There is a lawsuit in federal court in New Jersey against a school that required students to watch this 5-minutes "Introduction to Islam" as part of the World Cultures and Geography course. Under Establishment Clause doctrine, there should be nothing wrong with teaching public school students about religion, but there are some problems with the video. As the plaintiff puts it:
The video, according to the lawsuit, "seeks to convert viewers to Islam and is filled with the religious teachings of Islam, presented not as beliefs, but as facts."I presume the educators who chose this video were thinking in terms of encouraging young people to respect and honor Muslims. The video emphasizes positive achievements — science, art, architecture — and positive values contained in the religion. But it does have the problem of simply asserting that various beliefs are true and seems almost to include the viewer in prayer. The use of hypnotic music throughout the video puts the viewer in a receptive, spiritual condition that is at odds with the justification that students are simply learning a lesson in world culture and geography.
The lawsuit cites statements made in the video, including "Allah is the one God;" "The Quran is a perfect guide for humanity;" "Muslims created a tradition of unsurpassable splendor;" and concludes with "May God help us all find the true faith, Islam."
The text slides are set to a musical version of the poem "Qaseedah Burdah," which the lawsuit says, describes "Christians and Jews as 'infidels' and (praises) Muhammad in gruesome detail for slaughtering them."
Posts
223 comments:
1 – 200 of 223 Newer› Newest»Why should students respect and honor Islam?
We teach elementary school pupils to honor and respect homosexuality. Why not Islam? Just no creepy Christianity or Founding American values - those are for haters.
My question would be what are the videos that introduce the students to Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, etc. etc. like?
Similarly indoctrinative? (Is that a word?)
Videos like this one say "lazy teacher" to me. They're too lazy to find the truth for themselves, so they rely on a search of the Internet to find a video.
No. And I think the achievements of Muslim civilization are overrated for political reasons.
Islam has zero respect and zero honor anywhere in the world that allows freedoms like free speech. It only elicits great pity to see how miserable it makes all of its captives/slaves.
I would be thrilled if the same school would permit me to present a five minute video on "An Introduction to Salvation Through Jesus". We could call it School Neutrality.
I didn't watch the video, so these are guesstimates -- 0.00 seconds discussing the best way of throwing queers off of rooftops; 0.00 seconds devoted to clitoridectomies for fun and profit; 0.00 seconds on the new Spring line of suicide vests.
The Case against Education: Why the Education System Is a Waste of Time and Money Bryan Caplan
The main function is baby-sitting.
I think most people are overlooking the achievements of Afghanistan over the centuries.
Althouse “I presume the educators who chose this video were thinking in terms of encouraging young people to respect and honor Muslims.”
Bad assumption.
Maybe the students should spend five minutes a day looking at The Religion of Peace website. A helpful monthly counter is a great feature.
My prediction: public schools can require students to watch the video, but as part of a judicial "balancing test" the teacher will have to apply copious eye drops while the student's eyelids are propped open by wire retractors like in A Clockwork Orange.
The video is boring. And pretty useless as a learning tool because to the previously uninformed the images will mostly be mystifying and the text fades in and out so quickly that there is no time to absorb it. The music is sort of interesting for a while but the repetitiveness annoys.
I figure most kids will learn nothing from the video and have a little fun mocking it after class.
That makes it a perfectly mainstream product for contemporary secondary education.
And it requires virtually no effort from the teachers!
Jihad Report
Jan 20, 2018 -
Jan 26, 2018
Attacks 34
Killed 236
Injured 274
Suicide Blasts 8
Countries 13
Above is one week only. Full month of January report coming soon.
What’s the Baptist or Catholic total for the month?
"video emphasizes positive achievements — science, art, architecture "
You know what's telling? Those achievements are centuries past. And that's where they are stuck.
I assume (perhaps foolishly) that teachers explain to their students that the purpose of the video is to convert them to Islam. I am also going to assume (perhaps even more foolishly) that the students will also see similar videos regarding Christianity, Buddhism and Judaism.
I would prefer teaching comparative religion in college where I assume (once again foolishly) that more intellectually developed kids will learn something from the experience.
"Fabi said...
Why should students respect and honor Islam?"
What is "Because they don't want to be killed?"
This video is on the right track. Now they just need to add a few minutes with choice quotations from the Koran--correction, Quran. That'll teach 'm.
After the pro-islam propaganda film, the vilification of all Christians "because crusades" is up next. Narrated by Obama and Andrew Sullivan.
Some Muslims like to blow up the mosques of other Muslims.
Those Catholics love to firebomb those Methodist churches too. All religions are equal and great.
"Why should students respect and honor Islam?"
Please quote me accurately.
Let's not forget the House of Saud and their oil producing brethren planted the seeds for the development of the electric car. That, and increased oil and natural gas production in the US.
Agree with Curious George @ 1/29/18, 8:08 AM
I watched it, its meant to proselytize, not educate. The fact that it was selected to be used to "educate" children on Islam and that parents are having to go to court to stop it is just one more item in the "proof that most public school teachers and administrators are idiots and sending your children to public schools is child abuse" column.
And seriously, how hard is it to come up with a 5 minute introduction to Islam.
In the year 610 a man named Muhammad began to receive what he believed were divine visions from God, or Allah, which is the word for God in Arabic. This happened in the town of Mecca located on what is now called the Saudi Arabian Peninsula.
(show slide with world map pointing out were Mecca is located and its geographical location in regards to the class)
Muhammad shared his visions with others some of whom became his followers. Over a period of years Muhammad was able to spread his message, sometimes using violent means, and the religion he founded, Islam (meaning submission) spread throughout what is now called Saudi Arabian Peninsula and beyond. Today it is the second largest religious faith in the world and its adherents can be found in every country in the world. Its central text is called the Koran and is a collection of Muhammad's visions that were recorded by his followers. Muhammad was unable to do so himself because he was illiterate.
(since this is a five minute intro to grade school kids probably won't mention the supplemental texts or Sharia law)
The five basic tenants of Islam, called the five pillars are:
1) The statement of faith: There is no god but God (Allah) and Muhammad is the prophet of God
2) Prayer
3)Supporting the needy (charity)
4) Fasting during Ramadan
5) Pilgrimage to Mecca
Then include some stuff about algebra and Muslims being responsible for the Renaissance since this is a public school, also explain what the Renaissance is because this is a public school. Finally take a stab at denigrating Christians because of the Crusades. Definitely don't mention the Battle of Tours, the conquest of the Byzantine Empire and those two attempts to take Vienna.
The End.
"My question would be what are the videos that introduce the students to Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, etc. etc. like?"
The World Cultures class should cover multiple religions in a neutral way. The problem with the video is that it's partly in a devotional style (which I would call propaganda).
I'm almost certain that Islam was singled out for special treatment because educators believe that there is a danger of hostility and prejudice against Muslims, so they need special promotion. It's like the way schools put effort into implanting positive ideas about black people (but not white people). These educators assume that they are doing good for Muslims and racial minorities, but they are also being patronizing and, in that, they are betraying their own Christian/white supremacists beliefs.
The teacher's pets will love this video.
The rest will want to become Marine snipers or drone pilots.
there is a danger of hostility and prejudice against Muslims,
Yeah, Muslims fear backlash from tomorrow’s bombing is sort of evergreen.
When my daughter was little, PBS used to put on a series called “Fairy Tales for Every Child.” When they made one for white children, all of the white people were pigs, not figuratively, they were drawn as pigs.
I seem to recall a time in the Althouse blog where the commenters would address a post like this with mostly-sensible and often conservative law school grads citing Establishment Clause cases.
Now it seems dominated by Trumpist bigots on Medicare, bitching about Muslims and Obamacare.
Nothing wrong with Althouse’s post in this instance; she adequately set the stage for a thoughtful conversation on federalism or the Establishment Clause, etc.
It is so clearly unconstitutional the attorney who thinks it is worth spending taxpayers money to fight it should be looking elsewhere for work.
Why should students respect and honor Muslims?
Is that better, Ann? I find the terms largely interchangeable and it doesn't alter my inquiry at all.
But then again, I still run into people who are unaware that Muslims are forbidden to eat Pork and drink alcohol. Actual quote from someone after I informed him of this.
"Man, no wonder their so mad."
"These educators assume that they are doing good for Muslims and racial minorities, but they are also being patronizing and, in that, they are betraying their own Christian/white supremacists beliefs."
Kinda like when you said in the comments that we should pretend that all ethnicities/races have the same average ability.
Just another example, as if we needed any, of the growing by leaps and bounds of the Islamo-Leftist alliance.
They share a common goal, the destruction and then replacement of western civilization.
I'm almost certain that Islam was singled out for special treatment because educators believe that there is a danger of hostility and prejudice against Muslims, so they need special promotion.
Like the danger of hostility and prejudice against Jews. Nobody ever hates them...
