X Close

The new Inquisition must never win There is more at stake in the case of Batley Grammar than the fate of one teacher

The Batley protestors need a lesson in free speech (Photo by Christopher Furlong/Getty Images)

The Batley protestors need a lesson in free speech (Photo by Christopher Furlong/Getty Images)


March 29, 2021   4 mins

Picture the scene: an idyllic summer landscape populated by those much-loved icons of goodwill, the Care Bears. These instantly recognisable figures, fluffy and colourful and surrounded by butterflies and tiny floating hearts, are indulging in a rare bout of mischief.

One is smashing up a laptop with a hobnailed club. One is dangling on a swing between two freshly hanged corpses. Another is idly reclining on a bed of skulls, while a pair are greeting each other by shaking the hands of two amputated arms. Nearby, one of their friends is having sex with a decapitated head. All are grinning in that cute little Care Bear way.

The Care Bears Movie was one of the first films I ever saw at the cinema, so you can imagine how traumatic it is for me to contemplate my childhood heroes engaged in such wanton depravity. Still, the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo isn’t known for going easy on its targets, and if I’m offended by their Care Bears cartoon I can always choose not to subscribe.

This particular image appeared in an issue last September, and was satirising the practitioners of what has become known as “cancel culture”. The censors of our time, the artist reminded us, are acting au nom du “bien”. People are harassed and threatened, livelihoods and reputations obliterated, and all by those who believe themselves to be allied with the angels. Their language is that of “inclusivity” and “compassion”, even though their ruthlessness and intolerance betray the insincerity of their stated goals — or, at the very least, the way in which self-righteousness can blind people to the evil they commit in the name of a noble cause.

The furore at Batley Grammar School in West Yorkshire is the most recent example of how the lexicon of “social justice” has been weaponised in the name of progress. A teacher who had shown a caricature of the Prophet Mohammed — either from Charlie Hebdo or the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten (reports differ) — has been suspended for causing offence, and has now gone into hiding. Protesters outside the school have stated that they will not disperse until he is sacked.

Given that blasphemy laws no longer exist in the UK, these protestors have largely couched their complaints in terms of “safety and wellbeing”. On Friday, a man arrogantly claiming to speak on behalf of “the Muslim community” read out a statement in which the school authorities were accused of failing in their “duty of safeguarding”, and the teacher himself was charged with “threatening and provocative” behaviour. The Muslim Council of Britain has deployed similar tactics, suggesting that the teacher “created a hostile atmosphere”.

As much as I prefer to take people at their word, it seems unlikely to me that the protestors or the MCB seriously believe that the children’s safety has been compromised by a Religious Studies lesson about free speech. Certainly the pupils don’t appear to agree with those who are speaking on their behalf, which is why some of them have created an online petition to have their teacher reinstated.

What’s striking, though, is that despite all their talk of “safeguarding”, the protestors seem to be oblivious to a far more dangerous trend: that as a result of the various Islamist terrorist attacks in France in recent years — from the massacre at the Charlie Hebdo offices in January 2015 to the beheading of schoolteacher Samuel Paty last October — the right to criticise and ridicule religion has been increasingly under threat.

It isn’t simply the prospect of violent retaliation; it is the climate of intimidation that is fomented by the kind of protests we have seen in recent days. Cancel culture is sustained predominately by self-censorship, by those who see the consequences to others when they step out of line. After the events at Batley Grammar, how many teachers are likely to include the Charlie Hebdo cartoons in their lessons now?

Yet there has never been a more pressing time to engage with these issues in the classroom. If I were a teacher of Religious Studies, I would find it difficult to justify ignoring the question of the perceived conflict between religious faith and free speech, or not to discuss the murders of Samuel Paty and the satirists of Charlie Hebdo. While there is nothing wrong with acknowledging the potential offence that depictions of the Prophet Mohammed might cause, it is not a sufficient reason to avoid the topic altogether. I am sure that many pupils are disturbed by the anti-Semitic Nazi propaganda cartoons that are routinely included in history textbooks, but they serve an important function in the learning process. We know very little about the context in which the images of Mohammed were shown at Batley Grammar, but it is implausible that the teacher’s motives were anything other than educational.

Still, the protest itself is not all that surprising. As someone who attended a convent school as a child, I am all too aware that religious conservatives are often displeased at the contents of school curricula. When I became a teacher, there were often complaints from parents who disapproved of certain books or plays, either on grounds of religious belief or sheer prudishness. Angela Carter’s novel Wise Children was a particular bugbear for some parents, although at no point was the possibility of substituting texts or withdrawing pupils from class ever entertained. They had a right to be offended, but their offence was their own problem. I even taught briefly at a school run by an evangelical Christian who attempted to prohibit the teaching of novels that featured gay characters. It’s the reason I resigned from my post.

Teachers cannot be in the business of tailoring their pedagogic practices in order to appease the most intolerant elements of society. Nor should we be indulging those who feel that their particular worldview should be imposed on society at large. That is why there is more at stake in the case of Batley Grammar than the fate of this one teacher. With the immense publicity this event has generated, the outcome — whatever it is — will no doubt set an important precedent. If the school continues to capitulate to the demands of protesters, it will have a chilling effect on teachers in other schools who might wish to explore tendentious subjects.

But in the coming days, that won’t prevent the usual politicians, commentators and activists from emerging from their dens in Care-a-Lot, thirsting for the blood they can smell in the air. They will be saying things like “freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequences”, and other mantras that act as surrogates for thought. They will assert that the teacher is “Islamophobic” and “hateful”, because they are invariably convinced of their own telepathic capabilities. They will accuse the teacher of “bullying” as they sidle up to theocrats calling for his ruination.

Already the protestors have demanded that he face criminal prosecution for “stirring up hatred”, a favoured formulation of today’s “progressives”. Cancel culture is the Inquisition of the digital age; it is how blasphemers are subdued, whether religious or secular. We mustn’t let the Care Bears win.


