School Protests

[PVA]

In which case you could say it's fact that pretty much anything is offensive because somebody will be offended by it.

I don't doubt some Muslims find it offensive, it is Tony saying "It is fact that it is offensive" which I was questioning.

Well in theory yes you could say that I suppose.

It is a fact it is offensive though, not to everyone of course, but to some/many it is.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

"Murder is wrong" is an opinion. It's an opinion almost universally held but it's still an opinion. "Fact" means something different. I picked this up from Google and it expresses my opinion on this better than I could:

" A fact is a statement that can be proven true or false. An opinion is an expression of a person's feelings that cannot be proven. Opinions can be based on facts or emotions and sometimes they are meant to deliberately mislead others. "

You cannot prove that murder is wrong - hence it's an opinion.

They're not suggesting there's an argument about whether it's a fact or not, I believe.

 

[Nick]

Well in theory yes you could say that I suppose.

It is a fact it is offensive though, not to everyone of course, but to some/many it is.

Yeah but in which case everything is offensive and should be banned because somebody would be offended by it.

I'm offended by algebra, there is no place for letters in a maths lesson.

Avengers, assemble.

 

[PVA]

Yeah but in which case everything is offensive and should be banned because somebody would be offended by it.

I'm offended by algebra, there is no place for letters in a maths lesson.

Avengers, assemble.

I think you're taking it a bit too far.

If you find algebra offensive, then it's a fact that algebra is offensive to you. That does not mean it should be banned. But it's still a fact that you find it offensive.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I think you're taking it a bit too far.

If you find algebra offensive, then it's a fact that algebra is offensive to you. That does not mean it should be banned. But it's still a fact that you find it offensive.

I'm also doing my best not to get involved, I thought I'd given Tony the out way back when, as I suspect he's just misphrased what he meant but... he has doubled down on it quite a lot!

 

[Nick]

I think you're taking it a bit too far.

If you find algebra offensive, then it's a fact that algebra is offensive to you. That does not mean it should be banned. But it's still a fact that you find it offensive.

I am just going on how Tony was putting it across though..... If it offends me then it's offensive, fact.

Of course it is just my opinion that it's offensive, that's the point I am making..

 

[skybluetony176]

They have the right to be offended about what they want, hence it's their opinion and not fact.

It is also their opinion about not wanting to eat bacon, does that mean it's fact nobody should eat bacon?

Firstly it’s not an opinion it’s a belief. Big difference. Also the belief is that Muslims shouldn’t eat pork not everyone shouldn’t eat pork. The image of prophets are offensive to Muslims as they are to many belief systems. Where they stem from is an irrelevant.
If you must insist on using bacon to make a point at least use it in context. The equivalent of a teacher pulling imaginary of Allah out and showing it to Muslim children would be for a teacher to pull out a bacon sandwich and give it to Muslim kids to eat. Although I dare say you wouldn’t think that’s offensive either because you’re not offended by bacon sandwiches.

 

[Bugsy]

My belief is that fact over rides opinion. just thought I'd join in

 

[skybluetony176]

In which case you could say it's fact that pretty much anything is offensive because somebody will be offended by it.

I don't doubt some Muslims find it offensive, it is Tony saying "It is fact that it is offensive" which I was questioning.

Again it’s not some, it’s a consensus. So you’re not offending “some” Muslims you’re offending a faith.

 

[Nick]

Firstly it’s not an opinion it’s a belief. Big difference. Also the belief is that Muslims shouldn’t eat pork not everyone shouldn’t eat pork. The image of prophets are offensive to Muslims as they are to many belief systems. Where they stem from is an irrelevant.
If you must insist on using bacon to make a point at least use it in context. The equivalent of a teacher pulling imaginary of Allah out and showing it to Muslim children would be for a teacher to pull out a bacon sandwich and give it to Muslim kids to eat. Although I dare say you wouldn’t think that’s offensive either because you’re not offended by bacon sandwiches.

Opinion is the same as a belief.

I am using it in context, the exact context you used.