Teachers have a fine line to follow when they teach about religion in a public school. Using a pre-approved video isn't laziness. It's self-preservation. No matter how un-biased his or her presentation is, some parents will find something wrong with it. It will be deemed proselytizing by some and denigrating by others. A video approved higher up the food chain gives a teacher support. There are similar videos available for most mainstream religions, and if a teacher is using this one, they would be shown at the appropriate time in the syllabus. Public schools don't offer classes that focus only on religion in most cases. Religion is introduced when it has a major impact on history. PBS produces a lot of the videos used in classrooms. NASA even offers them to teachers at no charge. Some of NASA's are even exciting enough to keep the kids awake.
Capitol Hill Blue: “I don’t give a goddamn,” Bush retorted. “I’m the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way.”
“Mr. President,” one aide in the meeting said. “There is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution.”
“Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,” Bush screamed back. “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!” - Snopes
Remember when the left had their panties in a knot about the above story?
LLR Chuck: "Now it seems dominated by Trumpist bigots on Medicare, bitching about Muslims and Obamacare."
Sometimes, like late last night, Chuck forgets to hold the mask on tightly enough and it slips....
Teachers have a fine line to follow when they teach about religion in a public school. Using a pre-approved video isn’t laziness.
You have to look down one more turtle. The video didn’t approve itself.
Islam aside, this reminds me of the "babysitting" occasionally received by the students we've hosted. My wife took film appreciation in high school. It was a serious course and one of her favorites. So when she saw the course offered by our local HS, she talked our Russian son into taking it. Little instruction took place, and no text. They just watched movies day in and day out. My wife was mortified.
Definitely has the ring of endorsement.
Oh and in regards to Averroes:
"Ibn Rushd was a defender of Aristotelian philosophy against Ash'ari theologians led by Al-Ghazali. Although highly regarded as a legal scholar of the Maliki school of Islamic law, Ibn Rushd's philosophical ideas were considered controversial in Ash'arite Muslim circles.[9] Whereas al-Ghazali believed that any individual act of a natural phenomenon occurred only because God willed it to happen, Ibn Rushd insisted phenomena followed natural laws that God created.[10][11][12]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Averroes
Guess which school of thought won out within Islam.
Curious George said...
""video emphasizes positive achievements — science, art, architecture "
You know what's telling? Those achievements are centuries past. And that's where they are stuck."
Hillary's unemployed these days.
Maybe she could help Muslim leaders write a book called 'What Happened'
If you ask Google home who Jesus Christ is, it has no idea. It knows who Muhammad and Buddha are in great detail. Strange huh?
“LLR Chuck: "Now it seems dominated by Trumpist bigots on Medicare, bitching about Muslims and Obamacare.””
Muzzies, Obamacare, and Chuck all suck in equal measure. ‘Nuff said.
Is it even possible to be bigoted toward Islam’s practitioners? Explain where bigotry diverges from self-defense.
Has anybody ever been to the American Indian museum in DC? It is kind of like I imagine one of those Creationist museums would be. While I agree that archeology has clear limits as a “science,” as anybody who has ever tried to interpret the results of experimental physics could delineate ad nauseam, still, there is stuff they do know. They are not allowed to tell you that stuff in that museum, unless it comports with the modern understanding of Indian folklore and beliefs.
If that museum doesn’t violate the establishment clause, nothing does. It’s practically a temple, or a shrine, maybe. There is probably an exhibit there about how Earth moves through space on the back of a giant turtle.
To me I think it makes a big difference how old the students are.
I remember when I was a senior in high school my Physics professor, without comment, passed out a 2 page Hindu tract for us to read. He might have been trying to get himself fired. Or maybe he just didn't care anymore. He was a severely burned out science teacher. Often took naps in class. The unofficial name of the class was Fulcher's Film Festival. We would watch these damn science movies from the 1950's with kids in crew cuts. While he was napping in the back. Anyway, I was 18 and in no real danger of being converted to Hindu. My reaction was, "boy those HIndus are wrong." And I was mildly surprised to find out that cranky old napping white guy Fulcher was a Hindu. I used to skip his class all the time. Got a B.
Anyway, the key issue in establishment cases, in my opinion, is coercion. And there might be implicit coercion if you're talking about 9 year olds. But I feel like adults should suck it up and quit whining about how religious speech made them feel bad or oppressed or whatever. In retrospect I wish I had asked him if he had heard the good news about Jesus Christ.
If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.
-- Louis Brandeis
Drago observes: Just another example, as if we needed any, of the growing by leaps and bounds of the Islamo-Leftist alliance.
They share a common goal, the destruction and then replacement of western civilization.
Yes and the bizarre angle is that they, themselves, will be destroyed. So it's all about self-hatred, self-destruction.
The video is entitled "What is Islam?" not "Who are Muslims?".
Yes..think of all the Muslim hospitals in the US..wait, never mind.
It continues to amaze me that the same people who would be screeching bloody hell if this was a video about Jesus, think it should be MANDATORY to indoctrinate children about the Islam...
Who are also pretty much the same people who think its ok to murder babies (up-to and including newborns) but not kill Murdering Rapists...
Leftism is a mental illness...
"Now it seems dominated by Trumpist bigots on Medicare, bitching about Muslims and Obamacare."
We should spend more time spreading unfounded rumors about Trump's adolescent son.
Religions of the shithole world.
"the remedy to be applied is more speech" As if.
But sure, let's have "more speech." Start with an actual reading of the actual Koran and the actual provisions of the actual shariah.
Two benefits: strip anyone of illusions, teach the meaning of submission by example.
mockturtle: "Yes and the bizarre angle is that they, themselves, will be destroyed. So it's all about self-hatred, self-destruction."
The "enemy of my enemy" logic is playing.
Add to it the belief amongst the lefties and the strong LLR allies that once the primary enemy (conservative, traditional, western, Judeo-Christian values) is destroyed, then a new era will be ushered in where the lefties, the islamists and whatever "House Republican" (like Chuck) will make kumbaya peace in a new peoples paradise.
So go ahead, have a quaint discussion about "the law", even as the left demonstrates daily they are in a war against "the Law" and will "resist" any attempt to allow the peaceful transfer of power and will always make it up as they go in order to advance their cause.
Chuck said...
Now it seems dominated by Trumpist bigots on Medicare, bitching about Muslims and Obamacare.
That's odd. A quick ctrl-f search of the comments shows that your comment was the first mention of Obamacare.
Maybe you should think about why something seems ( to you ) to be, when in fact, it isn't. Then ask yourself how that applies to other things that, to you, seem to be.
I presume the educators who chose this video were thinking in terms of encouraging young people to respect and honor Muslims.
Why should they do that? Is it not an axiom of progressivism that as a consequence of their opinions some people are neither respectable nor honorable?
Did anyone watch the video?
It's a total snoozer.
Highly unlikely to convert anyone to anything.
I presume the educators who chose this video were thinking in terms of encouraging young people to respect and honor Muslims.
Why should they do that? Is it not an axiom of progressivism that as a consequence of their opinions some people are neither respectable nor honorable?
Only White Western men. Everyone else must be respected.
I think we’re not teaching students enough critical thinking skills and enough basics, and we’re not teaching them enough about the West, and the traditions of which they’re already a part.
This kind of fuzzy idiocy is filling the hole.
Drago said...
"LLR Chuck: "Now it seems dominated by Trumpist bigots on Medicare, bitching about Muslims and Obamacare."
Sometimes, like late last night, Chuck forgets to hold the mask on tightly enough and it slips...."
I mostly just skip over his comments. For two reasons. 1) this is the Alhouse blog not the "Chuck" blog. 2) I think there is a communicative principal in idiocy and it might be contagious.
I used to teach about Islam to 7th graders. I taught both the approved propaganda, and the actual history. My students knew who Charles Martel and Vlad Dracul were.
The school should not be allowed to force ANY video viewing against parental objections. I don't care if it's about Islam or the Hoover Dam. Whose child is it?
Rusty: "communicative principal in idiocy..."
Did you mean "communicative property"?
The video in schools is a terrible idea in schools for reasons already listed. I await someone to rise to defend it.
Althouse, is there no one in your stable of characters who will rise to the occasion?
Comments have given me encouragement. The knowledge about what Islam is all about - I mean really all about - is growing.
"Islam is a religion of peace. I guess they have to keep telling us that because our eyes are telling something else altogether."
What does Muhammad (S) mean?
In my day, the alien imagery & music would put off most children, but they only need a few converts.
Teaching kids honestly and fairly about Islam in an American school would be tough, but doable with a little thought. This was just bad teaching, I assume laziness.
This was just bad teaching, I assume laziness.
Or they wanted to force uniformity. They're probably more afraid a teacher will go the other way with Western chauvinism, and they'll get complaints from CAIR.
If you are going to teach American children to respect and honor Muslims, shouldn't we also teach them to respect and honor the Hells Angels and the Mafia? Those are also groups whose member believe it is their right to prey upon anyone who is not a member. Better movies, too.