Andrew Doyle is a comedian and creator of the Twitter persona Titania McGrath

andrewdoyle_com

Join the discussion


Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber


To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

388 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Peter Scott
Peter Scott
3 years ago

The whole debate about this issue misses the central point.
The RoP, unlike most other belief-systems on Earth, is very aggressively unable to tolerate any other worldview than its own. This is codified and enjoined in its own sacred documents.
With discomfort, most agnostics, atheists, Baha’i-adherents, Buddhists, Christians, Confucians, Hindus, Jains, Shinto-believers and Zoroastrians can live with each other without feeling the need to put one another to death and impose their principles on their neighbours and fellow human beings.
Not the RoP, whether in the 7th century A.D. or the Middle Ages, or the 17th century; or now again since the fall of the Shah of Persia in 1979.
Where it is in a tiny minority in a given human society, it keeps its most pugnacious convictions and impulses to itself.
Once it becomes a sizeable minority it goes on the warpath.

George Bruce
George Bruce
3 years ago
Reply to  Peter Scott

this is what our useless politicians, institutions and media class are completely unable to understand. 

You are more generous than I would be, Fraser. Most of them know what is going to happen. They just hope they will be dead or with enough money to escape, or will be able to point to past collaboration to receive a privileged status among the dhimmi.
The French book Sousmission by Laurent Obertone speculates a lot of them will convert.

George Bruce
George Bruce
3 years ago
Reply to  George Bruce

Reply to myself – sorry, the book is called Guerilla – completely different title.

Chris Waghorn
Chris Waghorn
3 years ago
Reply to  Peter Scott

Best comment here, and the most succinct by far. Thank you.

Dennis Boylon
Dennis Boylon
3 years ago
Reply to  Peter Scott

Is that true? The USA has been on a war path in the middle.east for decades for control of resources. The “civilized” West led two mass human slaughter wars with the largest death tolls in history. What exactly happened during the Shah’s reign after kicking Moseddegh from power in 1953? How did the Savak treat the citizens? Who put the shah in power in 1953 and why? When Bruce Laigen complained about his treatment to his captors during the hostage crises what did his captors tell him?

Hazel Pethig
Hazel Pethig
3 years ago
Reply to  Dennis Boylon

You’re conflating two completely different warpaths. There isn’t a civilisation in history that hasn’t slaughtered for control of resources. Not the same as killing for God.

Chris Wheatley
Chris Wheatley
3 years ago
Reply to  Hazel Pethig

An American winner of the Nobel Prize wrote a song called, “With God On Our Side” which lists quite a lot wars fought by the Americans where God got a mention.
At government level, WWI was fought about resources but it was sold to the average soldier as a religious war; the Germans were evil and their religion was godless. Priests in 2014/5 persuaded the young men to go to fight for God. (reference available).

Last edited 3 years ago by Chris Wheatley
David Owsley
David Owsley
3 years ago
Reply to  Chris Wheatley

Gott ist mit uns

Vilde Chaye
Vilde Chaye
3 years ago
Reply to  Chris Wheatley

Having God on your side isn’t quite the same as making sure those with other gods by definition deserve to die.

Retanot King
Retanot King
3 years ago
Reply to  Chris Wheatley

Chris — You mean the soldiers were not told or couldn’t figure out for themselves that they were fighting fascism and national socialism, and saving liberal democracy capitalism from tyranny? We must have had millions of pretty dumb soldiers then trying to emulate the Crusades — just like today we have millions of dumb wokes trying to emulate the Inquisition with their cancel attacks! Such an inversion of history I say.

Last edited 3 years ago by Retanot King
Robin Banks
Robin Banks
3 years ago
Reply to  Retanot King

Retanot King – with respect, fascism and national socialism are one and the same.

Rick Schmidt
Rick Schmidt
3 years ago
Reply to  Chris Wheatley

WWI was about resources peripherally but moreover about Euro-royal family delusional egos, Kings, Czar, Kaiser and that political structure was shattered in the aftermath.

Glyn Reed
Glyn Reed
3 years ago
Reply to  Chris Wheatley

Please don’t tell me you have a History degree.

Paul N
Paul N
3 years ago
Reply to  Hazel Pethig

It doesn’t much matter to the dead in whose name they were killed. They are still just as dead.

graham9
graham9
3 years ago
Reply to  Hazel Pethig

Crusades?????

Simon J Hassell
Simon J Hassell
3 years ago
Reply to  Dennis Boylon

Maybe check this website out and see if you can blame the West for all the atrocities happening around the globe. Let us know.
The largest mass slaughters were the systemic genocide of Jews et al by the Nazis and Stalin in the name of communism. They far outweigh the death tolls of both wars.
Islam: The Politically Incorrect Truth (thereligionofpeace.com)

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago

I think you will find Mao killed even more in the ludicrously named “Great Leap Forward” 1959-62.

Christin
Christin
3 years ago

Indeed. He’s the most successful butcher in the history of humanity, except for Islam. Islam has been estimated to have murdered over 300,000,000 people in its violent conquests since 632. The slaughter of infidels is ordered in its screed. The mountain of victims in India is ignored by historians.

clem alford
clem alford
3 years ago
Reply to  Christin

Millions of Hindus, Buddhists and other beliefs were butchered by Islam. The Islam formulated in Medina by the SWORD abrogated the peaceful Meccan religion.
(1) Political Islam Explained by Bill Warner | Sanjay Dixit – YouTube
(1) Bill Warner Why We Are Afraid: 1400 Years of Fear – French Sub-titles – YouTube

clem alford
clem alford
3 years ago
Reply to  Christin

Indeed. I posed a similar comment earlier but it has been removed!!!

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Christin

What a pity we never razed Mecca to the ground as the Romans had done to both Carthage & Corinth in the same year, 607 AUC or 146 BC.

We certainly had the ability in the 19th & early 20th centuries. Only about 40 miles inland from the Red Sea port of Jeddah it would have an easy operation for the Royal Navy and suitable British perhaps even Indian Army troops.
History would have rightly rejoiced.

