Print This Post Print This Post

Nov

29

(Updated) Teacher allegedly insults Islam but could teddy bears named Muhammad be suspect under Violent Radicalization prevention bill?


UPDATE: From the AP, 12:42pm today.

Warning: this is a bit of a ramble because these scenarios just keep coming and tossing sense to the wind.

The BBC has this article about a British teacher who works in a Christian school in Khartoum, Sudan but currently is in custody (though the BBC piece says she may be released very soon). She brought in a teddy bear as part of a habitat study session, asked the kids to name it and they chose Mohammad – one boy says he chose it because that is his name. According to the BBC piece, “It is seen as an insult to Islam to attempt to make an image of the Prophet Muhammad.” The offense is punishable by jail time and a fine.

Now, the U.S. Congress is considering a bill that seeks to study “violent radicalization” and “homegrown terrorism.” “Violent radicalization” is defined as “the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change.”

The process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance….change.

I look forward to seeing the cabinets define the process – what steps it covers, and then, of course, the definition of extremist. Could all be in the bill – chalk it up to my to-do list of what to check.

What I most get from that definition is a fear of change, because – if you read it carefully, not even violence is unacceptable. Only ideologically-based violence. So, if violence is random or for defense or based in the Constitution, say? It’s not a problem?

My head hurts.

Anyway, with that bill as a law, could people who name their teddy bears Muhammad be targeted here, depending on where they’re found?

Sounds crazy, but then so does the case with the teacher in Khartoum. Also – how do you tell a child that you can be named for the prophet, and you are live flesh and blood, but no inanimate object can? I understand the part about no images – some Orthodox Jews follow that too in regard to all human images. They won’t have figurines in their home either and no human images on synagogues etc.

So I guess if I respect that, I should respect the teddy bear situation too. The thing is, the children chose the name. So the tenet isn’t being passed down to them – or is it? The school is Christian, the kids are not.

I don’t know. But when common sense loses out, it’s never a good thing. There’s just no way it was right to put this woman in jail, for goodness sakes.

OK – end of ramble.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 11:17 am November 29th, 2007 in Congress, Education, Foreign Affairs, Government, Politics, Religion, Social Issues 

Comments

7 Responses to “(Updated) Teacher allegedly insults Islam but could teddy bears named Muhammad be suspect under Violent Radicalization prevention bill?”

  1. 1 Robin on November 29th, 2007 1:36 pm

    I caught part of this story, on the news last night. These people are just plain crazy for punishing the teacher over a name of a teddy bear. Really??? Couldn’t someone just politely inform her that she couldn’t use that name, and suggest another name she could use? But… I guess that would just be too easy.

  2. 2 Jill Miller Zimon on November 29th, 2007 5:47 pm

    Hi Robin – thanks for commenting and reading. I’ve read that she’s been found guilty of insulting Islam and will serve 10 days in jail (the sentence was for 15 but she’s been in there for five already) and then deported. Her attorney wanted to appeal but her place of employment doesn’t want an appeal. I’m not sure what’s next – I’m following the BBC and the Guardian for this story.

  3. 3 Some Sudanese want British teacher dead | Writes Like She Talks on November 30th, 2007 11:10 am

    [...] (Updated) Teacher allegedly insults Islam but could teddy bears named Muhammad be suspect under Viol… [...]

  4. 4 Keith Simpson on December 2nd, 2007 2:38 am

    This comment has been edited for profanity and obscenity:

    Give me the chance to insult bleeding Islam…and all religions; I HATE religion!
    Mine was Catholicism until I woke up.
    Why does [anyone] need to go peddling her wares in a country like Sudan anyway!
    Leave them all where they are at, luvvy; in the Dark Ages in their mud huts [...]
    Get yerself back to the ‘Pool!

  5. 5 Jill Miller Zimon on December 2nd, 2007 10:02 am

    Keith – You feel pretty strongly there. Thanks for reading and good luck. What’s “‘Pool” – Liverpool?

  6. 6 Remains of the Day, 12/7/07 | Writes Like She Talks on December 7th, 2007 5:32 pm

    [...] 13. Scott Bakalar at the Wom Blog and Jeff Hess on something I anticipated about here. [...]

  7. 7 Lieberman promotes expansion of online censorship in name of fighting terrorism | Writes Like She Talks on May 25th, 2008 8:08 pm

    [...] months ago, I wrote about how, under a bill proposed last November (HR 1955, passed by the House but not yet by the Senate) [...]

Leave a Reply




"));