"Is that better, Ann? I find the terms largely interchangeable and it doesn't alter my inquiry at all."
You find a reference to a system of beliefs the same as a reference to a type of person.
That's like mixing up democracy and Americans.
Encouraging American students to respect Muslims is about citizenship in a pluralistic society. Encouraging them to adopt the system of beliefs that is Islam is an entirely different matter! Teaching them to understand what the religion is is fine, but it shouldn't be done in a proselytizing manner or instructing that the religion is the correct religion.
"I seem to recall a time in the Althouse blog where the commenters would address a post like this with mostly-sensible and often conservative law school grads citing Establishment Clause cases."
I agree, things have really gone downhill. Now we have some spergy cuck pretending that he worked in the house of commons and has a law degree ranting about the President constantly.
Chuck is the equivalent of those stolen valor guys who fake achievements, in this case their legal credentials.
No wonder you love Blumenthal so much.
From the comments, it seems more like a demonstration of Islam than an explanation of the faith. It should be made more kid friendly. I would recommend a cartoon showing the key events in Mohammed's life. That should atttract the kid's interest........I went to Catholic schools, Jesuit even. There wasn't much criticism directed against the Church or its tenets. I ended up an agnostic.
Here is a charming video of a fellow in London who respects and honors non-Muslims by throwing glasses of water in their faces. He calls it a prank. What makes it funny is that there has been an epidemic of acid attacks in England, and the silly strangers naturally think the water is acid. Ho ho ho, what fun! The "strangers" shown in the video appear to be young white women. I guess Chuck and Igna weren't available to participate in the rollicking good fun they're having in London these days. Of course, we can't have that kind of fun around here yet. Too much concealed carry.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/youtube-prank-acid-attack-arya-mosallah-itzarya-a8182206.html
The best defense of the video, in my opinion, is that you can tell that it is presented from a Muslim point of view, as in: This is what we believe. The students are presumed to be able to make that inference. The school isn't saying Islam is the one true religion. It is exposing them to a video coming from people who believe that.
It may be better to have actual believers explain a religion, because if the teachers themselves try to do it, they may get it wrong or do it in a way that offends or denigrates.
But there should be a disclaimer explaining the point of view of the film, and there should be other parts of the course that present other religions in an equivalent way.
Ann Althouse said...
"It may be better to have actual believers explain a religion, because if the teachers themselves try to do it, they may get it wrong or do it in a way that offends or denigrates. "
Yeah, definitely Althouse. Too bad they didn't have some Muslims handy to come in and throw your son off the roof.
You want to respect and honor some Muslims, they've got loads of 'en in London. Be sure to wear your goggles. And some rubber boots. I hear lately the place has become kind of a shithole.
Make mention of the religion when appropriate, but don’t teach about the particular religion. At the college level comparative religions can be taught in depth and I doubt there will be parents grousing about it then. There will always be some parent who fears proselytizing no matter which religion is taught or even mentioned. I don’t see how history can be taught without making mention of the religion that may have caused certain events to take place, but it should end there, no teaching what that religion’s tenets are.
Althouse: "Encouraging American students to respect Muslims is about citizenship in a pluralistic society."
Sounds benign and wonderful, except we all know full well the sort of speech controls the left intends to instill by simply keeping our eyes open and looking around.
"respect" to the left means you better not say ANYTHING the left disagrees with.
If you do, it's "violence". And then the lefties and their LLR allies are fully justified in pre-emptively stopping your "violence" by committing actual physical violence against you.
We only see this every single place we look these days.
“It may be better to have actual believers explain a religion, because if the teachers themselves try to do it, they may get it wrong or do it in a way that offends or denigrates.”
That would be worse, I suspect. Having a Muslim man or woman come in and explain their religion would have parents in droves calling the local news network complaining about the public school teaching Islam. I wouldn’t want my grandkids to hear a Christian fundamentalist person come in and describe their particular belief system to them.
Nor would I want my grandkids to hear about the belief system of Muslims either in elementary school or high school. I’m sure Drago will chime in in 3, 2, 1....
Inga said...
"Nor would I want my grandkids to hear about the belief system of Muslims either in elementary school or high school"
So, you think they should wait and learn about Muslims when one blows them to Hell? Good choice. For your kids. Not for mine.
I think the question can easily be answered if one were to imagine demanding that students watch a similar film presenting the doctrines of Roman Catholicism as truth. This is very clearly an evangelizing film rather than a film educating about a religion's place in history and society.
What may be permitted in a religious school is not permissible in a public school. We all know that, really.
Yes, the parents have a case and a good argument. I don't think it is petty for them to pursue it, because we all have a stake in maintaining the public school system as a religiously neutral arena, open to pupils of all backgrounds and beliefs. We do, after all, pay for it.
"Then include some stuff about algebra and Muslims being responsible for the Renaissance.."
Don't forget they also perfected the practice of eating with their right hands and wiping their asses with their left hands. Or is it vice versa? Regardless, one of their major contributions to civilization over the past 1400 years.
But since you're so God-damned eager to import a few million of the criminal bastards, I'll give you a tip. If someone who looks a lot like Aziz Ansari comes up to you with a couple of plastic cups filled with a clear liquid, and throws one in your face, that's considered a joke in their culture, which is in every way equal to ours except that it's better. The proper response is to laugh at the good joke. "ha ha!", you must say. Unless the clear liquid turns out to be acid. In that case, proper etiquette is to shriek and roll on the ground while your filthy kaffir face melts off. Pluralism can work if we all just respect each other's little cultural peculiarities.
Althouse: "Encouraging American students to respect Muslims is about citizenship in a pluralistic society."
Fine, as long as you also teach that most Muslims are not interested in living in a pluralistic society.
Fabi, don't even try to pull that crap where somebody here tries to smear me with an oblique reference to Barron Trump. I wrote that others had made the suggestion, that Trump family lawyers (the same ones who represented Hulk Hogan) sent a series of cease-and-desist letters regarding online postings speculating that Barron Trump was autistic, or ASD, or Asperger's, or somehow similarly developmentally affected.
That much was never an "unfounded rumor." It was and still is, a fact.
The Washington Times reported the story. So did US Weekly and too many others to count. Here's the WT link:
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/nov/29/melania-trump-attorney-threatens-lawsuit-over-barr/
There are several WT links if you care to search them.
And since you are a golfer, Fabi, I want you to be aware of what a damn fine thing it is, that Ernie Els has allied himself with the Trump Organization as a major funder of Els for Autism. (PGA Tour star Ernie Els has a son with autism and has done a number of major events benefitting autism research with significant support from the Trump Organization):
https://ernieels.com/els-for-autism/sponsors-friends/trump/
Still, to quote Trump family lawyer Charles J. Harder; "Barron Trump is not autistic." I want that to be very clear here. According to Trump family lawyers, Barron Trump is not autistic.
In an excellent Catholic school (I have realized its exceptional quality in retrospect), we read substantial excerpts of the Koran and Hadiths. That was over four decades ago.
As also portions of the Gita, of the Analects, etc. Quite a lot. There was a great emphasis on broad understanding. Besides which a deep and sincere attempt at Catholic/Christian theology and apologetics, far beyond what I have seen in US Catholic schools.
There is a virulent strain of anti-Christian sentiment among anti-nativists on the left.
Chuck
Words fail, dude. They simply fail.
“So, you think they should wait and learn about Muslims when one blows them to Hell? Good choice. For your kids. Not for mine.”
Good luck with having your children taught in public school that all Muslims are likely to blow them up. That sort of thinking can be taught by parents like you in your own home. I don’t want any phobia’s toward any particular religion taught in public schools that my taxes pay for.
I don't see anything wrong with the video assuming, of course, that there is a similar film for Christianity.
The original interpretation of the 1st amendment was basically the US will not have a state supported religion such as the Church of England. Now it's become basically any government agency can't be seen as favoring Christianity or even showing Christian religious symbols (such as a cross on an seal - Los Angeles County ), and this includes schools.
Islam does not count for some reason...
Thought experiment - if the video had the same tone and was about Christianity, what would the out cry have been? And by whom?
1st Ammendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances
I don’t want any phobia’s toward any particular religion taught in public schools that my taxes pay for.
Was your phobia from public school? Or did you develop that at home?
Eleanor - any teacher who shows this film to a class is doing so either out of laziness or because it was adopted as the approved curriculum. Either is unconstitutional.
Public schools may not teach the Roman Catholic catechism. They may not teach the Bible as a source of religious inspiration. Public schools may not teach Buddhism. They MUST teach ABOUT all of these religions - their place in historical and modern societies - at the appropriate place in the curriculum.
And your assertion that showing this video would provide "cover" for the teacher is remarkably false - any teacher who understood constitutional limitations and tried to observe them would either precede this film with statements which would qualify the film's assertions or would follow it with those qualifications, and that would place the teacher in a very uncomfortable and controversial position.