Last edited 3 years ago by Charles Stanhope
Joseph Berger
Joseph Berger
3 years ago

I think you meant “razed” as in destroyed, not “raised” as in elevated.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Joseph Berger

Yes, I can never get the edit thing to work!

However now have a GGC to hand and can sort it out.

Last edited 3 years ago by Charles Stanhope
graham9
graham9
3 years ago

And add Rome to the list as well!

joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago

There’s always the future

Nicky Samengo-Turner
Nicky Samengo-Turner
2 years ago

Hear hear!

Retanot King
Retanot King
3 years ago
Reply to  Christin

But but but, Islam killed all those people with a lot of good intentions! Islam wanted to save the world. All my white woke activist friends have converted to Islam now, repenting their sins of privilege. That is a seal of approval. And I am sooo progressive, morally supreme, and pro-science.

graham9
graham9
3 years ago
Reply to  Christin

Sorry Christianity (in all its forms) wins hands down! I did my thesis at University on Religion and War and my statistical put Chritians at number 1 spot (and this is because we cheated and started the race before the Muslims as usual!) and by a long margin over Muslims. Basically, religions (all of them) are used and abused by politiciansl etc to control the masses. Marx got one thing right “Religion is the opium of the masses”.

Glyn Reed
Glyn Reed
3 years ago
Reply to  Christin

Don’t you think this should be taught in schools and universities? It might help to stem the tidal wave of unjustified but tenderly cultivated grievance among some ethnic minorities that is threatening to overwhelm our society.

roger dog
roger dog
3 years ago

And that wee fellah in Cambodia, Pol Pot.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  roger dog

Only 3 million, not even a bronze!

James Newman
James Newman
3 years ago

As dictators go he was very much tin.

Vilde Chaye
Vilde Chaye
3 years ago
Reply to  roger dog

not for lack of trying, and only because the country he tyrannized had a small population.

Glyn Reed
Glyn Reed
3 years ago

We can only hope that the Great Reset that the once liberal democracies of the west are now bent on – apparently – will not be quite a horrific.

Mark Preston
Mark Preston
3 years ago
Reply to  Dennis Boylon

The “civilized” West led two mass human slaughter wars with the largest death tolls in history.” – I’m pretty sure Mao and Stalin killed more people but then I only have a Ba in Modern History.

John Riordan
John Riordan
3 years ago
Reply to  Mark Preston

Nor do you need a history degree to know this either – speaking as one without a history degree who nonetheless knows you’re right without having to look it up.

clem alford
clem alford
3 years ago
Reply to  Mark Preston

No one is bcontinuing to kill in the name of Stalin, or Napoleon or Mao.
They do for MD and Islam
YouTube(1) Bill Warner Why We Are Afraid: 1400 Years of Fear – French Sub-titles –

Vilde Chaye
Vilde Chaye
3 years ago
Reply to  Mark Preston

If you think Mao is a creature of the West, you should return your “modern history” BA ASAP.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Vilde Chaye

Explain.

Retanot King
Retanot King
3 years ago

What Vilde is saying is that Mao and Lenin and Stalin are not the products of the enlightenment, liberalism, democracy, and capitalism (i.e. the West, as it evolved in the past 400 years). In case you have missed it, Mao and Stalin terminated capitalism, hated liberalism, and preferred autocratic rule over democracy.

Last edited 3 years ago by Retanot King
Joseph Berger
Joseph Berger
3 years ago
Reply to  Retanot King

very good response to a confused person

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Joseph Berger

Were not Lenin, Stalin & Mao all disciples of Marx?
As a fully assimilated German Jew was he therefore not of the ‘West’?
The so called Enlightenment is only one part of the West’s story, or do we now expunge the interesting bits such as Marx and Hitler to name but two?

Last edited 3 years ago by Charles Stanhope
Deb Grant
Deb Grant
3 years ago
Reply to  Mark Preston

Weren’t those wars in the West sanctioned by democratically elected Governments, that is, by the public.
Religious and tribal terrorism isn’t sanctioned by the public.

Dennis Boylon
Dennis Boylon
3 years ago
Reply to  Mark Preston

Did they? How many did Stalin and Mao actually kill? How many of Stalin’s were WW2 deaths?Who counted them? How did they count them? How did they die? Did they gas them? Did they just starve? Did they die of lack of shelter? Lack of medical care? The refugees from US led wars in Iraq, Syria, and Libya… how have their deaths been counted? Does the “civilized” West even consider them? Or is it their own fault they can’t find food, water, and shelter after their cities have been turned to rubble? My point is not to say who is worse but to ask are we really that different? How many are about to die in the West’s next round of mass human slaughter? You say you are a student of human history. Can’t you see it is coming as the West tries once again to subjugate the World’s masses? It is at our doorstep. I would suggest we all prepare.

Last edited 3 years ago by Dennis Boylon
Vijay Kant
Vijay Kant
3 years ago
Reply to  Dennis Boylon

There is always a guy in the room who misses the point, and then goes on to argue a different point just because he wants an argument!

Last edited 3 years ago by Vijay Kant
Martin Adams
Martin Adams
3 years ago
Reply to  Dennis Boylon

Whataboutery.

Dennis Boylon
Dennis Boylon
3 years ago
Reply to  Martin Adams

Humans are violent. There aren’t any exceptions

Fred Atkinstalk
Fred Atkinstalk
3 years ago
Reply to  Dennis Boylon

The Jains ?

roger dog
roger dog
3 years ago
Reply to  Dennis Boylon

But not in the name of ‘religion’.

Vilde Chaye
Vilde Chaye
3 years ago
Reply to  Dennis Boylon

Not only is your comment inane on its face, it also has nothing to do with the subject being addressed.

Retanot King
Retanot King
3 years ago
Reply to  Vilde Chaye

It’s Vilde Chaye! Howdy bro. Still at Harry’s place?