Maybe we can look up some cults "beliefs" and see what else is factually offensive?

 

[mrtrench]

Again it’s not some, it’s a consensus. So you’re not offending “some” Muslims you’re offending a faith.

Is it wrong to offend a faith, Tony?

 

[Nick]

Again it’s not some, it’s a consensus. So you’re not offending “some” Muslims you’re offending a faith.

That still doesn't prove what you said originally.

A faith is their opinion and views, it doesn't mean its factually offensive. Its their opinion.

As I said, in some cultures its OK to marry into the family. Does that mean its fact that the whole world should marry their cousin or is it their opinion?

 

[skybluetony176]

My belief is that fact over rides opinion. just thought I'd join in

The irony there is that opinions tend to be based on facts whereas belief tends to be based on conviction. When people say it’s the opinion of Muslims they’re completely misunderstanding exactly what faith and belief is so they’re already starting of on the wrong foot.

 

[mrtrench]

I'm offended by algebra, there is no place for letters in a maths lesson.

Wrong.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Think you'd all be getting the oakey stick of disapproval...

 

[Nick]

Wrong.

I'm offended by it, it's fact that it's offensive. Ask Tony.

 

[mrtrench]

They're not suggesting there's an argument about whether it's a fact or not, I believe.

Loads of kids had it down as a fact. I reserved my strongest disapproval for kids who thought it an opinion!
It was a gteat lesson!

It seems to me that Oakey believes it is a fact and disapproved of kids who thought it an opinion. I guess I'd have been in the corner wearing a conical hat.

 

[mrtrench]

I'm offended by it, it's fact that it's offensive. Ask Tony.

I'm teaching algebra tomorrow - a last minute top up for a pupil who has her pretend GCSE school exam to help the teacher grade them up. I'll not give you the address in case you pitch up outside.

 

[skybluetony176]

Is it wrong to offend a faith, Tony?

I’m an atheist myself. I struggle to see why anyone would set out to offend faith or anyone of faith based on offending their beliefs. It’s a shitty, insensitive and unnecessary. Unless you get your kicks from offending people. No one has to print images of prophets and offend religions and cultures to make a point. I’d say that wrong and offensive. The Catholic Church for many years got offended at the suggestion that they were harbouring child molesters. That clearly wasn’t wrong as it needed addressing. So it depends on various factors, it’s far from black and white.

 

[skybluetony176]

I'm offended by algebra, there is no place for letters in a maths lesson.

You seem to be offended by anything linked to Arabic culture so that’s hardly surprising.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

It seems to me that Oakey believes it is a fact and disapproved of kids who thought it an opinion. I guess I'd have been in the corner wearing a conical hat.

Nope, the choices were fact, belief, or opinion, and they reserved their strongest disapproval for opinion.

 

[mrtrench]

I’m an atheist myself. I struggle to see why anyone would set out to offend faith or anyone of faith based on offending their beliefs. It’s a shitty, insensitive and unnecessary. Unless you get your kicks from offending people. No one has to print images of prophets and offend religions and cultures to make a point. I’d say that wrong and offensive. The Catholic Church for many years got offended at the suggestion that they were harbouring child molesters. That clearly wasn’t wrong as it needed addressing. So it depends on various factors, it’s far from black and white.

That's a more subtle opinion (or is it a fact?) than I expected from you, Tony. But still very muddled and nebulous.

Boiling that down:

1. It's not wrong to offend a faith. (I agree)
2. It is wrong to deliberately set out to offend a faith sometimes. For example, it's OK to offend Catholics on the subject of child molesting.

Is it OK to offend Muslims re child molestation?
Is it OK for comedians to make fun of a faith or some aspects of it?

These things are difficult... I'd say, on balance, that it's wrong to be willfully unkind to others with no other objective than being unkind. Be it to a faith or anything else. It's all about intent and the spirit in which things are said and done. But it ends there - nobody can or should arbitrate what is fine and what isn't. One could argue, for example, that fundamentalist Islam as practised by some is an abhorrent; medieval and hateful ideology and that taking the piss out of it is the very best way to reform the people engaged in it.