Maybe you didn't watch the video, but not only does it make socially and historically questionable assertions (Islam = science, the foundations of the European Renaissance, unsurpassable beauty) but it also makes a number of explicitly religious assertions, one of which Ann cited. Any teacher with a modicum of understanding of the Establishment Clause would have a problem with presenting this film.
When I went to school we learned about Islam and Buddhism and Catholicism and Protestantism and Calvinism and Shinto and Hindu religions. But none of them were presented to us AS teaching a religion, which is what this film does.
If a school system believes its educational mission is to inculcate respect or reverence for a particular religion, that school system is defying the Constitution. It really is THAT SIMPLE. It's fine for a religious school to show this film. It's impossible for a public school to show it without creating very great difficulties for the educators, and impossible for this to be shown and for the parents to be sure that the educators in fact are setting the film in proper perspective.
Chuck, anyone who maliciously attacks a child, one you obviously suspect to be handicapped, is contemptable. I don't understand what you think you gain by acting like a total piece of shit, but maybe you can explain it. Neither do I know whether my pointing out your fecal flecked personage violates any policies here, but really it's just who you are. My God man, have you no shame?
“Was your phobia from public school? Or did you develop that at home?”
I have no phobia toward any religion Rick. I am a member of a Christian religion, so if you’re trying to say I have a phobia toward Christianity, I’d say you were simply trying to pick a fight.
Joint statement of current law on religion in public schools.
Teaching About Religion
5. Students may be taught about religion, but public schools may not teach religion. As the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly said, "[i]t might well be said that one's education is not complete without a study of comparative religion, or the history of religion and its relationship to the advancement of civilization." It would be difficult to teach art, music, literature and most social studies without considering religious influences.
The history of religion, comparative religion, the Bible (or other scripture)-as-literature (either as a separate course or within some other existing course), are all permissible public school subjects. It is both permissible and desirable to teach objectively about the role of religion in the history of the United States and other countries. One can teach that the Pilgrims came to this country with a particular religious vision, that Catholics and others have been subject to persecution or that many of those participating in the abolitionist, women's suffrage and civil rights movements had religious motivations.
A quote from Epperson
The antecedents of today's decision are many and unmistakable. They are rooted in the foundation soil of our Nation. They are fundamental to freedom.
Government in our democracy, state and national, must be neutral in matters of religious theory, doctrine, [104] and practice. It may not be hostile to any religion or to the advocacy of no-religion; and it may not aid, foster, or promote one religion or religious theory against another or even against the militant opposite. The First Amendment mandates governmental neutrality between religion and religion, and between religion and nonreligion. [note 12]
As early as 1872, this Court said: "The law knows no heresy, and is committed to the support of no dogma, the establishment of no sect." Watson v. Jones, 13 Wall. 679, 728. This has been the interpretation of the great First Amendment which this Court has applied in the many and subtle problems which the ferment of our national life has presented for decision within the Amendment's broad command.
Not as such, Ann. Without Islam, there are no Muslims; without Mulims, Islam is just a book. The same can't be said regarding democracy:Americans.
Your blog search history proves otherwise, Chuck. Further proof is that you used the occasion to continue the spread the unfounded rumors as you posted the requisite key words at Ann's blog so that search engines will return results.
Yes and the bizarre angle is that they, themselves, will be destroyed.
But not until:
Trump is impeached,
The D's take back the house in 2018,
K. Harris wins the White House in 2020, and
The Supreme Court is safely, overwhelmingly, left.
So it's all good.
"Encouraging American students to respect Muslims is about citizenship in a pluralistic society."
But I don't respect Muslims nor do I want my children to? Encouraging American students to be KNOWLEDGABLE about Muslims is perhaps a legitimate goal but teaching them to respect Muslims is another matter. But, then, I was taught that respect must be earned.
Here's how they learn about Islam in Sweden;
"In October 2017, a private survey revealed immigrants' drastic overrepresentation in sexual assaults, with men of foreign descent allegedly committing over 90 percent of rapes."
And now, in contrast to Epperson above, an excerpt from the article Ann linked:
Students also were required to complete a fill-in-the-blank version of the shahada, the Islamic conversion creed and prayer. The worksheet contained a link to a webpage that explains "the ease with which they could convert to become Muslim," the lawsuit says.
It should be clearly obvious to everyone that it would not be considered permissible to teach a prayer and enforce the writing of it in this manner in a public school.
You can't make a public school student complete a fill-in-the-blank version of the Rosary, of the Lord's Prayer, etc. You can't make a public school student pledge allegiance to the flag.
WHAT IDIOT thought it was right to force the students to complete this?
"There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the prophet of Allah."
I'm laughing, but I am very frustrated. When the parent complained to the school board, these concerns weren't even taken seriously!
The fascists at KickStarter attempted to suppress a book about the unfortunate habits of Muslims, but apparently there are still a few Swedes left in Sweden;
https://sputniknews.com/europe/201801291061149927-sweden-rape-book-crowdfunding/
InGarage said:
"Nor would I want my grandkids to hear about the belief system of Muslims either in elementary school or high school"
I will never understand people like Inga who opt for ignorance. I guess ?he believes it works for ?er.
But then, ?he's ignorant.
I have no phobia toward any religion Rick.
Sure, it's totally normal to claim the religious right will turn America into The Handmaid's Tale.
Fabi said...
Your blog search history proves otherwise, Chuck. Further proof is that you used the occasion to continue the spread the unfounded rumors as you posted the requisite key words at Ann's blog so that search engines will return results.
No, you prick; you started this today. I never brought up anything about Barron Trump. But you came after me with your 8:51 comment:
Fabi said...
"Now it seems dominated by Trumpist bigots on Medicare, bitching about Muslims and Obamacare."
We should spend more time spreading unfounded rumors about Trump's adolescent son.
1/29/18, 8:51 AM
You shouldn't do that. You, and Drago, and Full Moon and the rest of the jackass commentariat here; don't do that. I am not here to play nice with you. When you make some vague, oblique allegation that I have somehow harmed a minor, or "spread unfounded rumors about Trump's adolescent son," I am going to make it damned clear what I have written before. I am going to use Barron Trump's name in precisely the way that you avoided it. I am going to be clear and explicit in the ways that you weren't. I am going to post links that make it clear that this was a World Wide Web story without me at all.
You started this today, Fabi. Just as on previous days, Drago and Full Moon have started it with me.
I actually thought that with the litigiousness (threatened litigiousness, to be more correct) of the Trump family, Althouse might actually feel a bit put-upon by you creeps constantly bringing this topic up in your comments.* And I suggested to Althouse that she should remove anybody who pulls this stunt on me. She declined. Oh well, it's her blog.
*(For my part, I think I brought the topic up on my own twice; one was when Trump went off on the vaccine/autism link in one of the GOP primary debates and the other was when Trump met privately with Vaxxer nutjob Robert F. Kennedy Jr. during the transition at Trump Tower, and RFKJr came out and said that Trump was going to set up a Presidential Commission on vaccines, which was later shot down by Transition aides to the President-elect.
Every other time this comes up on Althouse comments pages it is because one of you assholes tries to smear me with it.)
Aside from the obvious promoting of Islam as a faith, this video is full of historical nonsense and distortion. The Renaissance was most certainly NOT based on "Muslim" scholars in Spain, Turkey and Arabia. First of all, the preservation of Aristotle and other Greek thinkers was the work of Byzantine Syrian Christian, Jewish and other scholars along with Muslim scholars. That preservation mainly influenced Scholastic scholarship from the 12th century on. Aquinas, a Scholastic, was influenced by Muslim Scholars only insofar as they passed on Aristotelian thought to all of Europe. And he did not pave the way for the Renaissance, which explicitly rejected the entire Scholastic approach. The Renaissance was far more thoroughly influenced by Christian Byzantine scholars fleeing Constantinople after it feel to the Ottoman Turks in 1457. It was they who brought more of the classical learning than the Muslims had ever been interested in.
As for the earlier rise of Islam, the video utterly excludes the military-political component of Islam. That was what inspired Muslim Arab armies in their vast imperialist expansion throughout the Middle East and North Africa. Instead, the video suggests a real harmony between Islam and the other "people of the book" of those lands - Christians and Jews, as well as all others. In fact, Muslims reduced those other religious communities to second-class status and an often demeaning second-class status. It did slaughter them in some contexts, but it did not eliminate them in large part because it was more useful to keep them in their dhimmi status and tax them.
I have no problem with this presentation if it is clearly identified as how Muslims now view their traditions. Fine. I really do hope they transform their faith into a religion of peace one day. However, its history does not come close to according with that characterization, and students deserve to have that full, unvarnished history presented to them outside the bounds of pressures to genuflect before the wearying gods of diversity and inclusion. Which gods are in fact the real ones getting preached here.
“Nor would I want my grandkids to hear about the belief system of Muslims either in elementary school or high school"
“I will never understand people like Inga who opt for ignorance. I guess ?he believes it works for ?er.”