Dennis Boylon
Dennis Boylon
3 years ago
Reply to  Vilde Chaye

OP was judging muslims as the “other”. Rather disgusting IMO. Also brought up how Iran descended into chaos after the Shah. Which is a bit ripe and should be called out. Humans are violent. The West is no exception to that. Only point I was making.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Vilde Chaye

“Not only is your comment inane on its face”

Shouldn’t that be ‘on the face of it’?

Vilde Chaye
Vilde Chaye
3 years ago
Reply to  Dennis Boylon

Not to mention that Japan was responsible for the Pacific portion of the Second World War.

Retanot King
Retanot King
3 years ago
Reply to  Dennis Boylon

Dennis Boylon — Exactly which resources does the USA “control”? Facts please, and leave that debunked narrative behind.
Mossadegh was happily handing Iran over to the Soviets. Which history are you reading? The dominant hstory? Mossadegh wanted 90% of the oil revenue while offering nothing in return, while the oil companies — namely the only people who knew how to get the oil out and had the money to do that — were prepared to settle and give 75% of the revenue to Iran. For a measly 15%, Mossadegh destroyed Iran’s nascent democracy by going in bed with the communists, and he ushered in a dictatorship.

Last edited 3 years ago by Retanot King
Dennis Boylon
Dennis Boylon
3 years ago
Reply to  Retanot King

Iran didn’t have the right to decide how to use its own resources? Why couldn’t Western corporations just pull out and cut its losses? Mossadegh was elected!!!!! Who put the Shah in power and immediately turned over Iran’s oil interests back to Western corporations? What did the late Bruce Laingen’s captors tell him while he was a hostage? Were they really simply crazed muslim fanatics who hated the West for no reason? But thanks for at least addressing that. Most Westerners just refuse to go there. It upsets their sensibilities.

Last edited 3 years ago by Dennis Boylon
Andy Martin
Andy Martin
3 years ago
Reply to  Dennis Boylon

‘Dennis’ – if you think the Ayatollah Khomeini and the brutal theocratic regime he brought into power – a regime that is still making the lives of most Iranians miserable was an improvement on the Shah, then you are either an ignoramus, or an Islamist.

Deb Grant
Deb Grant
3 years ago
Reply to  Dennis Boylon

Bad deeds back then don’t excuse bad deeds today.

Dennis Boylon
Dennis Boylon
3 years ago
Reply to  Deb Grant

I agree. That goes for everyone. Humans are extremely violent. They fight for power, control, and dominance. No exceptions. Western peoples live in a sort of bubble world were they don’t have to come to terms with their own violence. They send their poor young out to do it for them while they look at their TV screens and bask in their “superior culture”. Lol

Jennifer Britton
Jennifer Britton
3 years ago
Reply to  Peter Scott

Well said!

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Peter Scott

Brilliant, thank you so much.

I am however astonished it hasn’t been removed like so many others today. It can only be a matter of time,
as UnHerd is now but a shadow of its former self.

Retanot King
Retanot King
3 years ago

How is UnHerd a shadow of its former self? Because now it allows counter-narratives?

stephen f.
stephen f.
3 years ago
Reply to  Retanot King

No, counter-narratives have always been “allowed”, until this new regime, which removes posts. Unsaid is the new normal.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Retanot King

Don’t you recall the former Disqus system of discussion?

Galeti Tavas
Galeti Tavas
3 years ago
Reply to  Peter Scott

I disagree, your hatred of Religion, very use of the passive aggressive ,ROP’, shows you are a bigot and despise Islam, and I assume all religion. But then I respect Islam, and find Charlie Hebdo utter evil and vile, so we come from opposite directions. Atheists have made killing an art. Atheism has killed more, and more horribly, in the world, and modern world to a 100 to one those killed for religion struggle.

Hit* er was an atheist, the fools who say it was Catholic are just people with an anti religion agenda – but Pole Pot, Stalin, Mao, and many smaller atheist tyrants killed 100+ million in the last 100 years.

But no point in bothering trying to discuss this hate speech disguised as ‘Free Speech’ as everything Charlie Hebdo does is Hate Speech, and if you cannot understand that you do not see the real world.

If the above teacher gets his I have zero sympathy. The hundreds of teachers who had their lives destroyed by Liberal cancelers for the most innocuous things, them I sympathize with.

This comment is being moderated so edited to try to take out the spelling of Hi**le r to see if that was it.

Last edited 3 years ago by Galeti Tavas
Vee Gun
Vee Gun
3 years ago
Reply to  Galeti Tavas

The lack of belief in a deity has killed nobody. None of the people you cited killed in the name of atheism, they killed for their political doctrine.
Your assumptions about a poster tell everyone how bigoted you are. Are you Sunni or Shia?

Andy Martin
Andy Martin
3 years ago
Reply to  Vee Gun

Well Sonny skied into a tree and is long dead, though Cher is still alive.
I got you babe.

Derek M
Derek M
3 years ago
Reply to  Galeti Tavas

If the above teacher gets his I have zero sympathy.” – Charming

Adrian Maxwell
Adrian Maxwell
3 years ago
Reply to  Galeti Tavas

You are quite right, non believers killed a lot of people. But the simple Q is did their state of non belief direct, suggest, encourage, order or demand the killings? Your analysis, the canard that an early to mid 20th century lunatic was an atheist, fell away years ago. I’m surprised you still think that analysis stands up.

Robin Banks
Robin Banks
3 years ago
Reply to  Adrian Maxwell

I think it more likely that their excesses were were not hampered by a belief in something bigger than themselves.

David Hartlin
David Hartlin
3 years ago
Reply to  Galeti Tavas

Hilter wasn’t an atheist, he was a God. Same for Stalin, Pol Pot and Mao,they were not atheist, they were wanna be Gods with their own ideology’s.

Retanot King
Retanot King
3 years ago
Reply to  Galeti Tavas

Hetlir (censored) had a God and that was the German folk. Stalin and Mao had their own God, that of the revolutionary proletariat. There is little to differentiate communism and national socialism from a form of non-deist religion.

joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago
Reply to  Galeti Tavas

You have proved your substance, or lack of it, as a human being by admiring the vilest, most violent race that ever existed on earth. Hopefully though they have had their day and will fade into oblivion.

