British Teacher guilty for naming Teddy Bear "Muhammad&

Mr. Pessimistic

http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,5143,695231811,00.html

Mr. Pessimistic

So now they want this teacher executed? And SHE is spreading religious hatred. I see it as religious hatred and the inherent intolerance of religion being the bully here.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071130/ap_on_re_af/sudan_british_teacher

Constance963 · Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 10:46 pm Post subject:

People are just nuts. You would THINK that religion would teach you love and tolerance.....

And how exactly does the punishment fit the crime here, if there is even a crime at all?

MadArchitect · Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 11:45 pm Post subject:

Niall001 · Posted: Sat Dec 01, 2007 12:49 am Post subject:

Niggardly.

Mr. Pessimistic · Posted: Sat Dec 01, 2007 9:56 am Post subject:

Constance963 · Posted: Sat Dec 01, 2007 11:51 am Post subject:

[quote="MadArchitect"][quote="Constance963"]You would THINK that religion would teach you love and tolerance.....[/quote]

Religion might, but political institutions almost never do. And to talk about this incident as though it were simply about religion downplays the fact that she's being accused, tried and punished by a political body that probably has a lot more invested in maintaining a certain kind of status quo than it does in ensuring a particular religious ideal. I'd be willing to bet that if we looked more at the historical and social context (if, for instance, we read some books on the subject), we'd find that the political upheavals of the last 50-100 years have played a huge part in arranging the circumstances that led to this woman's imprisonment and deportation.[/quote]

I was not trying to downplay anything. I was just making a comment about misterpessimistic's quote about people streaming out of mosques and going right from their religious services to screaming for someone's murder. It was simply ironic to me that you come right from prayer to wanting someone dead.

MadArchitect · Posted: Sat Dec 01, 2007 12:42 pm Post subject:

Mr. Pessimistic · Posted: Sat Dec 01, 2007 3:52 pm Post subject:

WOW! POOOOOR religion! I mean, whenever it looks like it is complicit, it turns out, all the time it seems, to be just a tool used by something or someone else. Sorry I ever doubted it.

Mr. P.

irishrose · Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 3:33 am Post subject:

Mad: Seriously, tell me one thing you knew about Sudanese culture or politics that doesn't involve Islam.

Is this a quiz? Does spelling count?

That a lot of the ongoing conflict in Sudan centers on political and economic issues. A large portion of the wealth of the nation is in the hands of the political minority—a situation that will likely always lead to civil strife. But, from what I’ve read, if real peace terms are ever reached, the country has the potential to be very wealthy—at least, easily self-sufficient. And just to clarify, rather than say that’s something I “know” about Sudan, it’s more something that I understand to be true.

But, as far as I can tell, that doesn’t really have anything to do with this story. Actually, when I read about this, I had wished that it would be easy to find some of the primary documents/transcripts. As far as I understand, Khartoum is subject to Sharia law. But I was also under the impression that according to a new, working constitution that was trying to incorporate religious liberty as part of peace negotiations, precautions had been taken to ensure that non-Muslims weren’t adversely affected by Sharia. How in the world that would work, I have absolutely no idea. But, assuming that abuse of the name Muhammad is a matter of violation of Sharia, and assuming that what I had read about the constitutional consideration I guess about a year ago hasn’t since changed, I wonder if those terms in the constitution were argued in the teacher’s defense, and, if they were, why they were not upheld by the court. Damn, that would be a crazy interesting case to get our hands on.

MadArchitect · Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 4:01 am Post subject:

Yes, Rose, this is a quiz. How anyone could think themselves competent to judge another culture without knowing that culture in something like its fullness is beyond me. We're horrified to see radical Islamicists talk about America in terms of "the Great Shaytan", but we're just as eager to villify their culture on the least provocation. To hell with all of that. I'm sick of it. In this particular case, I would say that it is likely pertinent that the defendant is British by nationality, given that the Sudanese have historically seen the British as oppressors and political rivals. It's both naive and egocentric to refuse to consider the case on those grounds -- egocentric because a less informed perspective demands that the Sudanese match our presumable a-historical standard of liberal democracy. That perspective annoys me immensely. It's both irrational and conceited.

(Naturally, I assume that you recognize that these criticisms are not leveled at you, despite the fact that your reply afforded me the opportunity to vent them.)

If the defendant were native Sudanese, I'm not sure that the case would a) be as volatile an issue, and b) receive the sort of international attention that would bring it to our notice. Buy most of the people who have commented on the case could give a damn that the Sudanese have an ongoing historical entanglement with the British. All they see is the conflict between Islam and an apparently secular liberalism, and anyone who insists on a historical perspective is obviously a apologist with a vested interest in giving religion a pass. Dirty theists.

And Mr. P, your sarcasm is duly noted. Bring to my attention a case of religious intolerance that doesn't have so ridiculously obvious a political element and maybe you'll shut me up on this point. But every article you quote on this matter is such a softball. They've all got a heavy political component. Either that, or the antagonists are such obvious candidates for negative psychological evaluation. And I can't help but suspect that the reason is that politics is far more likely to support a militant mob mentality than religion. Prove me wrong. Please.

Frank 013 · Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 7:30 am Post subject:

Mr. Pessimistic · Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 10:00 am Post subject:

Ophelia · Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:10 am Post subject:

I have just watched "Dateline London" on BBC World, in which this issue was discussed. The Arab journalist in the programme, Barry, said that the decision of the Sudanese government was totally unjustified from the point of view of islamic values, and that British Muslims did not support the condemnation.
He added that the publishing of the cartoons about Prophet Mahommet in the Danish press were a different story, that they were offensive and had been made , in his view, with the express intention of being disrespectful towards Islam, as opposed to the naming of the teddy bear.


	FORUMS	ABOUT	BOOKS	VIDEOS	TRANSCRIPTS	LINKS	BLOGS	DONATE	CONTACT