To think this absolutely is homophobic

[HuntIdeas]

Muslim families have successfully argued for Birmingham primary schools to stop the No Outsiders programme

"Morally we do not accept homosexuality as a valid sexual relationship to have. It's not about being homophobic... that's like saying, if you don't believe in Islam, you're Islamophobic."

AIBU to think:

1. This absolutely is a homophobic thing to say
2. There are plenty of places in the world where you would get stoned for stating you didn’t believe in Islam!

Hopefully this link works: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-47613578

I think it's really coming up against the difficulties of living in a multicultural society. We do not all share the exact same sense of what is moral/right/okay and what is immoral/wrong/unacceptable.

Tolerance means we have to find a way to accept that some people believe differently to us. And somehow need to find a way to teach and protect children even if their beliefs (or their parents' beliefs) are abhorrent to us. This is hard. I don't think labelling religious positions as "phobic" helps.

I think part of it may need to be leaving difficult topics until the children are of an age where it's possible to have a more nuanced discussion with them. When you can say that some people have same sex relationships; homosexual marriage exists in this country but not everywhere; and also discuss how some people believe their religion does not allow homosexuality. And have that discussion without judgement and insist that children with either view treat each other with respect.

I feel like primary school is probably still too young to expect children to be able to understand contradictory beliefs. On the other hand not judging others is key from a young age, but maybe better handled as it comes up. Young children do tend to accept people as they are unless people make an issue of it.

third fiddle that’s what we would do, wait until children are old enough to understand the concept of there being different groups in society with different beliefs. Then you can explain to them that while we have certain beliefs within our religion, the law is different in the country we’re living in and that we can’t impose our beliefs on others

Breeze genuinely very pleased that the whole issue usually works well in your area; it's important to remember that strife only tends to creep in where entrenched attitudes come into play

In answer to your question, I very much agree with Imams being registered to conduct civil marriages. It might even be wise to make this statutory, both to include them in the existing system for other religions and also to solve some of the issues around legally invalid marriages in a non-offensive way

I also agree clarity about the law is vital, but it remains an unfortunate fact that, where aspects of the law are disliked, insistence on adherence will be presented as an attack on values - just as we're seeing in the Birmingham protests. Better minds than mine have struggled with an answer to this, but overall I feel that while cultural sensitivity is important, there might be some areas where for everyone's sake we really do have to say "this is how it's going to be"

Oh, and please don't apologise for posting frequently; these are after all important issues, and if they can be discussed in a reasonable way by reasonable people, that seems to me no bad thing

Primary isn’t too young as the homophobic language and attitudes start there. I’ve seen it. Children need to know on entry it is never ok to speak about being gay in a derogatory way and some children in their class may well have 2 mums or dads.

The reason the attitudes in the media are described as phobic is because they are. They’re incredibly damaging and it needs to be made clear that as a nation we won’t tolerate them or turn a blind eye. The mental health and well being of the gay community trumps sparing the feelings of those with damaging and unpleasant religious views.

My son started using the insult gay, he is three and picked it up at nursery. Why should he be made to put up with homophobia throughout nursery and primary school?

Exactly.

Also not providing children with education isn’t in their best interest. Homophobic language isn’t tolerated in our schools and will be dealt with every time. Some may end up with exclusions on their records. That and the damage hearing this shit does to the well bring and safety of gay children and the children of gay parents too illustrates the need for education at the very start.

There is no place for it anywhere in our society and education from the start is clearly much needed.

My nephews had the joy of a child in their class drawing and writing some hideous homophobic things st a party in KS1. It ended up in a pile of papers they took home from said party.My sister was understandably horrified and has ensured her dc no longer play with said child. Not fair that said child becomes isolated through lack of education- in the name of religion.

Said child had never met my son. He thought it was funny and impressive. Not educating doesn’t help integration it just causes less.

I totally agree 3rd fiddle.

I do think though monogamy is not a bad thing whether gay or straight in a society which is obsessed by sex. It's only a small small part of us. There are consequences to promiscuity.

I think the concept of denying yourself and putting others first is a good one

Thanks Breeze for your insights

He shouldn't Simon. Any incident of bullying language due to any reason - homophobia, acne, disability, academic ability, religion, red hair, wearing glasses, not conforming to gender stereotypes - should be dealt with as it arises whatever is in the curriculum.

I don’t.

Interesting the way you chose to ignore both Simon and my posts.

How can you say not educating in primary is a good thing when it is so clearly needed.

And there is a reason these views are viewed as repugnant. They are repugnant and have no place in our society.

They should not be tolerated any more than racism should be tolerated. Homophobia is homophobia regardless of why it exists. Being religious does not give you the right to say or do things the rest of society should not do.

But the damage is done we don’t want it in the first place. Punishing children for something they haven’t been educated about isn’t ideal. Far better to educate them properly in the first place. That is why children learn about other religions and all sorts of things their parents may not agree with. Children don’t then damage other children and they steer clear of getting themselves into trouble.