Martin Adams
Martin Adams
3 years ago
Reply to  Peter Scott

Thank you, Mr Scott. An excellent and incisive summary of the core issues that arise directly from the nature of this belief-system.
The name means “submission”; and ostensibly that is submission to God. However, the nature of the system, as can can be seen very clearly in its sacred texts (I’ve read a good number of them), means that if this system comes into conflict with another, it will be the other that has to submit. “Pugnacious convictions and impulses”. Thank you! For that’s exactly what they are.

Hannah Cohen
Hannah Cohen
3 years ago
Reply to  Peter Scott

This is a massive obfuscation of history. The whole of Christianity in Europe is a tableau of religious bloodshed, whether we’re talking Christians vs. pagans, vs. Jews, vs. Cathars, Catholics vs. Protestants, etc.
Hindus vs. Muslims in India, the suppression of Christianity in Asia, etc. The real problem is that all religions breed intolerance and dehumanize people not of the majority religion in any particular area. I would agree that in our current era, Islam definitely has taken the intolerance torch and sprinted the furthest with it.

Saul D
Saul D
3 years ago
Reply to  Hannah Cohen

Ideologies are the most dangerous of all human inventions – whether religions, cults or political theories. Anything that claims to have ‘an unassailable truth’ is dangerous because believers start to feel they have a moral obligation to silence and remove those who disagree or challenge them. By warping morality, great evil can be done by otherwise ordinary people.

Retanot King
Retanot King
3 years ago
Reply to  Saul D

Exactly. That is why the woke ideologues love Islam and spiritualism. Their ideology is based on self-righteousness and a sense of moral supremacy where any challenge is met by cries of blasphemy. The Woke Religion is just the manifestation of a new (non-deist) religion in the 21st century. Robyn D’Angelo, BLM, Greta, are all the new Mohammads.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Hannah Cohen

O for those happy centuries of the glorious Pax Romana, when hardly anyone gave a ‘fig’ about religion.

Derek M
Derek M
3 years ago

Not so great for the slaves, women or the conquered peoples of course but hey ho

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Derek M

Slaves were better off in Roman society than in any other society in history.

As to woman, they had greater legal rights than any women in the UK until the 1880’s.

The “conquered peoples” were almost invariably turned into Romans. What better fate could they ask for?

Forget the Hollywood depiction of Rome, it is utter bilge, but it does make amusing films I’ll grant you!

Last edited 3 years ago by Charles Stanhope
Ian Wigg
Ian Wigg
3 years ago

Mostly correct but I’ll think you’ll find that slaves in Saxon society were better off. The rules regarding their welfare were extremely strict.

Walter Lantz
Walter Lantz
3 years ago
Reply to  Peter Scott

I agree with what you said but I would add that a critical mass of intolerance cannot be achieved without the failure, either by design or by omission, of the host nation to preserve the very ideals that make them attractive in the first place such as freedom of expression which annoyingly to some must naturally include the freedom to be offended or insulted.
Western democracies to one degree or another have abandoned ‘one size fits all’ rights and freedoms under the illusion that it is somehow xenophobic or racist not to offer a ‘customer satisfaction guaranteed’ bespoke immigration experience.
Aside from the usual well-publicized nonsense as demonstrated by the Batsh*t Grammar case I also think the losers are also among the RoP adherents who immigrated precisely because they believed they could not only live their lives peacefully and remain true to their faith but also leave the strictly interpreted stone-age superstition, intolerance and sectarian squabbling back in the old country.

Last edited 3 years ago by Walter Lantz
Richard Burgess
Richard Burgess
3 years ago
Reply to  Peter Scott

For goodness sake, are you finding some equivalence?

Sacred Baloney
Sacred Baloney
3 years ago

Environmentalists have a God — and that is mother nature. Any deviation of how nature may be, is an unforgivable sin. And that is an irrational belief system which may not be questioned.

Peter Scott
Peter Scott
3 years ago
Reply to  Peter Scott

“Christianity is just as murderous….”
Nowadays?
Which Christian sect has lately been committing massacres? = The Baptists, the Congregationalists, the Roman Catholics, the Greek or Russian Orthodox?
How many murders and threats of violence have been perpetrated by Anglicans lately?
Please specify instances, for I have not seen these reported in the media and I do want to keep up-to-date in my thinking.

Fintan Power
Fintan Power
3 years ago
Reply to  Peter Scott

Well said Peter Scott. Very well put indeed.

marrecselous
marrecselous
3 years ago
Reply to  Peter Scott

What a load of rubbish that belies your ignorance of world history. In the 17th century Europe was tearing itself apart over religious differences while the Ottomans let Christians practice their religion in peace. The cancel culture crowd is spewing nonsense once again, but so are you, and that only adds fuel to the fire.

Last edited 3 years ago by marrecselous
Niobe Hunter
Niobe Hunter
3 years ago
Reply to  marrecselous

As long as they paid a special tax, and were very careful not to offend against any of the conquerors religious laws.

Of course, there was also the little matter of removing gifted Christian children from their parents, forcibly converting them to the one true faith, and employing them in the service of the empire. The girls went into the harem.

marrecselous
marrecselous
3 years ago
Reply to  Niobe Hunter

Still ludicrous to assert that “Christians […] can live with each other without feeling the need to put one another to death and impose their principles on their neighbours and fellow human beings.”

Vinnie J
Vinnie J
3 years ago
Reply to  Peter Scott

And we in the West, particularly Europe stand in the way of this religious juggernaut as it tramples through our traditions and beliefs as they have always done with not a single government standing against them for fear of being labelled racist or Islamophobic, which in itself isn’t that far from the truth as we should all be very very afraid and it it is not an irrational fear, it is a very real threat indeed.

Helen Murray
Helen Murray
3 years ago
Reply to  Peter Scott

What does RoP stand for?

