Hold onto your hats...
Dec. 1st, 2007 02:14 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
I'm about to say something controversial again.
Most of you who know me, know that I'm a fairly fundy fundamentalist. Why, yes, I'm one of those people who thinks that the Creation Museum is actually a pretty cool idea, contributed money to help them build it, and plan on a visit (halfway across the country from me) within the next year or so.
This is just to give a perspective on where I'm coming from. It's not the controversy, or, at least, not meant to be.
Most of you, by now, have heard the news story about the British teacher in Sudan who allowed her students to name the class teddy bear "Mohammed"--and the hullaballo that's ensued. Now people are calling for her death via firing squad. She's been sentenced to45 15 days (thanks to
bookishwench for the correction) in jail and deportation. She could have been sentenced to forty lashes, six months in prison, and a fine. For "insulting Islam."
These kids are seven...about the age of Da Boy. Also, Teddy Bear = Comfort Object. And "Mohammed" is one of the most common given names in Islam, much like "John" is here. And, dude...John was a prophet too!
Remember what I said above, the fundy thing? Yeah. If Da Boy wanted to name one of his stuffed cats "Jesus," I'd think it was a little odd...but I'd probably die of cute. Keep in mind that, to me, Jesus = God Himself, and not just a prophet. The actual Christian equivalent to naming his cat "Mohammed" would be naming it "John," or "Moses," or "Isaiah." Which I would find even less offensive. If those kids had named the bear "Allah," there might be a case...if you wanted to stretch it.
It seems to me that the Fred Phelps Contingent of Islam is the one making the rules right now. They're hunting offense and finding it where none is intended or even exists. In fact, they're professionals at it. So, where does the line get drawn, and who do we allow to draw it? Does He Who Gets the Most Offended win? Or does he just win if he threatens to blow up a bus full of people?
Where are the reasonable Islamic people, shouting from the rooftops that this isn't their religion, that it's been hijacked by these batshit insane wackos? Or have they been silenced by threats and intimidation?
I suppose that expecting reason from a nation that still embraces slavery is a bit much. My bad.
Most of you who know me, know that I'm a fairly fundy fundamentalist. Why, yes, I'm one of those people who thinks that the Creation Museum is actually a pretty cool idea, contributed money to help them build it, and plan on a visit (halfway across the country from me) within the next year or so.
This is just to give a perspective on where I'm coming from. It's not the controversy, or, at least, not meant to be.
Most of you, by now, have heard the news story about the British teacher in Sudan who allowed her students to name the class teddy bear "Mohammed"--and the hullaballo that's ensued. Now people are calling for her death via firing squad. She's been sentenced to
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
These kids are seven...about the age of Da Boy. Also, Teddy Bear = Comfort Object. And "Mohammed" is one of the most common given names in Islam, much like "John" is here. And, dude...John was a prophet too!
Remember what I said above, the fundy thing? Yeah. If Da Boy wanted to name one of his stuffed cats "Jesus," I'd think it was a little odd...but I'd probably die of cute. Keep in mind that, to me, Jesus = God Himself, and not just a prophet. The actual Christian equivalent to naming his cat "Mohammed" would be naming it "John," or "Moses," or "Isaiah." Which I would find even less offensive. If those kids had named the bear "Allah," there might be a case...if you wanted to stretch it.
It seems to me that the Fred Phelps Contingent of Islam is the one making the rules right now. They're hunting offense and finding it where none is intended or even exists. In fact, they're professionals at it. So, where does the line get drawn, and who do we allow to draw it? Does He Who Gets the Most Offended win? Or does he just win if he threatens to blow up a bus full of people?
Where are the reasonable Islamic people, shouting from the rooftops that this isn't their religion, that it's been hijacked by these batshit insane wackos? Or have they been silenced by threats and intimidation?
I suppose that expecting reason from a nation that still embraces slavery is a bit much. My bad.
no subject
Date: 2007-12-01 10:23 pm (UTC)They were talking about it on Fox News and there was a clip of a man saying (translated) if he saw the teacher he would behead her himself.
Really, where are the moderate Muslims condemning the extremists? Or does the Islamic religion actually support this kind of punishment for naming a bear after Mohammed? (I don't know, I've never read the Koran).