If you want your children to be taught about Islam in the school they attend, that’s your business, but it won’t be met with acceptance by many people on the right. I don’t know what you’re advocating, perhaps you should explain your opinion on the matter instead of finding an excuse to comment on me personally.
Inga, I believe you are the one confused. But before I make that assertion...what was your point behind c&ping the 'joint statement' above. Was it meant to just provide us with the current law or do you believe that it somehow reinforces some point you are making.
Please expand, if you can.
Thanks
“Sure, it's totally normal to claim the religious right will turn America into The Handmaid's Tale.”
Fundamentalism, when it comes to any religion is a step backward, not forward. I think there are many Christians who don’t want women to be treated as they were in the Old Testament and don’t advocate taking the Bible literally.
I never mentioned him by name, Chuck, and you were the very first person to introduce it here months ago. This is all on you -- no one else. You did and have at least three times used his name in this very post. You mentioned originally that your motive was to drive search engine hits for this ghastly smear. Look at your own comment history here -- it tells the full truth.
Fabi: "You mentioned originally that your motive was to drive search engine hits for this ghastly smear."
And LLR Chuck wrote it proudly.
Proudly
One of the most disgraceful things I've seen on a blog, Drago. If only he'd attack any member of the left with such vehemence!
Sure, it's totally normal to claim the religious right will turn America into The Handmaid's Tale.”
Fundamentalism, when it comes to any religion is a step backward, not forward
Fundamentalism isn't an effort to turn America into the Handmaid's Tale so this is misrepresenting your position. In the Christian context Fundamentalism merely means not changing the religion to suit political whims. That's why you reveal yourself as intentionally hateful and obnoxious conflating that position with Islamic Fundamentalists who support murder for various groups including apostates, Jews, women who have sex before marriage, and gays among others.
Jupiter:
Inga's solution is to not teach the children anything. Yet she posts a paper that points out the need, value and legality of teaching about a religion in a positive light.
I am tying to understand her. Did she yet again post something that she doesn't understand and contradicts her position...or does she have a more nuanced point?
I know... please stop laughing.
Maybe she is unclear about the difference between teaching about a religion and teaching that religion.
With her it often feels like one is trying to decipher what a monkey is chattering at you.
I liked Rusty's earlier allusion to her as one 'being mystified by disappearing playing cards".
But she deserves the chance to clarify herself.
At the core is this- would a similar Christian video get presented in the same school to the same audience? This is a question we can answer, right, with actual evidence- for example, has such a Christian video been played in that class?
“Inga, what American children should be taught about Islam is that it is a totalitarian ideology that is grossly incompatible not only with American law and tradition but with the most basic tenets of human decency.”
Feel free to teach your children whatever you see fit. But it won’t be taught in public schools.
“Muslims are running slave markets, right now, today, where they sell women as sex slaves, Inga.”
Yes fundamentalism is a scourge, but in this country Americans are free to worship as they please. Also in this country honor killings are prosecuted as a crime, rightfully so. No slave markets in this country, at least not openly (also illegal. The people of the countries you speak of will have to be the ones to change their own society, we’ve tried in Afghanistan and Iraq with not exactly great results.
Inga
"No slave markets in this country, at least not openly (also illegal. The people of the countries you speak of will have to be the ones to change their own society, we’ve tried in Afghanistan and Iraq with not exactly great results."
But you are super cool with residents of those countries becoming residents of this one and bringing along their indifference.
“Inga's solution is to not teach the children anything. Yet she posts a paper that points out the need, value and legality of teaching about a religion in a positive light.”
You’ve misstated my position once again. Is this a game with you? I won’t be wasting my time responding further to you. You’re only here to insult, not to discuss. However Livermoron restates my opinion, know this, he is doing so in an effort to create some back and forth fight. Not going to happen today. The thread was interesting and it wouldn’t be fair to others to respond to every one of your barbs directed toward me personally.
Blogger chuck said...
And I think the achievements of Muslim civilization are overrated for political reasons.
1/29/18, 7:45 AM
I think this is true, but 20+ years ago, the achievements were ignored or belittled. It's simply swung to the opposite side of the pendulum. Of course Islam had genuine achievements, but they weren't comparable to the achievements of the Greeks, Romans, and ancient and medieval Christians. If you focus on the achievements of these others, then Islam looks like it didn't accomplish much by comparison. If you focus on the (genuine) achievements of Islam, then you're bound to ascribe greater worth to it than it deserves. Both sides are incorrect.
“But you are super cool with residents of those countries becoming residents of this one and bringing along their indifference.”
Really? Is every single Muslim in every one of those countries an extremist fundamentalist Islamist?
Inga wrote:
But it won’t be taught in public schools.
There is the clue. She has no idea that what she posted from that 'joint statement' actually point out that it is LEGAL to teach children about religions. It even encourages it.
Goodness gracious. This isn't even tough to understand:
Students may be taught about religion, but public schools may not teach religion. As the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly said, "[i]t might well be said that one's education is not complete without a study of comparative religion, or the history of religion and its relationship to the advancement of civilization." It would be difficult to teach art, music, literature and most social studies without considering religious influences.
But it is incomprehensible to her, it appears.
As to the legality of showing the video. It is legal to show the video in public school, but not to make it mandatory. Parents must be able to opt their children out, and a substitute lesson provided.
Obviously this religious propaganda has no place in a public school.
However, if a school wanted to show it right after the school showed a documentary on 9/11, I guess I'd be okay with that. You know, to explain the motivations of the terrorists.
If I ran this blog (which I don't -- I'm just thankful it's here) I would ban LLR Chuck for life simply on the strength of his truly despicable 10:58 a.m. comment. How completely disingenuous can you be? As Michael said: "Words fail, dude. They simply fail." A complete and utter disgrace.
Inga once again reveals that she would rather live next to a Ba'athist than a Baptist. That she prefers Mohammed over Mormons. Salafasm versus Salvation.
People have brought up Rotherinham, England to you before, and as I recall you have zero to say about it. Not a word of criticism, nor a word of support for the poor English girls repeatedly gangraped by Muslims, with the official support and approval of the local leftist politicians.
In fact, you scream "racism" at anyone who says they don't want another Rotheringham here. You are far, far more worried about the Southern Baptist Convention and you completely ignore the real Handmaid's tale that Islamic society produces.
Cathedrals all over Europe are being forcibly converted to Mosques, and your response? "How Dare the Christians fight back at all, even speak out against it! Don't they know that the proper way is to kill themselves after voting Hillary?"
In fact, I'd bet you cry every time you hear about a Muslim converting to Christ.
As for your "Is every Muslim from those countries a fundamentalist" question: You do realize it's a stupid one, right? Your side rants and raves against vetting these people at all, let alone an investigation into whether they support traditional Islam or some hypothetical "moderate" version of the religion that doesn't exist at the moment. The moderate Muslims are the ones that say "leave her alive after the gang rape instead of killing her." Your kind of people! Just like Hillary!
--Vance
Inga runs when she is trapped. And I do plead guilty of wanting a back and forth.
She is all about claims and little about proof.
In case you didn't notice...I asked her to reconcile some conflicts in her posting.
She can't even reiterate her point.
Really Althouse, better lefties. Please.
"Really? Is every single Muslim in every one of those countries an extremist fundamentalist Islamist?"
This is not the issue, or rather, you engage in the hyperbolic fallacy.
The problem is statistical. What are the odds of importing enemies of the US, or potential enemies? Every one certainly isn't, but a disproportionate number are or will be (see for instance Somali Al-Shabaab recruitment in US Somali community), and under the right circumstances, potentially, a significant number could easily be radicalized.
Moreover, a large Muslim population provides a "sea" in which these fish can swim.
Standard insurgency situation. An insurgent needs a more-or-less compatible, sympathetic population within which to operate, even if all of them are not actually insurgents.
Fundamentalism, when it comes to any religion is a step backward, not forward. I think there are many Christians who don’t want women to be treated as they were in the Old Testament and don’t advocate taking the Bible literally.
The difference being, Christian fundamentalists don't kill those who don't take the Bible literally. Muslim fundamentalists do kill those who don't take the Koran, Sura, and Hadith literally.
Good answers, Igna.
While you were thinking them up, and phrasing them just so, that Muzzie dragged that little Yazidi girl back to the hole he lives in. She fought him at first -- chastity is still valued in her culture -- but after he twisted her arm around behind her back and dislocated her shoulder, she stopped fighting and let him have his way. Which he did, several times, although he won't use her mouth until he's beaten her enough to be sure she won't dare to bite him. Then he took some pictures of her with his cell phone, chained her to the bed and went off to have lunch with some friends. It gives a man an apetite, raping an infidel.
You’re only here to insult, not to discuss.
Inga wrote this. Seriously.
Moreover, a large Muslim population provides a "sea" in which these fish can swim.
Once a certain percentage of a population is Muslim, they start advocating for sharia law. Once they reach a certain higher percentage they start demanding sharia law. Once they are a majority they impose sharia law.