Alexei A
Alexei A
3 years ago
Reply to  Helen Murray

Religion of Peace

Andrew Fisher
Andrew Fisher
3 years ago
Reply to  Peter Scott

What is the RoP? It is slightly ludicrous to claim that Christianity is intrinsically more tolerant of other beliefs than Islam. Hundreds of years of history belie this. Paganism was ruthlessly supressed by Christian churches, as were the Cathars, Lollards, numerous other sects, Hindus in Goa, and of course Muslims and Jews were massacred in large numbers during the 1st Crusade.

We can also see examples of Buddhist nations being extremely intolerant such as in Myanmar today.

What happened in the West which over time made a huge difference in outlook was the Enlightenment. This was a radical philosophical and moral shift which is far too little understood in our education system. Over time this changed our basic moral assumptions.

I am not a believer of any kind, but the main problem we face is the political weaponisation of religion, whose actual tenets are often contradictory and open to interpretation. Islam has far more prestige in the Muslim world than secular governments, so extreme movements can be much more successful by taking on the mantle of Islam, rather than say Marxism.

Vikram Sharma
Vikram Sharma
3 years ago

This should become a test case for our values as a society. The teacher was teaching: explaining things in context and drawing up larger lessons for learning. Britain made a big mistake in how it cowed to the burning of Rushdie’s Satanic Verses. Instead of taking a stand, we tried appeasement then.
Every act of appeasement convinces the fanatics that a)they are right in demanding special status, b) Britain is racist and admits it by acting on their complaints (the poor teacher has been punished already, no one has bothered to hear his side), c) if they threaten, Britain will fold, and d) the whole thing alienates non-Muslims from a large section of British population.
I hope people don’t simply sigh and make another cup of tea. This could/should be a turning point.

G Harris
G Harris
3 years ago
Reply to  Vikram Sharma

Well said.

It’s a small thing, but people on here could also sign the petition linked to here in the piece.

Penny Gallagher
Penny Gallagher
3 years ago
Reply to  G Harris

I already have.

Dennis Lewis
Dennis Lewis
3 years ago
Reply to  G Harris

I signed the petition two days ago.

Jane Pritchard
Jane Pritchard
3 years ago
Reply to  Vikram Sharma

I agree. Religion or more particularly Islam is not the only scenario for the current cancel culture with threats and even violence. The government is mealy mouthed brainwashed or worse afraid to stand up and be counted. Petitions are a symptom of mob rule but it is something and most importantly signing a petition gives us a peaceful voice.

Last edited 3 years ago by Jane Pritchard
Jennifer Britton
Jennifer Britton
3 years ago
Reply to  Vikram Sharma

Perhaps the British government is afraid of the offended community, or at least those who claim to speak for the community, which community may itself be afraid of those who claim to speak for them.

Ellie Gladiataurus
Ellie Gladiataurus
3 years ago

The current scaredy-cat Conservative Government is an embarrassment to the UK. But I fear that a Labour Government would actually be worse.

Jennifer Britton
Jennifer Britton
3 years ago

Perhaps the government is rightly scared. Perhaps the offended community is rightly scared of those who claim to speak for them. Beheadings and stabbings and vehicular attacks are scary, are they not? But fear is what those who want to control society count on.

A society cannot live in fear forever without negative consequences. Science and vaccinations can dispatch a pandemic causing virus and fear of it. However, all the science in the world cannot remove religious intolerance. Only liberal education backed by strong social and governmental support for it will root out religious fear and animosity and create healthy socialization. Absent those things, the UK government should be afraid.

Ralph Windsor
Ralph Windsor
3 years ago

Your fears are well founded. Labour has abandoned its old demographic in favour of new ones.

joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago

Most definitely, they would open the borders and let more of the bas**rods in.

Simon J Hassell
Simon J Hassell
3 years ago
Reply to  Vikram Sharma

Yes, it’s somewhat akin to negotiating with terrorists. It merely encourages the next demand.

Galeti Tavas
Galeti Tavas
3 years ago
Reply to  Vikram Sharma

I disagree about the teacher’s motives entirely. I think he was having fun being all edgy and getting in some hate speech because it is allowed against religion.

“We know very little about the context in which the images of Mohammed were shown at Batley Grammar, but it is implausible that the teacher’s motives were anything other than educational.”

OH YEA? Then how do you know it was implausible? My guess is he was working from the Liberal agenda of attacking religion. If ‘Hate Speech’ is in the perception of the one who feels something is hate speech, and that seems to be the law of the land, then I felt this was Hate Speech he made by displaying these. And so it was hate speech.

I am most likely the most Right Wing poster here, but I happen to respect Islam, so am not so bigoted as most have been trained to be. I think Charlie Hebdo is pure hate speech. Intended as it, and is it. And I think this teacher committed intentional hate speech in doing what he did.

John Lewis
John Lewis
3 years ago
Reply to  Galeti Tavas

Surely you are aware that the liberal agenda for attacking religion does have one significant exception – or do you find that implausible?

Last Jacobin
Last Jacobin
3 years ago
Reply to  John Lewis

Some of the reluctance of liberals to criticise Islam could be due to them not wishing to appear to give support to people who criticise Islam because they are racist.
If a Muslim woman is suffering under a misogynistic ideology it doesn’t help to tell her she’s also a dangerous threat to civilisation who should be deported, for example.

Sacred Baloney
Sacred Baloney
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

I don’t know about liberals, but I guarantee you that the reason the left is reluctant to criticize Islam is because the left needs the support of west-hating Muslims to arrive at power. The left always hated religion. But now it is in love with Islam. It is rash opportunism. You will never find an ounce of moral principle and integrity in that crowd.

kathleen carr
kathleen carr
3 years ago
Reply to  Galeti Tavas

He ( and whoever arranged this course which apparently has been taught for 2 years without incident) is a complete idiot-but what a price to pay-he and his family will probably need protection for the rest of their lives. Other people who have come to Britain ( including my family ), Christians and other religions abide by the ‘When in Rome’ principle , this newish element of Islam does not-they even murdered that shopkeeper for wishing his customers Happy Easter-was he committing hate speech?Why Britain cannot welcome oppressed Christians from Africa , Middle-East and countries such as Pakistan instead of fundamentalist muslims I don’t know.