Every time I hear about this story I just shake my head. I really hope she gets pardoned.
no subject
Date: 2007-12-01 10:34 pm (UTC)Maybe I'm just culturally ignorant, but I really don't get what's so insulting to Islam to call the bear something that people name their kids all the time. It's not like they named the class rat Mohammed.
no subject
Date: 2007-12-01 10:36 pm (UTC)Mainly on the BBC I think - both British muslims and Sudanese ones. They have had the headmaster of the school, Sudanese MPs and Sudanese lawyers all saying she was bound to be found not guilty because it was so obviously not done with malice - which apparently it has to be to actually be, like, a crime. Then being shocked to find that she was found guilty, albeit of the 'mildest' variant of the crime.
There have been members of the Muslim Council of Great Britain saying the same things in every news bulletin too. Two British muslim peers, Baroness Warsi and Lord Ahmed, are currently in the Sudan trying to get her pardoned. Mind you as she was actually only sentenced to 15 days the chances are that the main thing they are actually hoping to achieve is to convince the Sudanese government to resist any call to have her retried as some of their fundamentalists are calling for, and let her out quietly at the end of her sentence.
I totally agree with you about how stupid the whole thing is - I mean as the class named the bear after a pupil shouldn't it be his parents that are being jailed, or his grandparents if he's named after his father etc.? And the fact that the only reason it suddenly became a problem, when the bear was named in September, is nothing to do with any of the parents of the children but another member of staff who complained to the police or whoever. Do we get the feeling this may be a way of causing trouble for someone we don't like or are jealous of?
Personally I think the UK government ought to withdraw any aid it gives to Sudan and if, as I have a feeling, she is on VSO or sent by some other charity that they withdraw all their people from the country on grounds of their safety, as goodness only knows what they might find themselves accused of. Because the Sudanese MPs, lawyers etc. say, about the demonstrations, that the people in them probably don't actually know the proper story at all but will have been given a 'version' by people wanting to stir up trouble; what's to say it can't happen to someone else?
no subject
Date: 2007-12-01 10:43 pm (UTC)I want to go to Africa in the worst way, on a photo safari. Catch me dead going to a place where the government encourages actions like this, and spending my money there.
no subject
Date: 2007-12-01 11:13 pm (UTC)Although it seems that the Sudanese government are not encouraging the demonstrations, nor were they pushing for her to be tried. I think they might be a bit embarrassed by it but, as one of the Sudanese lawyers pointed out, their legal system is based on the British one where the judiciary cannot be instructed by the politicians but are independant, only deciding on whether a case does or does not break the word of the law, and then passing sentence. So once someone decided there was a case to answer the government could not intervene.
I don't know whether to be disgusted that she was found guilty, or impressed that the judge found her guilty of only the minor charge, and passed the minimum sentence. Mainly the former I think, with a touch of the latter.
For a reasonable current news report see this BBC one.
I think her lawyer is probably right too - the appeal process could take more time, and the longer it lingers the more chance that the calls for her to be retried by a 'tougher' court will get louder compared with any reasonable ones. This is the way with most fundamentalists of any sort - shout loud enough and the still small voice of reason will be stifled. And I do include Christian fundamentalists in this sweeping statement - but I really do not mean any personal offence to you.
no subject
Date: 2007-12-01 11:22 pm (UTC)But then, I'm probably the most un-religious Christian fundamentalist you'll ever meet...
no subject
Date: 2007-12-02 05:44 am (UTC)I'd hate to invoke Godwins's law, but I think one of the few times a reference to Hitler's Germany really is warranted is when discussing a war-torn nation that's been accused of genocide. The way these people cling to Islamic fundmentalism and all the fearmongering and willingness to follow the leaders to horrible places does remind me Hitler's rise to power in a downtrodden Germany and how he was able to inspire a nation to such horrible insanity.
But yeah, Sudan is not exactly a great tourist spot. In addition to the violent outbreaks which threaten everyone there and the totalitarianism, there is a lot of hate of Westerners, as this episode is evidence of.
