Classical Mechanic
Full Member
Now you’ve offended me.Louis van Gaal also played for them.
Now you’ve offended me.Louis van Gaal also played for them.
It’s so remarkable. I cannot understand this phenomenon. It’s a blind spot for many people somehow. Although I also think it comes from a good heart because they see Muslims are under constant scrunity which unfortunately is also true.Not just on the caf. Although that’s presumably because Christians historically have had more privilege. So people are more willing to step up and defend those as they see lacking in privilege. Which is fair enough really.
Although I always find it weird that they’re willing to go in to bat for a religion with elements that are so at odds with progressive politics and that hasn’t matured and become more tolerant to the same extent as Christianity. There has to be some cognitive dissonance involved.
Made up stories to you. A key aspect of someone else's faith and beliefs.It's made up stories
But atheists don’t tend to impose their thinking on religious people and the other way around it is the case like we see with this teacher.Made up stories to you. A key aspect of someone else's faith and beliefs.
You're not the greater authority on what people's faith should be here
Nor is there a higher authority in a humanistic form.Made up stories to you. A key aspect of someone else's faith and beliefs.
You're not the greater authority on what people's faith should be here
I agree to a large extent but it's also something to be careful about. Some younger people are far more impressionable than others. There's a reason age specific censorship exists in the first place. Kids at certain ages don't know any better. Borat is a hilarious movie. Many kids might watch it and think it's funny and then go on and repeat loads of the same anti-Jew jokes because it's funny and not realize that you're actually just insulting many people, because they didn't get the point of the movie in the first place. I'm not an expert on what the ages should be, but it wasn't all that long ago that I was in high school and grade school, and I know even in Canada in the 2000's and 2010's there was lots of subtle racism and xenophobia against other cultures, or looking back at all the anti-gay jokes and phrases people used. Some people quickly grow out of it and realize it's probably wrong. Others don't.You honestly think that the 14-18 y/o demographic wouldn’t be able to better discuss race relations than their parent’s generation, that they wouldn’t be more accepting & open to opposing views? It seems to me this is a little like youth sports; let’s the kids find themselves without parental intrusion. The parents will always feck it up. I’d be curious to know the story of how the parents became aware of this lesson - did a child come home incredibly distraught & inconsolable or was it just told in passing to the parents who then became ‘outraged?’ Do we know anything about this? Or did the student(s) here lie to their parents to create outrage as occurred in France? You’re right, we just don’t know.
There would be a whole lot more good allowing the kids to hash out the debate sans parents imo. It’s not as if none of them have viewed extreme topics online or in media before & typically children are far more tolerant than their parents. Let’s not devalue how intelligent the kids are & coddle them through censorship.
I think the reason why Christians are willing to stand up for blasphemy laws is because quite many evangelical christians would like the same thing. The catholic church would love blasphemy laws as well and the evangelical christians I know in real life as well don't like having their faith questioned. Essentially they also feel entitled to be protected from what they feel is offensive and obviously have their own agenda about protelyzing Christianity to as many as possible.It’s so remarkable. I cannot understand this phenomenon. It’s a blind spot for many people somehow. Although I also think it comes from a good heart because they see Muslims are under constant scrunity which unfortunately is also true.
The ability to offend and take offence (and be in a position to rebut it) is a privilege most people throughout history have not had and absolutely should not be something we want stopped.I think there's a big difference in using it from an educational POV as a teacher, and as a random artist or satirical comic or whatever.
But to your first point, isn't it the same thing as how same-sex marriage was such an issue for so long? Telling them we can make fun of you, deal with it and don't get offended by it? Shouldn't the answer be don't make something offensive in the first place? Especially when literally the entire purpose of the thing in question was to offend someone.
Strongly believe that religion in schools is a terrible idea and it's dumb as feck to teach as a subject, and it 100% should be ignored for school. Literally 0 value in it, it doesn't help you in any sort of future career, it doesn't help you become educated, it doesn't help with general health. It's a waste of time. The public school system in Canada does that well, at least when I was going through school.Religion shouldn't be taught in school full stop. It's made up stories that belong in the dark ages. It should be completely ignored.
