No one in UK is prohibited from blaspheming against Christianity but it is extremely touch to act ion the same way against Islam or Judaism.
1 Like
Thanks for riding that Sherman tank over my vague attempt to lighten the mood there. I’ll pop off and get my pitchfork and tiki torch and be back in a more appropriate temperament… 
2 Likes
That’s fair enough in theory Geof but the only religion actually chopping heads off in Europe a the moment is Islam. How or why this has come about is irrelevant because there is an urgent, practical need to stop them doing it. We can address the theory later 
2 Likes
The Russian T34 was a far superior tank Kirstea. Especially with the with the 85 mm gun. So you got off lightly 
3 Likes
I don’t know much about tanks I am ashamed to admit, and that’s despite a torturous visit to The Tank Museum where I was led to believe we were going to Monkey World next door only to be bitterly disappointed on arrival. They really should combine those attractions, it would be the ultimate day out…
4 Likes
No one is prohibited from ’ blaspheming ’ against any religion I the UK - as there IS NO law against blasphemy. It was repealed in 2008 in England and Wales and in Scotland in 2021. NI is the only part of the UK that retains such a law. This teacher broke no law .
I really don’t agree. christian atrocities now or in the past are no more theoretical than muslim - or any other religion. There is indeed an urgent, practical need to stop it everywhere in the world - but disguising the truth about it in order to blame what happens to be an ethnic/cultural minority in Europe will not stop it - indeed it will no doubt make it worse.
This mirrors an incident last year here where a teacher was murdered following a class being shown the CH cartoon, fortunately the only consequences so far in Batley have been a protest outside the school.
From what I’ve read the cartoon was shown in a RE class at a school who’s pupils are predominately Muslim and given that my first question would be why did the teacher think the material was suitable?
Do teachers now teach on what is acceptable or what is relevant? If parents don’t like what is taught - even though it’s relevant and useful and not illegal - do they have a right to demand it’s not taught ? If that is the case - why bother with education at all. ?
4 Likes
Presumably to teach his class that we are tolerant of criticism of our religions in UK.
I think that Islam still views anything that they consider disrespectful of The Prophet ‘blasphemous’ whether or not it is not viewed as that in UK.
They can view it how they like - what they can’t do is impose those views on others in the UK . Although given that anyone who deviates from the perceived ’ correct ’ line in thd UK today can be ’ cancelled ', dismissed , deemed in need of re- education, called all sorts of names - maybe I’m wrong in that assumption.
2 Likes
In my experience all religious people prickle at perceived insults to their gods and prophets - some more than others, a small minority react violently.
You might find this article interesting Sue - about the real ‘cancel culture’ in the UK…
Or this chilling new development…
All police forces in England and Wales have been circulated with guidance for policing protests – which campaigners say may breach human rights. Jolyon Maugham of Good Law Project said “What is really worrying here is the embedded value judgement, that it is wrong to target economic activity; what about supply chain slavery, commercial polluters, the very right to strike? How is humanity weighed in the balance against money?”
The fact that the teacher was suspended immediately makes me think that this was not part of the usual RE curriculum for this school given the pupil makeup.
No I am totally agreement with you on that and it is to be resisted at all costs.
1 Like
Why should the pupil make up affect the curriculum in a Grammar School for goodness’ sake.
I thought Batley was in down to earth Yorkshire.
1 Like
Jane, the majority of the pupils are Muslim (roughly 75%) so you’d expect a ‘tweaking’ of the curriculum to suit.
No you wouldn’t expect 'tweaking ’ - sorry but that way lies madness.
2 Likes
Churchill had some darker sides - a fact acknowledged by his biographers for years. - which great person doesn’t. It’s the fact that the ‘darker sides’ are either ignored altogether or used to dismiss any good the person did. ’ Churchill was a racist / drank too much / was anti- feminist ergo he can’t have been a great war leader. ’ Not true - he could be all of those things and that’s what needs to be taught. No person is one sided. Even the most sainted person or most celebrated has a dark side - does that cancel out the good ? Does the fact that Rhodes was a colonialist cancel out the good his money has done in the field of education ( Rhodes scholars ) and if it does - why don’t all those that have benefited from his money but campaign against him pay back the grants they got ? Maybe I don’t see just black and white as so many of today’s protesters do when they chose to cancel people for one side of their character without looking at the whole person and all of their actions.
3 Likes