Hold onto your hats...

[agilebrit]

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 to 45 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.

Comments

[zilly14.livejournal.com]

I TOTALLY agree with everything you said. I can't understand how people find this offensive enough to justify being punishable by death. If the kids agreed to call the bear Jesus, I wouldn't be offended at all. Maybe it wasn't the best thing to let the kids call the bear Mohammed, being in an Islamic country, but it doesn't seem to me like the naming was malicious. My understanding is that the kids named the bear, not the teacher, right?

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.

[curiouswombat.livejournal.com]

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?

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?

[aadler]

Speaking as one who’s dealt with Muslims in both their own countries and in mine: yes, there’s a major difference between those who take their religion seriously (most of them) and those who are just looking for any excuse to take offense … and, more, to use their being-offended as a means of acquiring power. I respect the former, even when I disagree with them. The latter are best treated as they would treat their enemies: immediately, harshly, and without apology.

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.

[lady-moriel.livejournal.com]

Yeah. I completely agree. The whole thing is ridiculous, especially since Muhammad is such a common name in Muslim countries--the kids named the bear after a kid in their class, for crying out loud. I don't get offended by Hispanic kids being named Jesus (pronounced differently, of course, but spelled the same), and while I'd think it strange and a little offensive if a Caucasian family named their kid Jesus, you won't see the vast majority of Christians demanding a government response, let alone threatening the parents' lives. And if it were a teddy bear? Really, who cares? But the people that are hunting for ways to be offended are calling it a deliberate offense and grab for power by evil Westerners.

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.

[bookishwench.livejournal.com]

Actually, it's 15 days, not 45, with 6 already served.

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.

[baron-waste.livejournal.com]

Muslims: Teddy Bear Protesters Don't Represent Us

[crayonbreakygal.livejournal.com]

Not controversial at all. We're all thinking the same thing, no matter what religion we all are or the politics, or whatever. People are just crazy. I do hope that woman gets the hell out of there as soon as they let her go. They should be looking at that school employee, not some innocent person.

[texanfan.livejournal.com]

The reasonable Muslims are either in countries where this sort of thing doesn't happen or in fear of their lives just like the non-Muslims. They are out there but their being shouted down.

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?