Last Jacobin
Last Jacobin
3 years ago
Reply to  kathleen carr

The guy who was murdered was a Muslim who proved Muslims can live well within a multicultural society. The murder was due to religious extremism not Islam, per se.

William Murphy
William Murphy
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

The murdered shopkeeper was one of the peaceful Ahmadi sect, whom many Muslim do not even recognise as part of the Islamic community. The Ahmadi have a huge annual gathering near Alton in Hampshire every year (COVID permitting). It is much safer holding it in Jane Austen country than in any Islamic state.

Ralph Windsor
Ralph Windsor
3 years ago
Reply to  William Murphy

Or in Batley perhaps.

kathleen carr
kathleen carr
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

And his murder showed that others can’t-I said newish element of their faith. I don’t understand different groupings but perhaps something like the Reformation?

Ralph Windsor
Ralph Windsor
3 years ago
Reply to  kathleen carr

If Islam is operating on the same timetable as Christianity we will have to wait several hundred years for its reformation and a bit longer still for its enlightenment.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Ralph Windsor

Yes ‘they’ are in about the year 1389, just after the Peasant’s Revolt.

No chance!

Last edited 3 years ago by Charles Stanhope
Derek M
Derek M
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

I can’t think of anyone murdered in the UK recently by a religious extremist from any other religion. I must have missed all those Mormon hit-teams trying to kill the cast of The Book of Mormon

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

So conflict between Shias and Shias ( Al Sadr and Al Khoei ), betweeen, Salaafis and those Muslims they call apostates and between Wahabis and Shias in the Middle East and Pakistan, is not due to Islam ?
Post 2003, 90% of Muslims were killed by other Muslims and Shias are still being killed in Pakistan.

Cheryl Jones
Cheryl Jones
3 years ago
Reply to  kathleen carr

How is he an ‘idiot’ for discussing the very important topics of free speech, satire, blasphemy and religious intolerance in BRITAIN? Charlie Hebdo cartoonists got slaughtered for the crime of drawing a cartoon, anyone who thinks cartoons deserve a death sentence is not someone who belongs in the West.

kathleen carr
kathleen carr
3 years ago
Reply to  Cheryl Jones

If you know someone has a bad temper you don’t provoke them . This subject is the ‘red rag to a bull’.It shouldn’t be but it is.Why successive governments in the West want to welcome people who wish the resident majority harm , I don’t know, but they do and ‘the law’ will arrest and harass anyone who opposes this policy.

joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago
Reply to  Cheryl Jones

Or indeed the world.

joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago
Reply to  kathleen carr

The government may be weak but the British people are not, if nothing is done to stop the terrorists murdering innocent people then the public will take it into their own hands, don’t judge the great British people by the weak government that think they lead them.

Andrew Thompson
Andrew Thompson
3 years ago
Reply to  Galeti Tavas

Go and have a lie down Sanford there’s a good boy

Derek M
Derek M
3 years ago
Reply to  Galeti Tavas

I am most likely the most Right Wing poster here”, well in ons sense probably

Brian Dorsley
Brian Dorsley
3 years ago
Reply to  Galeti Tavas

No words, no matter how offensive or blasphemous deserve violent or fatal retribution. And I say this as a man of faith. A religion that cannot peacefully withstand criticism is not a real religion.

Cheryl Jones
Cheryl Jones
3 years ago
Reply to  Galeti Tavas

As far as I can discern you are an example of the problem. Charlie Hebdo has been holding the line for free speech pretty much alone, even in the face of the most grotesque and unjustifiable violence. Time for all right-thinking people to back them up against the likes of you. Blasphemy is a victimless crime – and if Christians can handle it Muslims should get over themselves, grow a backbone and realise they live in BRITAIN not Saudi Arabia.

joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago
Reply to  Cheryl Jones

A virtual pat on the back to you, when are the British going to retaliate and claim back Britain from the scum, not too long in the future I think. Even a worm will turn.

joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago
Reply to  Galeti Tavas

Because he discussed cartoons, you utter moron. You’re already a self confessed terrorist lover. When you said the teacher deserves what he might have coming you are showing that you are a danger to the public.

Last Jacobin
Last Jacobin
3 years ago
Reply to  Vikram Sharma

The Home Office’s own report found ‘there are no grounds for asserting that Muslim or Pakistani-heritage men are disproportionately engaged in such crimes,’
This hasn’t been brushed under the carpet. It’s been widely (and often falsely) reported on and there have been many prosecutions and investigations. There is no doubt the victims were ignored and let down for years – in part because of societal and police class prejudice.
To use these cases to attack all Muslims is akin to using the systemic sexual and other abuses carried out by Priests, Nuns and other officials of the Catholic Church and Church of England to attack all Christians.

Andrew Thompson
Andrew Thompson
3 years ago
Reply to  Vikram Sharma

If they can get away with the systematic rap e of schoolgirls getting away with this will be child’s play

Last Jacobin
Last Jacobin
3 years ago

Like the Christian church systematically abused children? Tarring all Christians or Muslims with same brush as the worst of their faith is wrong and should be avoided.

Weyland Smith
Weyland Smith
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

Can’t wait to see the Islamic equivalent of Father Ted

Ralph Windsor
Ralph Windsor
3 years ago
Reply to  Weyland Smith

That would be an ecumenical matter.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

What about the Great Public Schools?

*This morning I heard Dixon of Dock Green saying that a ‘tsunami’ of allegations was about to hit the media.

* Radio4

joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

Why do the Muslim rapists only choose white schoolgirls though, I think that speaks for itself. If they were just abusers of all children, as you suggest the Christian church are, then there are more than enough of their own sort to choose from, given the way they breed.

Ralph Windsor
Ralph Windsor
3 years ago

Well, the Old Bill in that locality don’t seem too keen to be on either case.

Last edited 3 years ago by Ralph Windsor
Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago

Don’t forget 30 years of no prosecutions for FGM!