 

[mrtrench]

Nope, the choices were fact, belief, or opinion, and they reserved their strongest disapproval for opinion.

Strictly speaking, that's correct... it's stated that Oakey doesn't approve of "opinion" but it's not made clear whether he thinks it's a belief or a fact. Maybe he can clarify? Because I don't agree that it's a belief either, because there is rationality and fact behind the statement.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

I’m an atheist myself. I struggle to see why anyone would set out to offend faith or anyone of faith based on offending their beliefs. It’s a shitty, insensitive and unnecessary. Unless you get your kicks from offending people. No one has to print images of prophets and offend religions and cultures to make a point. I’d say that wrong and offensive. The Catholic Church for many years got offended at the suggestion that they were harbouring child molesters. That clearly wasn’t wrong as it needed addressing. So it depends on various factors, it’s far from black and white.

In the context of doing stuff like this purely to be antagonistic I agree.

But what about just to question what they believe, point out the holes in their arguments or the bits that just don't make sense? This is intellectual debate, but would lead to the more fervent believers being offended. So should that debate therefore not be allowed because they cause offence? Or is that 'cancel culture'?

Just a couple of generations ago Christians were on the whole offended by homosexuality. Jews were offended by working on the Sabbath. Was doing those things wrong? If they were facts they would still be wrong.

 

[skybluetony176]

That's a more subtle opinion (or is it a fact?) than I expected from you, Tony. But still very muddled and nebulous.

Boiling that down:

1. It's not wrong to offend a faith. (I agree)
2. It is wrong to deliberately set out to offend a faith sometimes. For example, it's OK to offend Catholics on the subject of child molesting.

Is it OK to offend Muslims re child molestation?
Is it OK for comedians to make fun of a faith or some aspects of it?

These things are difficult... I'd say, on balance, that it's wrong to be willfully unkind to others with no other objective than being unkind. Be it to a faith or anything else. It's all about intent and the spirit in which things are said and done. But it ends there - nobody can or should arbitrate what is fine and what isn't. One could argue, for example, that fundamentalist Islam as practised by some is an abhorrent; medieval and hateful ideology and that taking the piss out of it is the very best way to reform the people engaged in it.

Depends on how you’re using child abuse to offend Catholics. Of you say all Catholics are child abusers that’s obviously offensive as there’s nothing to suggest that is in anyway true. If you point out that there’s historical evidence that abuse has not only happened in the Catholic Church (although it’s not isolated to the Catholic Church) but it’s also been covered up that’s not offensive that’s just stating fact, regardless of of some Catholics or the entire faith takes offence from it. The same goes for Islam, there’s very much murmurings from certain high profile people and groups that all Muslims are child offenders. Clearly not true and offensive. There’s clearly evidence that where there has been cases of child grooming gangs within communities there has been incidences that the community and indeed clerics and mosques has covered it up that isn’t offensive because as with the Catholic Church it’s true.

As you say these things are complicated.

 

[Nick]

Just a couple of generations ago Christians were on the whole offended by homosexuality. Jews were offended by working on the Sabbath. Was doing those things wrong? If they were facts they would still be wrong.

Using Tony's logic the gays should have been banned as to not offend.

 

[mrtrench]

there’s very much murmurings from certain high profile people and groups that all Muslims are child offenders.

Who has said that?

 

[Nick]

Who has said that?

Nobody, that's Tony's way of distracting because you mentioned child abuse within that community.

He will be blaming Tommy Robinson for FGM next.

 

[shmmeee]

Strictly speaking, that's correct... it's stated that Oakey doesn't approve of "opinion" but it's not made clear whether he thinks it's a belief or a fact. Maybe he can clarify? Because I don't agree that it's a belief either, because there is rationality and fact behind the statement.

*she

 

[Deleted member 5849]

*she

Yeah, I felt slightly woke using they/them as couldn;t quite remember, so erred on the side of caution.