So we have to respect there beliefs and not draw a cartoon, but they can't respect someone's belief that they can draw it if they want to. Gotcha.Made up stories to you. A key aspect of someone else's faith and beliefs.
You're not the greater authority on what people's faith should be here
But you wanted the teacher sacked without knowing the full context. That would have impacted his life.Strongly believe that religion in schools is a terrible idea and it's dumb as feck to teach as a subject, and it 100% should be ignored for school. Literally 0 value in it, it doesn't help you in any sort of future career, it doesn't help you become educated, it doesn't help with general health. It's a waste of time. The public school system in Canada does that well, at least when I was going through school.
Whether it's all made up stories, different topic and to each their own. Imo people can believe what they want, doesn't impact me and I'll still go on living my life the same way which is trying to be respectful/tolerant of other people's beliefs/differences.
Brother, we mainly agree here, there’s no need for hyperbole. It’s best to foster debate as soon as possible in one’s educational life. I was fortunate enough to go to a high school where we didn’t have multiple choice questions on many tests, we had to write out our answers & debate our points. I learned a lot in classes where I had to defend terrorism or defend racism or defend classism / capitalism; I realized I didn’t have much to do with all of these as it was difficult to get my heart behind defending them, even for a grade. I am sure stuff was censored from me in my private high school, but not nearly as much as could have been. It’s beneficial for 14-18 y/o students to be challenged & made to feel uncomfortable. There should always be oversight & limits on curriculum, I just don’t feel that line should eliminate debates on topical, poignant issues like this.I agree to a large extent but it's also something to be careful about. Some younger people are far more impressionable than others. There's a reason age specific censorship exists in the first place. Kids at certain ages don't know any better. Borat is a hilarious movie. Many kids might watch it and think it's funny and then go on and repeat loads of the same anti-Jew jokes because it's funny and not realize that you're actually just insulting many people, because they didn't get the point of the movie in the first place. I'm not an expert on what the ages should be, but it wasn't all that long ago that I was in high school and grade school, and I know even in Canada in the 2000's and 2010's there was lots of subtle racism and xenophobia against other cultures, or looking back at all the anti-gay jokes and phrases people used. Some people quickly grow out of it and realize it's probably wrong. Others don't.
I don't think that is correct. You can't really make sense of human history or understand the world in 2021, without knowledge of religion.Religion shouldn't be taught in school full stop. It's made up stories that belong in the dark ages. It should be completely ignored.
We should want fewer people to be offended by racist or sexist remarks, yes? What good comes out of someone being offensive to a group of peoples entirely peaceful belief? I'm not saying because a group doesn't believe in same sex marriage and are offended by it, that you have to respect that. But when we're talking about something that literally never has to come up apart from when you're intentionally trying to offend them... why? Drawing a cartoon of a religions main prophet in a negative way. What do you gain out of it? It's purpose is to offend. It caused offense. Congrats on being a dickhead.The ability to offend and take offence (and be in a position to rebut it) is a privilege most people throughout history have not had and absolutely should not be something we want stopped.
It’s totally coming from a good place. Plus moderate Muslims (i.e. the vast majority) are being demonised by media campaigns portraying them all as fundamentalists. So it’s good to push back against that.It’s so remarkable. I cannot understand this phenomenon. It’s a blind spot for many people somehow. Although I also think it comes from a good heart because they see Muslims are under constant scrunity which unfortunately is also true.
I agree you need a certain degree of knowledge of the worlds religions to understand history and the world's societies as they are. You can teach people religion without indoctrinating them.I don't think that is correct. You can't really make sense of human history or understand the world in 2021, without knowledge of religion.
There is a difference between evangelising / indoctrinating people and simply educating them about the multiplicity of faiths in the world.
It's one thing teaching about the impact of religion in history, and another thing being in actual religion classes. 2 very different topics. Where I grew up they have a catholic school board and a normal public school board. The catholic school board forces kids to go to mass (or whatever it is), read about religious history for that religion, and all that other religious stuff, and blend religion into every topic. The public school board will teach history based on historical facts and say what happened with religions. They won't bring religion into any other topic, and there isn't any religion specific class (because it provides 0 actual educational value).I don't think that is correct. You can't really make sense of human history or understand the world in 2021, without knowledge of religion.
