to be malicious but that doesn't stop you being a fecking idiot.
HowSlippery slope that logic
I don't get it though, if it is clear in a religion that showing a picture of the prophet drawn by human hand is not allowed, why show the picture, especially when you have members of that religion in the class and local community. Talk about it sure, but why show it? Would mods allow the Charlie Hevbdo cartoons to be posted on this forum, given that I imagine there is a sizable muslim comunity here that would find the offensive?A satirical cartoon can be offensive, yes. If it’s a good cartoon that’s a good thing. I would say it’s good for a teacher to not avoid controversial subjects. Especially when it comes to satirical cartoons.
I wouldn’t dare it but I applaud people who do.
Where does it stop though? Don’t show satirical cartoons of Trump because there are republicans in the class room?I don't get it though, if it is clear in a religion that showing a picture of the prophet drawn by human hand is not allowed, why show the picture, especially when you have members of that religion in the class and local community. Talk about it sure, but why show it? Would mods allow the Charlie Hevbdo cartoons to be posted on this forum, given that I imagine there is a sizable muslim comunity here that would find the offensive?
It feels to me like saying to a class with some Jewish students let's eat some pork. There's nothing unhealthy about eating pork it's only banned in the Torah because pigs don't chew cud (An animal is allowed if it chews cud and has cloven hooves)
These religious rules may seem small and ridiculous to those who are not part of that religion, but are big deals for those that are.
Slippery slope is a logical fallacy, what a blunder you've made.Slippery slope that logic
What is the purpose though? What are you trying to prove/teach by displaying such images?Where does it stop though? Don’t show satirical cartoons of Trump because there are republicans in the class room?
Religion has power. And you need to be able to question power in a free society and satirical cartoons are a good way to do that. That certain parts of the Islam want to decide whoever some free individual in a free society draws is a reason to ridicule in a satirical cartoon. It’s one of the reasons for satirical cartoons.
I do agree Muslim students should have the chance to walk away.
It's an obvious topic on free speech because it's the one thing that leads to killings, riots and national crisis. And it's really just cartoons. Our teacher on religion didn't hide the fact that he considers all religion made up which might cause offense to anyone who's religious.I don't get it though, if it is clear in a religion that showing a picture of the prophet drawn by human hand is not allowed, why show the picture, especially when you have members of that religion in the class and local community. Talk about it sure, but why show it? Would mods allow the Charlie Hevbdo cartoons to be posted on this forum, given that I imagine there is a sizable muslim comunity here that would find the offensive?
It feels to me like saying to a class with some Jewish students let's eat some pork. There's nothing unhealthy about eating pork it's only banned in the Torah because pigs don't chew cud (An animal is allowed if it chews cud and has cloven hooves)
These religious rules may seem small and ridiculous to those who are not part of that religion, but are big deals for those that are.
I think it's quite easy to see where to draw the line and this is a bit of an extreme comparison, Islam is a centuries old established, respected, global religion with a long standing rule not to show an image of the prophet. Trumpism isn't really comparable.Where does it stop though? Don’t show satirical cartoons of Trump because there are republicans in the class room?
I'm not suggesting never mentioning it - we should definitely talk about things like this, that's how people learn. But showing it doesn't add anything except controversy.It's an obvious topic on free speech because it's the one thing that leads to killings, riots and national crisis. And it's really just cartoons. Our teacher on religion didn't hide the fact that he considers all religion made up which might cause offense to anyone who's religious.
They are both nonsense and should be treated equally.I think it's quite easy to see where to draw the line and this is a bit of an extreme comparison, Islam is a centuries old established, respected, global religion with a long standing rule not to show an image of the prophet. Trumpism isn't really comparable.
Why would you not respect other religions, like I say talk about it and debate for sure, but why show something that everyone knows will offend?
1. That religion has the tendency to limit other’s people freedom. Could be a position which the students can discuss further.What is the purpose though? What are you trying to prove/teach by displaying such images?
Honestly, comparing Islam to Trump followers and claiming both are rubbish and deserved to be treated equally is not only foolish but hugely insulting.They are both nonsense and should be treated equally.
That's all that needs to be said on the subject really. Getting your knickers in a twist over a cartoon is and should be treated as ridiculous, but if you don't want to see it then you should be given the choice to leave.If I were a teacher and was going to the whole thing, I would give any muslims who don't want to join the option of being free to skip class.
GreatHonestly, comparing Islam to Trump followers and claiming both are rubbish and deserved to be treated equally is not only foolish but hugely insulting.
To have discussion what all the fuzz is about. By allowing students to see the "forbidden" material. It's a not a madrassa or a mosque.I'm not suggesting never mention it - we should talk about, that's how people learn. But showing it doesn't add anything except controversy.
I don’t think because something is centuries old it deserves more respect. Especially when it’s limiting other people’s freedom.I think it's quite easy to see where to draw the line and this is a bit of an extreme comparison, Islam is a centuries old established, respected, global religion with a long standing rule not to show an image of the prophet. Trumpism isn't really comparable.
Why would you not respect other religions, like I say talk about it and debate for sure, but why show something that everyone knows will offend?
No but it's offensive and the strength of feeling within the Muslim community about it is well known. I actually thought the argument for the Hebdo publication was much stronger as it was satire. But this is a schoolroom and any teacher doing this would know what they are doing and it smacks of bravado to me. There was no need to show it, it could easily have just been discussed.To have discussion what all the fuzz is about. By allowing students to see the "forbidden" material. It's a not a madrassa or a mosque.
I get the idea, but, why undermine the Islamic kids or banish their opinions from the class because you want to show a picture that's offensive. Why not just talk about it and get the view points from all pupils, that seems to me to be a much better learning opportunity.If I were a teacher and was going to the whole thing, I would give any muslims who don't want to join the option of being free to skip class.
Not a very good teacher.It's an obvious topic on free speech because it's the one thing that leads to killings, riots and national crisis. And it's really just cartoons. Our teacher on religion didn't hide the fact that he considers all religion made up which might cause offense to anyone who's religious.
Which is quite scary that teacher shouldn’t discuss cartoons because they have to fear for their lives. So almost nobody does it and when someone does it he’s called stupid. The oppression of Islamic fundamentalists clearly works.Pretty stupid and probably intentional considering the school and area he did it in.
Whether it's acceptable to do is another subject - but I think most people know by now if you do something like that it's going to cause a big problem.
I don't feel you are undermining the mulims in the schools by allowing people to see the cartoons. Being offended is of itself not a virtue. I would personally allow the muslims students the possibility to skip the classes if they want to. The whole thing only continues to be controversial because there continues to killings, riotings and mass crisis over cartoons which cause offense. It will cease to be controversial when it's no longer a mass crisis.No but it's offensive and the strength of feeling within the Muslim community about it is well known. I actually thought the argument for the Hebdo publication was much stronger as it was satire. But this is a schoolroom and any teacher doing this would know what they are doing and it smacks of bravado to me. There was no need to show it, it could easily have just been discussed.
I get the idea, but, why undermine the Islamic kids or banish their opinions from the class because you want to show a picture that's offensive. Why not just talk about it and get the view points from all pupils, that seems to me to be a much better learning opportunity.
Well when these teachers can ask you to write an essay on a six word poem, I'm not sure you can apply logic to their approach.I'm unsure why a teacher would do this, surely it is obvious that it would cause offence and stir up trouble?
When I was in highschool, these type of cartoons were used as an example of satire, in classes of french and literature. There was no particular political or religious message attached to it.What is the purpose though? What are you trying to prove/teach by displaying such images?