Fabi said...
I never mentioned him by name, Chuck, and you were the very first person to introduce it here months ago. This is all on you -- no one else. You did and have at least three times used his name in this very post. You mentioned originally that your motive was to drive search engine hits for this ghastly smear. Look at your own comment history here -- it tells the full truth.
Of course you didn't name Barron Trump. You wanted to smear me without mentioning him.
Inga said...
I don’t see how history can be taught without making mention of the religion that may have caused certain events to take place, but it should end there, no teaching what that religion’s tenets are.
1/29/18, 10:23 AM
————————————-
Jupiter said...
“Inga, what American children should be taught about Islam is that it is a totalitarian ideology that is grossly incompatible not only with American law and tradition but with the most basic tenets of human decency.”
—————————-
Inga said...
“Feel free to teach your children whatever you see fit. But it won’t be taught in public schools.”
—————————-
Islamaphobia won’t be taught in public schools, nor will the tenets of the religion. This is something I’m in agreement with.
——————————
“Teaching About Religion
5. Students may be taught about religion, but public schools may not teach religion. As the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly said, "[i]t might well be said that one's education is not complete without a study of comparative religion, or the history of religion and its relationship to the advancement of civilization." It would be difficult to teach art, music, literature and most social studies without considering religious influences.
The history of religion, comparative religion, the Bible (or other scripture)-as-literature (either as a separate course or within some other existing course), are all permissible public school subjects. It is both permissible and desirable to teach objectively about the role of religion in the history of the United States and other countries. One can teach that the Pilgrims came to this country with a particular religious vision, that Catholics and others have been subject to persecution or that many of those participating in the abolitionist, women's suffrage and civil rights movements had religious motivations.”
Oh and Chuck is the kind of person who would happily offer your Jewish friends shelter ("Come in, come in! I will protect you!")... only to call the cops and stand back counting his reward money while they drag them off screaming to the trains, all while he hgh-fives the local SS sergeant.. Hey, he's not personally killing them, right? Who can begrudge a guy an honest dollar?
Note, it doesn't have to be Jewish (though I'm sure he'd particularly love to send Ivanka to the showers), it can be any group hunted by a leftist government. I know one thing: when the burning times come and my faith group is being hunted by people Inga supports, I'd rather take my chances running down the railroad track than accept sanctuary from Chuck.
--Vance
"Of course you didn't name (redacted). You wanted to smear me without mentioning him."
He is an actual human being and an adolescent. You're an anonymous internet entity and cannot be smeared, as such. Maybe your big lawyer brain should have made the distinction, Cuck.
Good point, Igna. That little Yazidi bitch is an Islamophobe! Serves her right to watch Muslims slaughter her whole family, then be sold in a meat market to a grunting savage from one of the shitholes surrounding Birmingham. We should bring him here, he'll make a great neighbor for you. Maybe you have a granddaughter about his age? Actually, he prefers younger women.
"Fundamentalism, when it comes to any religion is a step backward, not forward."
Modern fundamentalism in Islam is actually an artifact of better education, high technology, and higher standards of living. In many ways it is a purging of localized folk-Islam that persisted due to a lack of literacy and little contact with the core texts.
This cuts across all versions of Islam, and has been going on for a while. You can get some of this from, for instance, V.S.Naipaul "Among the Believers" and "Beyond Belief".
But anyone following the news would have picked up on this. Consider the unique career of the Ayatollah Khomeini. He and his followers, in the 1970's, were early adopters of high tech, in that case audio cassettes, with which they created a fundamentalist Shiite samizdat, and educated a generation of Iranian Islamists (of their flavor). Tribal/regional/village laxity were purged.
Inga saidv I misrepresented her point. These are all things Inga stated in this thread.
Make mention of the religion when appropriate, but don’t teach about the particular religion
no teaching what that religion’s tenets are
Nor would I want my grandkids to hear about the belief system of Muslims either in elementary school or high school.
(Then she c&ped this without understanding it):The history of religion, comparative religion, the Bible (or other scripture)-as-literature (either as a separate course or within some other existing course), are all permissible public school subjects.
(After that she posts this): But it won’t be taught in public schools.
When I asked her to clarify her position she chose to deflect and run. And, of course call me a liar for 'mistating" her point. With her own words.
Run brave Ingarage. Run!
"Bowe Bergdahl Republican" Chuck: "Of course you didn't name ****** *****. You wanted to smear me without mentioning him."
LLR Chuck actually thinks he's being clever with his non-stop attacks on a youth.
That's the kind of courage that caused LLR Chuck to briefly consider joining the military, but he didn't 'cuz no draft.
Plus, it freed up Chuck to work on his continuous #StrongDemDefender routine.
“I know one thing: when the burning times come and my faith group is being hunted by people Inga supports...”
Yeah me and my fellow parisoners in our Presbyterian Church will hunt you down like dogs....
LOL.
“Students may be taught about religion, but public schools may not teach religion.”
Teaching religion= teaching the tenets of the religion. It is possible to teach ABOUT religion, especially in history or art appreciation or music, without teaching the tenets of the religion. This isn’t some difficult concept to grasp unless one is only interested in argument for arguments sake and not argument for the sake of better understanding.
ten·et
ˈtenət/Submit
noun
plural noun: tenets
a principle or belief, especially one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy.
"the tenets of classical liberalism"
synonyms: principle, belief, doctrine, precept, creed, credo, article of faith, axiom, dogma, canon; More
"Yeah me and my fellow parisoners in our Presbyterian Church will hunt you down like dogs...."
You (and yours) are the sea in which these people swim -
No Christianity Please
You ignorant...whatever. How do you teach about a religion without listing its tenets?
How do you teach about Christianity without talking 10 commandments, crucifixion and redemption?
Keep spinning, idiot.
Inga said...
"Yeah me and my fellow parisoners in our Presbyterian Church will hunt you down like dogs...."
The Muzzies will burn your Presbyterian Church, Igna. With you and your fellow parishioners in it. All but the young women and girls. It's what their God told them to do. They'd show you, in the Book they have, if you weren't too old to bother with.
No possible way is "Chuck" a lawyer. The final tell was his offer of spending $100 on Amazon to bribe Althouse to offer up a certain topic. LOL. Chuck is likely an employee in a golf shop or the driver of the machine picking up the range balls. But vile nonetheless.
Come on, Inga. We all know that the Democrat party, who you support, as well as Islamic fundamentalists, whom you also support, would hunt down people like me, if you had power. You know, Mormons. Or some of my friends who are black female conservatives... they'd probably be first in the ovens.
--Vance
If there are people here who want their children’s school to teach the tenets of the world religions, it’s not going to happen without pushback from parents who are concerned about proselytizing.
Which is what this blogpost describes.
Drago said...
Rusty: "communicative principal in idiocy..."
Did you mean "communicative property"?
Yes. And I'd already had my coffee.
Therefore......................
The phrase is teach ABOUT the tenets. Teaching the tenets is illegal.
For God's sake woman learn the language and the meaning of words.
That's why you continue to misrepresent what you yourself posted.
Rusty: if you skip over gar..er Inga's post you'll find an immediate 17% increase in your intelligence.
Just a helpful tip.
5. Students may be taught about religion, but public schools may not teach religion. As the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly said, "[i]t might well be said that one's education is not complete without a study of comparative religion, or the history of religion and its relationship to the advancement of civilization." It would be difficult to teach art, music, literature and most social studies without considering religious influences.
Not too difficult to understand, unless one chooses not to understand it. That would be their issue.
“Teaching the tenets is illegal.”
Which is EXACTLY what I said.
LOL
Fabi said...
"Of course you didn't name (redacted). You wanted to smear me without mentioning him."
He is an actual human being and an adolescent. You're an anonymous internet entity and cannot be smeared, as such. Maybe your big lawyer brain should have made the distinction, Cuck.
Fabi you brought him onto this page. Not me. You brought Barron Trump the conversation, without using his name, when I would have been much happier to have left him out. You simply wanted it to be a smear of me. And attack, in which all other context was left out.
I don't know why Donald Trump has his batshit theories about vaccines and autism. Trump can explain that if he wants to.
But I'll fight my own fights, thank you very little, and all that I want you and others to understand is that the next time somebody comes after me the way you did today, claiming that I have "spread unfounded rumors about Trump's adolescent son," or if somebody else claims that I have somehow harmed underage children, I am going to respond in exactly the same way. I am going to let everyone know that it is Barron Trump whom YOU are talking about, and I am going to supply the context that you left out.
For that reason, as I have already instructed you, you shouldn't do that. So stop.
I am no more 'spreading unfounded rumors' than the Washington Times was.
As a lawyer I want to encourage as many of these lawsuits as possible. They're kind of fun and the fees add up.
Livermoron said...
"Rusty: if you skip over gar..er Inga's post you'll find an immediate 17% increase in your intelligence."
Igna is not here to argue. Igna is here to hijack the forum for the people who pay her. That's why so many of her posts are just cut-and-paste from various Fake News outlets.
