The teacher from Batley is still in hiding

[Nicetrynigel]

Teacher Batley
His life ruined because a bunch of thugs decided they didn't like what he was teaching in his RE lesson.
This and the Labour MP's request for bhalsphey laws against those of the Abrahamic faith have made me concerned.

People should be free to offer an view against another's religion. It's scary that we are being a country where people thing being offended gives them a right to made death threats.

How do you know that's how they identify? You could be being incredibly offensive!

Ah you weren’t the poster who said that. So we have no clarification on what she means.

I wasn’t the only one confused.

No, I genuinely thought she meant any depictions of the Pope are blasphemous, as with Islam and the prophets.

😂

Ok they.

No I dont
Its a lesson about blasphemy
Dont you understand what that is
Or were you taken out of your class explaining blasphemy

Because if you are going to explain visually what a blasphemous image is ( in order to teach all kids as at least 30% of students are visual learners ) then you are going to actually have to show them images which explain blasphemy.

If my kid came home and told me he’d been shown a picture of the pope in a tutu I’d ask why
He would explain we were being taught all about blasphemy and the pope in a tutu was an example of a blasphemous image. I would agree….yes it is

What I wouldn’t do is go out and send death threats to the teacher, for teaching!

Charlie, when you start to think you know randoms on the internet better than they know themselves, then it’s generally time for bed.

Bummer.

I don't believe that is what happened. I think you are misrepresenting the case.

It read very clearly.

"Blasphemous pictures of the Pope"

I mean, that's fairly obvious.

I'm starting to doubt your posts more and more now!

Not one person has said anyone should send death threats to anyone. You know this right? You’re kind of preaching to the converted.

I think you’re missing the nuance. Or you’re deliberately playing dumb.

A blasphemous image doesn’t necessarily have to be grotesque. Just a standard image can be blasphemous because it shouldn’t exist in the first place.

I have clarified and

I am a she

If you called me they I wouldn’t be bothered either my username gives nothing away other than

I ‘stand side by side’

No, that's you misunderstanding Catholicism.

Or you're playing dumb?

Sounds like you could have learnt a lot from that RE lesson. As could the kids if they hadn't kicked off. You live in a country where there are multiple religious. Catholicism one of the oldest observed here, and yet you don't know that there can be non-blasphemous portraits of the Pope? I find that astonishing.

Why would you assume I understand Catholicm?

I think you are starting to get goady.

Blasphemy means different things to different people.

That could easily be my DC too. Forced to teach a subject they're not qualified to teach and using lessons that have been prepared by predecessors. Thankfully not teaching RE this year.

Maybe it's long gone past time to remove religious studies from the curriculum. In my experience with my own children who all had to do the GCSE, it's more about morality than any branch of religion, but perhaps the country at large isn't mature enough to deal with this.

Thankyou Itoldyou

@Dimpliy
Here is one my post explaining ( there’s another about the pope in a tutu on this page )

Yes! And that's exactly the point of the original RE lesson!

I think we're getting somewhere now.

Yes the teacher should have been mindful
of that and pre warned the parents, so they could make an informed decision to withdraw their dc or keep them in the lesson.

I feel sorry for the teacher concerned but, in fairness, everyone knows that Islam forbids any likeness of the Prophet and the French cartoon was designed to cause offence. Likenesses of Jesus, often not very realistic (eg with blonde hair and blue eyes), and caricatures, have abounded throughout history and Christians generally do not mind them; a pope is an ordinary human being so there is no offence at HIm being portrayed. It is nothing to do with free speech or different opinions. To Muslims, it is blasphemy to portray their prophet.

My opinion is that a teacher of religious studies should have known better. However, if motives were benign, he should be forgiven and supported. He is hardly likely to do it again. He needs to make a personal statement and do some extra study. However it is beyond me why he thought it was all right to do this. I don't have a degree in theology or comparative religion and even I know how important it is to Muslims not to draw pictures of the Prophet. If he has such little respect for other faiths he is in the wrong job.

So they could remain ignorant, as you are, of the other religions that exist and are observed by their fellow citizens?

How will that help social cohesion and promote understanding?

Or do you think we shouldn't care about anybody else's religion? Just Islam?

The thing is.
If you’ve been to school in a Christian country and obviously I don’t know if you have but if you have then you will have leant about
Idolatry
No question about that.

So if you are here in the UK and schooled here in the UK or your children are ( if you have kids ) then you’ll know all about The beginning of the Church of England and one of the huge huge differences about the Catholic Religion and the Reformation and Protestantism coming over from abroad was the issue of Idolatry
ie Images

Eg The Catholic crucifix has an image of Jesus crucified on it, that is not blasphemous. That is an image of Jesus and his image is not blasphemous.

it is not insurmountable here on MN discussing an issue that has happened in the UK to assume you might be in the UK discussing a UK issue and therefore to also assume, as the PP has, that you would indeed understand basic RS taught in this country. In fact basic History re the Reformation will also have given a good grounding on imagery because Cromwell took all the images out of the Catholic Churches and even King Edward had all the stained glass smashed up. ( nothing to do with blasphemy there, just to do with worshipping images ) You’ll have still been taught the images exist though

Anyone who ever went to a school where badly behaved, often violent, pupils were treated with kid gloves by teachers because ‘they’ve got a tough home life’ or ‘you shouldn’t have provoked them’ (and by ‘provoke’ they always meant something like ‘look at’ or ‘ask not to stab you with a pencil’) recognises the behaviour of the Community Leaders exactly.

The Olympic opening ceremony comparison is ridiculous. Did the designer get death threats? If he had done, would the threat makers have been handled like fragile babies? Was the designer’s mum forced to appear in front of a council of frothing Community Members, wearing a mantilla, grovelling for her child’s safety, while police officers looked on indulgently at the quasi-paramilitary organisation that has sprung up around them?