However, Sudan is not all of Africa any more than it's religious totalitarianism is representative of all Islam. It's just one country. There are many nations in Africa which are democracies where laws protect human rights and which are much safer to visit. If you really want to go to Africa, just do your research well when deciding which countries to visit. Don't let Sudan's actions put you off the continent as a whole.
no subject
Date: 2007-12-02 06:22 am (UTC)I even bought a stone carved pangolin from a seller on eBay in South Africa once. It's one of my most prized pieces; I've never seen another like it. :)
no subject
Date: 2007-12-02 07:57 am (UTC)Another LJ friend just returned from a trip to Ghana and has been posting her pictures over the last several days. I'm practically green with envy at the moment. Perhaps someday - though I think I'd rather visit Peru again and see more of it.
no subject
Date: 2007-12-01 11:10 pm (UTC)As I speak, ads for the Da Vinci Code are running on the television next to me. Now, THAT is offensive, along with being deliberately blasphemous; yet I, who am both offended and disgusted by it, feel no particular urge to proclaim fatwa on anybody over the matter. I just decline to watch the movie, and make my dislike known whenever the subject arises.
Sudan is unquestionably one of the lesser spots on the globe right now. Much happier to be where I am.
no subject
Date: 2007-12-01 11:17 pm (UTC)Exactly! And I do the same. But then, you and I are reasonable people...and we haven't been kept in ignorance by a government that has a vested interest in making us stupid, and we're not being stirred up by so-called leaders telling half-truths and outright lies.
no subject
Date: 2007-12-01 11:27 pm (UTC)An even more horrifying recent story: in Saudi Arabia, a 19-year-old girl has been sentenced to 200 lashes and six months in jail...for being gang-raped. Actually, she was originally sentenced to 90 lashes and a lesser jail sentence, I forget how long, for being in a car with a male who wasn't related to her before the gang-rape happened, but the sentence was increased because she and her lawyer spread her story to get foreign sympathy.
no subject
Date: 2007-12-01 11:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-12-02 12:01 am (UTC)you can ignore this if you want but i'm really curious to know why if a Mexican names his or her kid Jesus it's okay but if a white person does it it's offensive.
no subject
Date: 2007-12-02 12:11 am (UTC)Basically it's just because Jesus is a common name in that culture, and that's not a problem for me; in Western culture, it's not, so if someone inside this culture were to give their kid the name of an extremely important religious figure, they'd be doing it knowing the name's significance for that culture. So they might well be doing it because they know it'll get a reaction.
no subject
Date: 2007-12-02 12:44 am (UTC)Also, it's not the responsibility of innocent people to claim their innocence as though they were guilty simply because they have the same religion as a group of morons who are not even following the tenents of their religion. Muslims in this country should feel no more compelled to justify their choice of religion than Christians feel it necessary to justify themselves in the face of, as you mentioned, Phelps. He's not a Christian; he's just using Christianity as a shield for his hate. It's the same deal with these Sudanese so-called Muslims. I've read the Koran cover to cover. This sort of thing is not espoused in it anywhere.
Additionally, news shows are far more interested in putting on stories about idiots than they are in interviewing rational human beings. Rational people do not, however, grab ratings (though CNN.com is being reasonable enough to lead their story off with a photo of a Muslim protester against the imprisonment here (http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/africa/12/01/sudan.teacher/index.html#cnnSTCText)). If anyone bothered to talk to an average American Muslim on the news rather than putting on tape after tape of crazy people rioting in the streets on another continent and then being offensive enough to somehow think these people speak for all Muslims and that all Muslims need to apologize for the views of these people, you'd find that the average Muslim thinks this whole situation is nuts.
no subject
Date: 2007-12-02 02:00 am (UTC)You're right to a certain extent, but I would note that when the Batshit Insane Contingent of Christianity blows up Planned Parenthood or shoots an abortionist, the rest of us rise up in a body and go "NOT US. We don't support this, nuh-uh."
Apparently the BBC is being more evenhanded in reporting these events, as
no subject
Date: 2007-12-02 02:08 am (UTC)Muslims: Teddy Bear Protesters Don't Represent Us
no subject
Date: 2007-12-02 04:06 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-12-02 07:08 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-12-02 01:52 pm (UTC)Also, just like the loud mouthed, offensive Christians, Muslims that do horrible things are much more newsworthy than the people just getting on with their lives or trying to actually live their faith. How often does the news cover Christians saying Phelps doesn't represent us?