Prove this statement of yours:
It is possible to teach ABOUT religion, especially in history or art appreciation or music, without teaching the tenets of the religion.
If you are trying to save face by spinning your anser...well, we all see through that.
Your position was made abundantly clear, to wit:
Make mention of the religion when appropriate, but don’t teach about the particular religion
and: Nor would I want my grandkids to hear about the belief system of Muslims either in elementary school or high school.
Yet she c&ped this without understanding it:
The history of religion, comparative religion, the Bible (or other scripture)-as-literature (either as a separate course or within some other existing course), are all permissible public school subjects.
How do you teach comparative religions without discussing the tenets of that religion? Do you think (I use that word advisedly here) that comparative religion is just about adding up the numbers who believe in a particular religion and seeing how that number compares to another religion??
Keep spinning your determination to keep yourself and your progeny (shudder) ignorant.
“Inga is not here to argue. Inga is here to hijack the forum for the people who pay her.”
Daddy Soros!💋
Eat a bag of dicks, Cuck. You -- and only you -- introduced him by name to this blog along with the attempt to smear him, and then admitted that you would repeatedly post links -- as you've done today and multiple times in the past -- so it would return hits. Quit being a disingenuous schmuck.
Wouldn't it be great if parents decided how & what their kids should be taught? The idea that we all should have goals that promote a single attitude towards Islam is fascism, isn't it? That the state has its own interests that may or may coincide with the people, but always override them?
Let’s stop talking about autism in regard to poor Barron. Instead let’s ponder what ails poor Livermoron. Never have I run across someone who has such difficulty grasping others’ meaning. It’s as if he has his mind so full of preconcieved notions that even despite bring corrected multiple times, he cannot wrap his overwrought brain around what the other person is saying. It’s as if he can only believe that the person must say what he wants them to say so he can counter them, simply for the sake of argument and strife. This isn’t normal, this isn't conducive to a decent discussion and in truth I think he does it purposefully in order to find a way to insult and demean a person he happens to have in his sights. This is pathological. It’s a shame really, as the discussion could progress in a much better fashion without the unnessesary disruption
The public schools are in favor of what ever will push people away from Judaeo-Christian values and teachings. Don't understand why people don't get that. It's pretty obvious to me.
Daddy Soros!💋
Snort!
About the video ~ obviously it is proselytizing, and also, it is terrible. Poor grammar, poor music, dubious claims, total lack of sourcing except the "Noble" Quran ~ amateur garbage pulled from YouTube is acceptable educational material in New Jersey these days? What do they spend on average per student there, like twenty grand? Anyone who sends a kid to such a public school should be horsewhipped.
Pants, it's even worse than we imagined. Take a listen to this video taped in a public classroom: California Teacher Slams Military in Classroom And this guy will be only disciplined? Not fired?
Fabi said...
Eat a bag of dicks, Cuck. You -- and only you -- introduced him by name to this blog along with the attempt to smear him, and then admitted that you would repeatedly post links -- as you've done today and multiple times in the past -- so it would return hits. Quit being a disingenuous schmuck.
No, I introduced that story -- a completely true and sourced story -- to this blog when Donald Trump was going off on vaccine/autism links as a matter of public policy. Twice, at least, since he became a political candidate, Trump did that.
I don't understand why you don't fucking get it. If you bring up this story in an attempt to attack me, as you did earlier today at 8:51 am, I am going to push back without restraint. So many of you seem too stupid to get that. I don't know how to explain it any more simply. If you try to attack me with this story, I will defend myself without reservation and that will inevitably involve much more discussion of Barron Trump -- by name -- than some of you would like.
I absolutely promise you that will be my response.
Barron Trump's name would certainly have never come up today on this blog, but for Fabi's 8:51 am comment, which was purely intended as a personal attack on me.
Chuck is on the spectrum. Teams and teams of doctors--the top men--confirmed this. He is looking for a little buddy in Barron. Sorry, Chuck. You'll have to find another.
This isn’t normal, this isn't conducive to a decent discussion
Inga has shown many times she has neither interest nor ability to engage in a decent discussion. I don't know how many people are still around from when Althouse closed comments for a few months but Inga was openly gleeful that the comments forum was closed as her only goal was preventing others from engaging in discussion (much like Chuck). But now she wants to pose as someone interested in decent discussion.
Apparently she believes people don't remember who she really is.
Inga can't refute what I post based on her comments. So she, again, makes claims without evidence.
What a fucking cunt she is.
Lewis Wetzel said...
"The idea that we all should have goals that promote a single attitude towards Islam is fascism, isn't it?"
Well, Muslims certainly believe that.
If Igna actually believes anything, I don't suppose she could tell us what it is, but Althouse worries me more. I am fairly sure that Althouse starts from the First Amendment, which she regards as an absolute. Since I tend to agree, I am trying to point out that the Constitution is not a document created in a vacuum and capable of operating in all conditions. Tolerance of religious practice requires religions that are willing to be tolerant. But tolerance of intolerant religions is submission, which is what the word Islam means. From a purely Islamic point of view, the American Constitution is an affront to God, and laws based upon its text are blasphemy. If you want to run a Constitutional Government in a country with a substantial Muslim minority, you will need to practice violent repression. Or else look the other way, when the savages behave like the God-damned savages they are.
Religion is not for public schools to teach or teach about. It is the function of parents, churches, synagogues and mosques and parochial schools. The best way for kids to learn about Islam is to spend a few months in a Muslim country, just like the best way for them to learn about Socialism is to visit a place like Venezuela. This may not be possible nor desirable but it's enlightening. My brother learned much more about Communism from twice visiting Russia than from studying Marx and Lenin.
“Apparently she believes people don't remember who she really is.”
Really? News to me. I didn’t like the way people were mercilessly attacking Althouse (you were among those people) on her own blog and I agreed it might be a good idea to shut down comments for a while and it was proven to be a wise decision on her part. I remember who I am and that’s all that really counts. What you think of me means nothing.
I always find it humorous the same people to screech about Separation of Church and State!!!!! ... are the very same people who are silent - at best - or defenders of Islamic indoctrination in those same situations.
Why, it's almost as if they find comfort in totalitarianism brotherhood.
I suppose Igna believes that in three generations the Muzzies will all be Constitutional Scholars like Obama or something. The appalling fate that is overtaking the peoples of Europe argues otherwise. I confess, I do not understand how someone who does not hate Americans can look at what is happening in Europe without wanting to slam the door shut in the face of any Muslim gangster who tries to come here.
I didn’t like the way people were mercilessly attacking Althouse (you were among those people)
Once again you reveal your arguments have no relationship to reality. You simply live a fantasy where whatever argument fits the moment miraculously becomes true.
Rick said...
This isn’t normal, this isn't conducive to a decent discussion
Inga has shown many times she has neither interest nor ability to engage in a decent discussion. I don't know how many people are still around from when Althouse closed comments for a few months but Inga was openly gleeful that the comments forum was closed as her only goal was preventing others from engaging in discussion (much like Chuck). But now she wants to pose as someone interested in decent discussion.
That's a lie.
I've written numerous emails to Althouse pleading with her to better enforce moderation standards on her comments pages. Page after page after page of personal attacks on me. Althouse is clearly not going to do it, and has said as much. She removed the notification paragraph just above the commenting form, advising that "COMMENTS ARE MODERATED some, but not all, of the time."
I'd be much happier if other commenters never mentioned me and never addressed any comments to me. Althouse would too, I am willing to bet.
Blogger Jupiter said...
"Livermoron said...
"Rusty: if you skip over gar..er Inga's post you'll find an immediate 17% increase in your intelligence."
Igna is not here to argue. Igna is here to hijack the forum for the people who pay her. That's why so many of her posts are just cut-and-paste from various Fake News outlets."
C'mon.
Something more challenging, please.
Chuck, there is a certain subset of commenters here who have very little interest in discussion or even just expressing their opinion. Their only raison d'être is to lay in wait for someone they consider the opposition to appear in the comments sections and then they pounce, most often in a weird pathological fashion. I think perhaps they have sadistic tendencies and aggression issues. It’s too bad that moderation isn’t possible, but Althouse and Meade don’t have the time or the inclination to make a serious attempt.
Chuck said...
"I've written numerous emails to Althouse pleading with her to better enforce moderation standards on her comments pages."
Pleading, hey? Like on bended knee, more in sorrow than in anger? Oh, Chuckles. You do crack me up. You really do.
If you ask Google home who Jesus Christ is, it has no idea. It knows who Muhammad and Buddha are in great detail. Strange huh? - whitney
You misspelled, 'predictable.'
Shorter Chuck: You guys are making me attack a child.
lefty Inga and LLR Chuck as allies.
Peas in a pod.
Now that was unexpected.
I'd be much happier if other commenters never mentioned me and never addressed any comments to me.
You know, there's a perfectly good solution to that request. And it's been suggested many times.