Get me, with my 21st century attitudes

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Again it’s not some, it’s a consensus. So you’re not offending “some” Muslims you’re offending a faith.

The solution has long been just give Muslim parents notice of the lesson and offer them an opt out. But also make clear that the lesson will proceed whether they like it or not

 

[skybluetony176]

In the context of doing stuff like this purely to be antagonistic I agree.

But what about just to question what they believe, point out the holes in their arguments or the bits that just don't make sense? This is intellectual debate, but would lead to the more fervent believers being offended. So should that debate therefore not be allowed because they cause offence? Or is that 'cancel culture'?

Just a couple of generations ago Christians were on the whole offended by homosexuality. Jews were offended by working on the Sabbath. Was doing those things wrong? If they were facts they would still be wrong.

In my experience Muslims like most people of faith are very open to discussing their religion. In fact my experience is they feel honour bound by their faith to do so.

So in the original context of the thread was it right for a teacher to discuss Islam with a class and indeed discuss the cartoons of Allah? Absolutely. The issue I have is that A) it didn’t need to have the cartoons shown to discuss it. B) the teacher clearly went out of his way to get the images, in doing that if he didn’t already know how controversial these images were he certainly would have learned that in an effort to find the images, then C) at no point did it occur to him that actually it wouldn’t be a good idea showing these images and actually they’re not needed to discuss them.

There’s Christians in government that still believe homosexuality is wrong. In parts of the U.K. it’s still taught as wrong, it’s curable etc. Just look at the DUP leadership competition.

I think there’s a movement now isn’t there in the U.K. amongst the Jewish community for Jews to observe the Sabbath again. The Jewish faith is multi-layered and I think most Orthodox Jews still observe it anyway. Jews also practice aniconism same as Muslims, I’m not sure to be honest if it extends to prophets as it does in Islam but images of god in any form is certainly offensive to Judaism.

 

[skybluetony176]

The solution has long been just give Muslim parents notice of the lesson and offer them an opt out. But also make clear that the lesson will proceed whether they like it or not

So what happened in this case then? Was the notice not given or was it given and the parents didn’t opt out?

Anecdotal but when my eldest was in primary one girl was excluded from religious education because her parents were atheist and didn’t want her taught about religion. The same patents then complained when their daughter was excluded from the nativity play, so they included her, they then complained that she didn’t have a big enough part.

 

[Deleted member 11652]

In my experience Muslims like most people of faith are very open to discussing their religion. In fact my experience is they feel honour bound by their faith to do so.

So in the original context of the thread was it right for a teacher to discuss Islam with a class and indeed discuss the cartoons of Allah? Absolutely. The issue I have is that A) it didn’t need to have the cartoons shown to discuss it. B) the teacher clearly went out of his way to get the images, in doing that if he didn’t already know how controversial these images were he certainly would have learned that in an effort to find the images, then C) at no point did it occur to him that actually it wouldn’t be a good idea showing these images and actually they’re not needed to discuss them.

There’s Christians in government that still believe homosexuality is wrong. In parts of the U.K. it’s still taught as wrong, it’s curable etc. Just look at the DUP leadership competition.

I think there’s a movement now isn’t there in the U.K. amongst the Jewish community for Jews to observe the Sabbath again. The Jewish faith is multi-layered and I think most Orthodox Jews still observe it anyway. Jews also practice aniconism same as Muslims, I’m not sure to be honest if it extends to prophets as it does in Islam but images of god in any form is certainly offensive to Judaism.

I get offended when Alex Scott comes on the telly. I guess they should ban her so I don’t get upset. If they don’t I’ll murder the producer of the show that puts her on.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

So what happened in this case then? Was the notice not given or was it given and the parents didn’t opt out?

Anecdotal but when my eldest was in primary one girl was excluded from religious education because her parents were atheist and didn’t want her taught about religion. The same patents then complained when their daughter was excluded from the nativity play, so they included her, they then complained that she didn’t have a big enough part.

Pretty sure he didn’t give notice which was very daft