The mental health and well being of the gay community trumps sparing the feelings of those with damaging and unpleasant religious views

Personally I just wish folk could get along and that we didn't have to make these distinctions. But yes - if it comes down to it I'd always prioritise the first over the second

Because religious affiliation is a choice and sexuality isn't

Alternatively, the damage is caused by making an issue of it. How many of these parents will have felt the need to talk to their children about what their (personal) religion says about homosexuality as a direct result of it being brought up in school? As someone who goes against the prevailing orthodoxy on gender issues (I'm gender critical) I'm dreading that coming up in school as if various normally trustworthy organisations are allowed a hand in what is said, my children will be taught things I think are dangerous lies viz people can change sex. But if a child in their class said they were transgender I'd be making damn sure my kids treated them kindly without having to compromise their own beliefs.

They do already have two-mum families and Muslim families in their classes, so far zero incident without anyone needing to be explicitly taught about homosexuality or in the younger child's case Islam (it comes up later in RE).

Lucky old you.

Not the same everywhere by any means.

Respecting other religions isn’t just taught in RE but all the time. I expect the same re same sex relationships. Continuous respect and education via lessons. That way we can all live harmoniously and respecting differences.I really don’t like my gay son learning about Islam as he finds it upsetting. I think there is value re the lessons though and don’t demand them to be stopped. I expect the same level of tolerance back re lessons on same sex relationships. The reason we have lessons on both is because there is a need.

Do you think it would be any more acceptable for the child with gay parents to taunt the Muslim child about their parents being homophobic bigots? I think children can be unkind about all sorts of things. The fact that children are unkind about a classmate wearing specs doesn't mean an immediate needs for lessons on optometry. They're taught to be kind from nursery onwards.

Never seen kids about specs as so many wearvlkvely specs these days.

The difference between specs and being gay is you can take specs off and aren’t made to feel dirty for just existing.

Expecting kindness doesn’t cut it when you have parents at home saying same sex relationships are wrong, sinful and worse.

Completely homophobic. Homosexuality is not a choice, and you can't 'catch' it by learning about it in school.

If the parents are already talking about it at home, we're never going to win directly contradicting them in school. We can insist on kindness though. Young children are very absolutist, they struggle with mum believes that, teacher believes this, and will tend to argue with one or the other or just be confused and upset. I think mum believes that and teacher says to be kind is easier. Most families won't disagree with be kind.

Punishing children for something they haven’t been educated about isn’t ideal. Far better to educate them properly in the first place. That is why children learn about other religions and all sorts of things their parents may not agree with

I freely admit that this is where I hit a bit of a brick wall, being strongly opposed to any religion in schools - even the alleged "teaching about them all" because I simply don't trust that all staff will be even-handed about it. For me, it's just too close to indoctrination in beliefs rather than education around established facts

Since we don't live in a world where folk keep their religious views in the private sphere I fully accept this is controversial; nevertheless I've never been convinced that it isn't the way to go (though I remain open to other views)

I think part of it may need to be leaving difficult topics until the children are of an age where it's possible to have a more nuanced discussion with them.

I don't see how teaching children that some people have two mums or two dads is a difficult topic.

Nor do I cyber, but it seems some people do. (Or the content of the lessons is more than that? Child coming home saying they were the opposite sex would concern me too and I'm an atheist.)

thirdfiddle
I agree with you. Having this discussion online with friends at the moment.

Puzzled, with regards to your statement:

I also agree clarity about the law is vital, but it remains an unfortunate fact that, where aspects of the law are disliked, insistence on adherence will be presented as an attack on values

It's all about the approach. There is a group who will feel that it is their absolute right to be hostile and to ignore the law and try to circumvent it by any means they can. There is also a group which will go out of their way to show how accepting they are of British laws because their main priority is being accepted here and not practising their religion.

But then you have that large group in the middle whose religion is their priority but who understand, or have the potential to understand, that while living here they have to comply with the laws and live in peace with others. When it comes to this group, they way you approach sensitive and controversial issues makes a huge difference.

Pointing out that they have to comply with the law is not so much the issue. The issue is that this is frequently accompanied by value judgements and an insistence that Muslims should be persuaded into changing their thinking to see British laws as progressive and their own attitudes as regressive. This is problematic and to be honest I'm shocked that language like 'regressive' was used in the report.

For example, the review highlights concerns around polygamy. Polygamy is already against the law in the UK, so that's all that needs to be stated. Why do we get several paragraphs going on about how allegedly harmful polygamy is? All that does is alienate people who are already complying with the law about it. We don't have to agree with the law in order to comply.

If someone comes to me asking questions and expressing concerns about non-compliance with polygamy laws in a respectful manner much like you have been doing on this thread, it opens up a dialogue and allows for interaction.

But if someone comes along using strong negative language about polygamy and demanding that I condemn it in principle and change my thinking, that is just going to put me on the defensive instantly and make me far less likely to feel comfortable with the person or want to engage in dialogue. It's actually highly offensive to Muslims to suggest they should be critical of polygamy in principle. It's permitted in our religion, many of us have family members outside the UK in polygamous marriages, and our Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and his companions used to marry more than one wife.

I'm not calling for polygamy to be legalised in the UK, but the approach taken needs to be sensitive to this context. That's why I'm saying that the focus should be on clarifying exactly what laws and guidelines Muslims need to comply with while still allowing them freedom of thought. Of course there are a vocal minority who will resist adhering to the laws, but there are also many people like me who are not seeking to overturn nor circumvent the laws, but feel very worried that our freedom of thought and belief seems to be under attack.