“lefty Inga and LLR Chuck as allies.”
Drago, I’d even defend you if need be. Decent people don’t stand by and watch when others are being beaten up. You know this, don’t you? Didn’t you learn it in kindergarten?
Inga said...
Chuck, there is a certain subset of commenters here who have very little interest in discussion
This is the same unsel-faware person who accused me of 'wanting a back and forth'.
?he is totally clueless.
I haven't watched the video, so I can't comment on it directly, but I have no problem with kids learning about Islam in school as long as other religions are covered as well. Ron gave a pretty good first chapter above. I'd also cover how Islam spread as it did. If you want to convince those who are against teaching about Islam in school, you can explain that it is important to know your enemy as Sun Tzu said.
Inga:
You do not qualify as 'decent people'.
If you are so interested in a real discussion, why not have one? Why not answer my very clear questions?
No one is coming to your defense because you are indefensible.
Be smarter and more honest. Shut up until you are.
I can't stand the idiotic Inga/Attack-Inga exchanges going on here, which derail any chance of real discussion (though not as badly as the irrelevancies about Trump's son). But I have to comment on Inga's idea of teaching about a religion without teaching its "tenets." That makes absolutely no sense to me. It seems to suggest a notion of religion as a purely social force, not a set of ideas. How anyone could possibly understand the role of religion in history without teaching its ideas is beyond me. The problem is not teaching the tenets, it would be preaching those tenets. What's wrong with that video is not that it teaches the tenets, or even (as bad as it is) that it preaches them. What is wrong is that it is false in a million different ways about what Islam is, what it preaches, what its history is, all of it. It is a disgrace that ought to embarrass the schools, the teachers and any honest Muslim as well.
Inga said...
"I think perhaps they have sadistic tendencies and aggression issues."
I like that, "aggression issues". You mean, we don't roll over and let you have things your way, like a good little Yazidi slave? You just haven't beaten us enough, Igna. Spare the rod, spoil the comments section.
Chuck said...
I'd be much happier if other commenters never mentioned me and never addressed any comments to me.
If this were true wouldn't Chuck not address other commenters?
And yet here's his first comment on this post:
Chuck said...
I seem to recall a time in the Althouse blog where the commenters would address a post like this with mostly-sensible and often conservative law school grads citing Establishment Clause cases.
Now it seems dominated by Trumpist bigots on Medicare, bitching about Muslims and Obamacare.
Why it's almost like when you're a dick to everyone they respond in kind. Whoever could have guessed? At least you'll always have Inga. You're likely the only two people over 50 still playing the instigate and run to teacher ploy that annoyed everyone else in the second grade.
In 1977, New Jersey District Court, in Malnak v. Yogi, 440 F. Supp. 1284 (D.N.J. 1977) [https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/440/1284/1817490/] ruled that transcendental meditation and its derivative The Science of Creative Intelligence could NOT be taught in New Jersey public schools. The Plaintiffs argued that permitting students to learn meditation and listen to some video tapes violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Part of what got the plaintiff's dander up was that the TM organization had implemented a World Plan to spread the meditation practice around the world. Seven goals of the World Plan were enumerated in the petition to the Court:
(1) To develop the full potential of the individual;
(2) To improve governmental achievements;
(3) To realize the highest ideal of education;
(4) To eliminate the age-old problem of crime and all behavior that brings unhappiness to the family of man;
(5) To maximize the intelligent use of the environment;
(6) To bring fulfillment to the economic aspirations of individuals and society;
(7) To achieve the spiritual goals of mankind in this generation.
Okay; some lofty objectives; but, hardly the stuff of a new age world religion, and certainly more doable than many teachers of Islam. To my knowledge, there has never been a practitioner or teacher of TM advocating Hindu law or removing body parts of unbelievers (or, in this case, non-meditators).
So, it does not require a lot of Talmudic reasoning here that if a light weight, very lefty peace and love sort of thing like transcendental meditation with a series of thirty minute videos by the Maharishi constitute a religion, all the more this video and its rather implicit theological pitch.
WHY does this sort of thing happen in New Jersey?
Some good ways to teach about religion without teaching its tenets.
“Just observe on field trips. If you plan field trips to houses of worship, be sure students, parents, chaperones and all other teachers know that the goal is to observe rather than participate in any form of ritual. Better yet, avoid putting students in a situation where they might simulate or practice ritual on a public school field trip. Go to the house of worship when there is no service in session. Advise tour leaders not to hand out yarmulkes in a temple, for example. In a mosque, students can dress modestly out of respect, but avoid taking the next step of requiring girls to cover their hair.
Be an active moderator of any guest speaker on religion, including parents. When teachers invite guest speakers, they should be ready to step in if a speaker crosses the line from providing information into proselytizing. They should correct misinformation or stereotyping, too, if they hear it.
Lumberton, Texas, geography teacher brought in a variety of clothing, including a burka and hijab, for students to try on. It caused no controversy till 2013, but educators should consider this: When you ask students to try on an item related to another religion, it can be problematic on several fronts. It can be like simulating ritual. It also could offend followers of that faith.
Stay away from anything else that resembles simulating ritual in class. Trying on clothing is problematic. Simulating prayer in a classroom is even more so. Having students write out another religion’s statement of belief seems innocent, but writing the Muslim statement of belief in calligraphy is a religious act for a Muslim.”
http://time.com/4515229/religion-teaching-public-schools/
JaimeRoberto said...
"If you want to convince those who are against teaching about Islam in school, you can explain that it is important to know your enemy as Sun Tzu said."
Good as far as it goes. The problem is, they are not teaching that Islam is the enemy. It's like they were teaching that the Second World War was caused by the Poles' failure to understand the entirely reasonable cultural desire of the noble Germanic peoples for "Lebensraum", a term that means more or less what we Americans mean by "Liberty". So don't be afraid of the NAZIs. They're people, just like us! See, they're all singing a song together!
“Know the First Amendment and what its Establishment Clause means. The First Amendment Center, a part of the Newseum, has a wealth of resources for teachers trying to sort out where the line is when it comes to religion in the public school classroom. Teachers obviously cannot lead prayer, but what about students? They can lead prayer, provided an adult is not the one pushing the idea.
Choose textbook, supplementary materials carefully. The Pluralism Project and the Religious Literacy Project, both based at Harvard University, are safe bets for teachers looking for good materials about world religions. So is the California 3Rs Project, developed with help from First Amendment Scholar Charles C. Haynes.
See teaching about religion as more than just teaching the facts. Yes, teach, don’t preach. But educators can easily incorporate lessons about stereotypes. Use facts and common sense to explain why it’s wrong to say all Muslims are terrorists, for example.
Be culturally sensitive to the religions practiced in your community. While schools cannot give off days for every religion’s holiday, they can at least acknowledge them in a simple way. Indicate when holidays fall on the school- or district-wide calendar as a nod to religious diversity in your community and our world.“
http://time.com/4515229/religion-teaching-public-schools/
Really? Is every single Muslim in every one of those countries an extremist fundamentalist Islamist? - Inga
Since people like you absolutely refuse to allow any vetting from those countries? Yes. Every single Muslim in every one of those countries is an extremist.
Your stupidity regarding vetting requires sane people to take absolute positions until known otherwise.
Congratulations.
Inga said...
Use facts and common sense to explain why it’s wrong to say all NAZIs are terrorists, for example.
“Since people like you absolutely refuse to allow any vetting from those countries? Yes. Every single Muslim in every one of those countries is an extremist.“
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-syrian-refugee-crisis/
Gina Kassem oversees the refugee resettlement program in the Middle East and North Africa for the U.S. State Department. As of late 2016, the U.S. was processing an additional 21,000 Syrian refugee applications for relocation to the United States.
Gina Kassem: Mostly we focus on victims of torture, survivors of violence, women-headed households, a lot of severe medical cases.
Kassem told us each Syrian refugee who makes it to the United States goes through a lengthy process of interviews and background checks.
“Bill Whitaker: You know there are many Americans who don’t trust government to fix the roads or run the schools. How can you convince them that this process is going to keep them safe?
Gina Kassem: Because they undergo so many steps of vetting, so many interviews, so many intelligence screenings, so many checks along the way. They’re fleeing the terrorists who killed their family members, who destroyed their houses. These are the victims that we are helping through our program.
For the lucky few this is where the long road to the U.S. begins. Everyday thousands of Syrian refugees line up here in Amman, Jordan, to register with the U.N.
Every single refugee is interviewed in detail multiple times by the U.N. for their vital statistics: where they came from, who they know.
Their irises are scanned to establish their identity.
And then they wait for the chance the U.N. might refer them to the United States. Less than one percent have had that chance.
For that one percent the next step has been this State Department resettlement center in Amman for a background check led by specially trained Department of Homeland Security interrogators.
Like all Syrian refugees being vetted this family was questioned at least three times by interviewers looking for gaps or inconsistencies in their stories.”
Post a Comment