There is a difference between evangelising / indoctrinating people and simply educating them about the multiplicity of faiths in the world.
Avoiding idolatry is one part of it. The other part is to avoid misrepresentation. Muslims are not supposed to create any visual representations of any of the past prophets and messengers, and it's because of both idolatry and the huge risk of misrepresenting or incorrectly characterising them.So, correct me if I'm wrong but usually with religion the aversion to depiction of key figures is in place to avoid idolatry. Christianity supposedly has it (except they don't which is immediately apparent anytime you walk into a church) and Islam certainly does by the reaction to these cartoons. Yet, isn't there some irony or hypocrisy in the strong reaction to the cartoons that would suggest some form of idolatry already exists? Like, if Mohamed wasn't so extremely revered the reaction wouldn't be as strong?
That did make me laugh, but this thread has actually be quite civil in my view. I'm proud of the caf!
These threads always escalate so quickly.
These kind of threads usually are always civil from my experience, yet there are always people acting like these threads descend into extreme evil. Same with the Sarah Everard thread, apparently people were appalled by all the misogyny but I didn't see this immense misogyny at all.That did make me laugh, but this thread has actually be quite civil in my view. I'm proud of the caf!
Where was this, where’d you grow up?It's one thing teaching about the impact of religion in history, and another thing being in actual religion classes. 2 very different topics. Where I grew up they have a catholic school board and a normal public school board. The catholic school board forces kids to go to mass (or whatever it is), read about religious history for that religion, and all that other religious stuff, and blend religion into every topic. The public school board will teach history based on historical facts and say what happened with religions. They won't bring religion into any other topic, and there isn't any religion specific class (because it provides 0 actual educational value).
This is in Canada, and the Catholic schools are mainly public here. They also tend to be the best public schools, though, which is why several non-Christians attend those schools.Where was this, where’d you grow up?
We’re the catholic schools private or public?
Wow. Just smacks of one school board that exists in facts, another in alternative facts. Just like the two political parties in my country.
So, if you’re in a catholic school zone, you have to go to that school? Or can you opt to go to one outside of that zone due to your religious / non-religious beliefs?This is in Canada, and the Catholic schools are mainly public here. They also tend to be the best public schools, though, which is why several non-Christians attend those schools.
Is there a typo here or is this your understanding of history?Christianity does not have the same history of religious intolerance either and that's the problem here.
It absolutely is not a teachers job to be respectful of people's beliefs, if those beliefs go against the entire ethos of the society we live in.Not sure what your point is? Yes, all people can be offended by everything. A big responsibility of a teachers job is to be respectful of all people's beliefs. Choosing to use a picture that served no purpose other than to offend, is not respectful. I'm not saying it's illegal to use a picture like that. I'm saying you're probably a cnut if you release that image, and then furthermore you should be punished if you use that image in your class as a teacher.
I'm much more uneasy with the idea of faith schools and teaching everything through the prism of religion - that sounds pretty horrendous.It's one thing teaching about the impact of religion in history, and another thing being in actual religion classes. 2 very different topics. Where I grew up they have a catholic school board and a normal public school board. The catholic school board forces kids to go to mass (or whatever it is), read about religious history for that religion, and all that other religious stuff, and blend religion into every topic. The public school board will teach history based on historical facts and say what happened with religions. They won't bring religion into any other topic, and there isn't any religion specific class (because it provides 0 actual educational value).
I can't say for certain (as I wasn't born and raised here), and I'll avoid answering the questions to not misinform you. @bosnian_red would be better placed to answer these questions.So, if you’re in a catholic school zone, you have to go to that school? Or can you opt to go to one outside of that zone due to your religious / non-religious beliefs?
Is all governmental money apportioned then same between catholic & ‘secular’ schools (for the lack of a better term)? What causes catholic schools to be ‘better?’
Barley grammar school is 4-16 yearsThis was secondary school so the pupils were between 13-18. We were probably around 16-18 when the cartoon crisis kicked off. We saw all the cartoons in class and discussed them and the crisis and the topic. No protests, no one harmed, no harm came from it. No calls for the teacher to be sacked.
