Sudanese children name Teddy Bear "Muhammad" - Teacher sentenced to 15 days in prison

[redforever]

[quote=BlackEleven;1089741]I think where you and I differ on opinion is on where the teacher's responsibilty in a foreign culture begins and ends. For me personally, if the due dilligence has been done, then it all boils down to intent. Is it really an insult if you didn't intend it as such?

We do agree on some points. I agree with you that the teacher should be well versed in laws and religious customs, especially when teaching in a poor, third world country where religious fundamentalism runs rampant. She should do her due dilligence and research the religion and culture as much as possible to try and avoid any such conflicts. However, I disagree with you that she could have had any way of knowing that naming the bear Mohammed was offensive for several reasons.

Firstly, the bear received its name by the children, not the teacher. I agree with your earlier comment that she should have vetoed this if she perceived it to be a religious offense, but I don't think she had any reason to believe so. Why would the children name the bear after their prophet if they knew it to be offensive? And why would she not think the name was to honour the prophet, as is typically the case in Western culture when we name something after a specific person? And why in serveral months would no one come forward and tell her than she's insulting the prophet?

I understand she should be wary of the Danish cartoons and the situation that created, but I don't think the comparison is valid in this case. The Danish cartoons were intentionally poking fun -- after all that is the purpose of cartoons -- at some aspects of the Muslim faith. I think we can agree that her intent was not trying to poke fun of Mohammed by likening him to a stuffed animal, even though that's the way it was percieved.

And I don't think you're KKK example holds water either. I don't kids in the deep south would name a bear KKK unless that was a either common first name in the deep south to begin with or the name of a religious figure, or both. They're not just going to randomly concoct a name which just so happens to be offensive.

And even if everything I have said is false there is, of course, there's the question whether such an offensive deserves 15 days in jail and deportation. We both agree this is a case of a faux pas more so that a violation of law. Does committing a faux pas warrant jail time and deportation? Even if we disagree that teacher could have prevented this, does she still deserve what she got?[/quote]



In the end, it does not matter what we think, if she committed a faux pas, or if she broke the law. The fact of the matter is she was teaching in a foreign country, a foreign country that is quite fundamentalist in its beliefs, extreme in some cases. As such, she should have taken due diligence to be more sensitive. As far as the children requesting that name, well, the children in a classroom are under the care and guidance of the teacher. As far as parents not saying anything, well, those parents are living in a country where they are taught not to question anything. Who knows how or why this finally surfaced but when it did, it obviously was a very sensitive issue.

The children were 7 years old. Tell me how many 7 year olds are completely familiar with all the tenets of their religion? The teacher also asked the children what their favorite name was. Now tell me, how many from the Muslim faith will not say that Mohammed is a favorite name of theirs? These children are too young to know what the connotations of their choice for a name would lead to. The teacher on the other hand is old enough and educated enough to know better than to go ahead with a name as significant as Mohammed for the name of a teddy bear.

As I have said before, there was a huge problem when Mohammed was depicted in a cartoon in Danish newspapers, that problem was broadcast worldwide. It does not matter if the cartoons were intentionally poking fun or not. It was a huge problem and it was recent enough for anyone to remember. I would doubt that a teacher from England would be oblivious to it.

And surely any foreigner living and working in a country where the dominant faith is Muslim should know that Mohammed is a pretty significant prophet in that religion and you tread on a dangerous and slippery slope when you use that name, no matter what the intent was.

[BlackEleven]

Originally Posted by redforever

In the end, it does not matter what we think, if she committed a faux pas, or if she broke the law.

Oh, I think it does. Why should someone be punished in a court of law and sentence to jail and deportation if they have not broken the law to begin with?

Originally Posted by redforever

The fact of the matter is she was teaching in a foreign country, a foreign country that is quite fundamentalist in its beliefs, extreme in some cases. As such, she should have taken due diligence to be more sensitive.

We disagree on the level of due dilligence here, but religious fundamentalism is not an adequate excuse for using the law to punish someone to what comes down to a religious faux pas. I do not think its too much to expect any country, however religiously fundamental, to not jail people who have violated no law. Yes, I realise it happens all the time -- even in the United States -- but that, in no way makes it right.

As for the rest of the post, we both made our arguments already on those points. There's no reason to rehash the same arguements in different words and go around and around in circles. I think we can agree that that's not doing either of us any favours.

[Flameschick]

What is it that these countries produce aside from oil and religious nutcases? Nuke these places, watch oil prices skyrocket, and force people into taking their bikes to work saving the environment. Eliminate Islamic fundamentalist psychos en masse and help prevent global warming. Kill two birds with one stone.

[redforever]

Quote:
Originally Posted by redforever
In the end, it does not matter what we think, if she committed a faux pas, or if she broke the law.

Oh, I think it does. Why should someone be punished in a court of law and sentence to jail and deportation if they have not broken the law to begin with?

But in Sudan, apparently she did break laws and was charged with "insulting Islam, inciting hatred and showing contempt for religious beliefs ". To us, it might be a faux pas, to them it is a punishable offense.

Of course in our country, we might not agree with such a law, and the punishment would not be as severe, if there was any punishment at all. But like I keep saying, she was not teaching in Britain, she was not teaching in Canada, she was teaching in the Sudan. Better you keep on your toes in such a country and exercise diligence in what you do.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

That is unique to them just like many things are unique to us.

In Afghanistan about two years ago, a credible poll found that 95% of Afghan's believed a court was being "merciful" in giving a recent Muslim convert to Christianity the chance to renounce his new religion or face death.

That's a remarkable uniformity of thought.

What is "unique to us" is that a multi-cultural society of some tolerance will almost never have 95% of people agree on anything. Scraping together 60% is almost a miracle on most topics.

In fact, I would wager than 95% of us wouldn't even agree that execution is an excessive punishment for this lady for allowing a teddy bear to be named Mohammed.

Cowperson

yep, the crazy fundamentalist are a much larger "minority" than most people over here would like to believe

[BlackEleven]

Originally Posted by redforever

But in Sudan, apparently she did break laws and was charged with "insulting Islam, inciting hatred and showing contempt for religious beliefs ". To us, it might be a faux pas, to them it is a punishable offense.

This is the reason I was arguing intent earlier, as was her lawyer. How can you insult someone if you meant no offence?

Originally Posted by redforever

Of course in our country, we might not agree with such a law, and the punishment would not be as severe, if there was any punishment at all. But like I keep saying, she was not teaching in Britain, she was not teaching in Canada, she was teaching in the Sudan. Better you keep on your toes in such a country and exercise diligence in what you do.

Well you should always exercise dilligence, no matter what the country. There's no need to offend people unnecessairly, but if you do, you shouldn't be subject to jail time. Even if it is Sudan.

[redforever]

Originally Posted by Flameschick

What is it that these countries produce aside from oil and religious nutcases? Nuke these places, watch oil prices skyrocket, and force people into taking their bikes to work saving the environment. Eliminate Islamic fundamentalist psychos en masse and help prevent global warming. Kill two birds with one stone.

With comments like these, I am led to believe you would be a perfect fit with the countries you say we should just nuke. Who is being the fundamental extremist here?

[redforever]

There has been resolution in this case, the woman has now been pardoned and will likely be sent home on Tuesday.

http://news.google.ca/news/url?sa=T&...KIqsqwPexbHUCA

[GirlySports]

Good to hear!

Here's an article about cultural differences in general.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/portal/ma...0/ftpas130.xml