If you want to read the how it all started here it is. The link contains the original cartoons at your own risk.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-Posten_Muhammad_cartoons_controversy
The whole school body didn’t attend the class.Barley grammar school is 4-16 years
Barley grammar school is 4-16 years
From what I understand the problem here is that the teacher went against the ethos of the school, hence the apology from the school.It absolutely is not a teachers job to be respectful of people's beliefs, if those beliefs go against the entire ethos of the society we live in.
Again, a close family member is a teacher during sex ed, 15 of her students parents refused to let their kids go to class because LGBT sexual health was to be included.
My relative is a gay woman , she absolutely does not have to respect those ridiculous beliefs.
I didn't say they did. I'm simply replying to a poster who said the age range was older than a previous poster when it isntThe whole school body didn’t attend the class.
Gotcha.I didn't say they did. I'm simply replying to a poster who said the age range was older than a previous poster when it isnt
I don't know what year the class was, should have asked when speaking to someone earlier.If that's the case I probably wouldn't have broached the subject unless they were 14-15 years or above.
Yeah I wrote that elsewhere, of course be respectful of all beliefs within reason. Not drawing an offensive image about a certain religions prophet won't change anyone's life for the worse. Of course other aspects like the LGBT issues that often arise they should for sure ignore and strongly support the people who in this case are being suppressed from living their lives. People should be allowed to do with themselves whatever they want, so long as it does not oppress or actually harm others (for the most part? Hard to cover everything with a blanket statement). In general, don't be a dickhead and let people be happy in a peaceful way is how I see it, and how teachers especially should be respectful towards these things. They don't have to agree with any or a specific religion, but they shouldn't insult it either (but also like you say, shouldn't hide from the archaic views of a certain religion). Drawing or using an offensive picture of the prophet from the religion IMO falls under one of the things you don't do.It absolutely is not a teachers job to be respectful of people's beliefs, if those beliefs go against the entire ethos of the society we live in.
Again, a close family member is a teacher during sex ed, 15 of her students parents refused to let their kids go to class because LGBT sexual health was to be included.
My relative is a gay woman , she absolutely does not have to respect those ridiculous beliefs.
Where was this, where’d you grow up?
Were the catholic schools private or public?
Wow. Just smacks of one school board that exists in facts, another in alternative facts. Just like the two political parties in my country.
Yeah, Canada. It's not that one does alternative facts, the catholic board still teaches everything as far as I know scientifically based, but I'm not sure if they shirk away from some topics like evolution (never asked anyone). But from where I grew up at least, there is both public and private for both standard and catholic school boards, but the vast majority is public. Private schools here have a reputation of being just money sinks for no reason, you don't get a better education here, the public school system is very good as is, and the private system is loaded with boarding students from abroad whose parents didn't realize that the public system was good in Canada and that the private system is a waste of money (at least where I'm from, might not be the case everywhere in Canada). Can't really say one is better than another, there are good catholic and good standard public schools, and there are bad ones for both. I'd say there's a much smaller gap between the best and worst than there is in the States.This is in Canada, and the Catholic schools are mainly public here. They also tend to be the best public schools, though, which is why several non-Christians attend those schools.
Where I grew up there were loads of options, some chose to go to standard public school, some people chose to go to a catholic school (I think to be a teacher there, you have to be baptized even if you aren't religious), not sure what the student requirements were. Funnily enough my fiancée went to a catholic private school (one of the only 2 in the area) as her parents came from Arizona when she was starting high school so they didn't know that the public school system was probably better than the private one. They aren't religious at all either but just picked it based on their experience of what was better in the states, so they both had to pay more and probably got a worse school education out of it. Not sure how it works if within your zone you only have the one option. Generally I don't think there's a difference in education or funding overall between them, no idea the actual numbers and there probably is but the end result wasn't any noticeable difference. Education wise you would assume they miss out on something as they allocate however many hours to religion topics, so I'm not sure what that would've replaced in my schools.So, if you’re in a catholic school zone, you have to go to that school? Or can you opt to go to one outside of that zone due to your religious / non-religious beliefs?
Is all governmental money apportioned then same between catholic & ‘secular’ schools (for the lack of a better term)? What causes catholic schools to be ‘better?’