Adrian Maxwell
Adrian Maxwell
3 years ago
Reply to  Vikram Sharma

I quite agree. Also, Ive been reflecting on Peter Scott’s input. Whilst his analysis is right, I don’t agree with his statement of the central issue. For me the central issue is the craven cowardice of the school in question, the government and the West generally in the face of behaviour that is simply unacceptable and unwanted by the majority.

Last edited 3 years ago by Adrian Maxwell
joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago
Reply to  Vikram Sharma

Hear hear, so very well said.

David Bell
David Bell
3 years ago

Equating this case with your convent school experience is fallacious. We are talking islam here and that is a different kettle of fish entirely. Don’t expect to change opinions or minds on their side, the only question is how to deal with this growing problem. I see no other solution than to encourage those who don’t wish to conform to our values to find a more congenial country to reside in.

Dudden Hall
Dudden Hall
3 years ago
Reply to  David Bell

Or we could stop teaching religion in schools? Schools should teach things about the real world, bullying, acceptance of gay lifestyles, and tolerance of others.

Simon Baggley
Simon Baggley
3 years ago
Reply to  Dudden Hall

Silly – teaching an understanding of religion is not promoting -and ultimately no different than teaching kids about Marxism or Fascism for instance

Sheila Smith
Sheila Smith
3 years ago
Reply to  Dudden Hall

It’s teaching about religion not forcing students to be religious.

Betty Fyffe
Betty Fyffe
3 years ago
Reply to  Sheila Smith

Not when some of those students come into the class already indoctrinated with hatred.

Stephanie Surface
Stephanie Surface
3 years ago
Reply to  Dudden Hall

How can you teach about bullying, gay life style and tolerance, if you don’t mention religion? All of this is highlighted in the situation at Batley Grammar.

Judy Johnson
Judy Johnson
3 years ago
Reply to  Dudden Hall

It is important for children to learn to consider abstract concepts.

Neil Papadeli
Neil Papadeli
3 years ago
Reply to  Dudden Hall

As I understand it (my son is in year 10), Religious Studies is not ‘teaching religion’ but the study of world religions and philosophy i.e. exactly acceptance of different lifestyles and tolerance for others. Ironic isn’t it?

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Neil Papadeli

You should start teaching him Classics/Greats at the first possible opportunity.
At the end of the day the ‘rest’ are just ‘also ran’

Johannes Kreisler
Johannes Kreisler
3 years ago
Reply to  Dudden Hall

Or we could stop teaching religion in schools? Schools should teach things about the real world, bullying, acceptance of gay lifestyles, and tolerance of others.

i. Religion is a manmade construct, therefore it is part of the real world. Teaching about religion is necessary, as religions played a large part of history throughout human civilisation.
ii. “Acceptance of gay lifestyles” (or any lifestyles, for that matter) is a private sentiment, therefore private matter, not something to waste precious school-time on. Teach another language instead. Or Chaucer. Or basic cooking skills, even.
iii. “tolerance of others” < see above. Besides, which others? Are you advocating indiscriminate tolerance, even of the intolerable? That’d be just plain batshyte deranged.

Charles Hedges
Charles Hedges
3 years ago
Reply to  Dudden Hall

Without Christianity there would be no schools. King’s Canterbury School claims it was founded in the mid 7th century.It was Christianity which kept scholarship going after the collapse of the Western Roman Empire in 410 AD.

Jonathan Marshall
Jonathan Marshall
3 years ago
Reply to  David Bell

Exactly. It isn’t that “the right to criticise and ridicule religion has been increasingly under threat” – it’s the right to criticise and ridicule one particular religion which is threatened.

kathleen carr
kathleen carr
3 years ago
Reply to  David Bell

When the police failed to arrest these numerous ‘protesters’ ( apparently few are actual parents-one runs a charity for community cohesion and has given this teacher’s name and address to a billion followers!) you know who is in charge. What Douglas Murray and others predict will change European society in about 30 years has just speeded up. I got a taste of this intolerance when I was a teacher 30 years ago. An older boy came to my class to help 2 non-English speakers. Towards the end of the class he stood up and threw a long thin knife at my head which luckily missed . He went up to the blackboard took out the knife and left the room ,followed by the 2 younger boys. When I reported this incident I was told ‘We leave it to their community to sort out’-so it was never put on file, unlike other examples of violence.

joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago
Reply to  David Bell

Or find one for them, they would if the shoe were on the other foot. Provided the people in question lived that long.

Andy Paul
Andy Paul
3 years ago

I know I should not, but I remain surprised that being “offended” somehow confers an iron clad entitlement to shut down debate, to ensure someone loses their job, or in extreme cases to kill. The same forces that saw the murder of Samuel Paty in Paris are now at work in Batley.

We are seeing religious fundamentalists demanding that a state funded school align itself with their doctrines and remove a teacher for being in breach of them. Is it remotely acceptable that a teacher in 2021 has to go into hiding in Britain for his own safety?  

 Being “offended” is part and parcel of living in a robust democratic society and any claim of “offence” should be met with the singular response that being offended confers no more entitlement than being left or right-handed.

We must defend the values that created this nation for if not our continued failure to do so simply emboldens the regressive ROP to impose itself further on society to the detriment of us all.

kathleen carr
kathleen carr
3 years ago
Reply to  Andy Paul

Also its entirely subjective , how can society accomodate everyone’s different idea of what they think is offensive by punishment or apology. I’m offended as builders have just ruined the facade of a Victorian house by covering it in grey render , knocking out the original windows and putting in a new plastic door. It offends my aesthethic sensibility-can I protest and have an apology please?

Terry Mushroom
Terry Mushroom
3 years ago
Reply to  Andy Paul

“I’m offended because you’re offended.”
It’s a circular argument.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago

Thanks for this polemic, but who can really be surprised?

Only a few months ago a similar outburst of hysteria and persecution erupted at that former paragon of virtue Eton College.

What chance does Batley Grammar really have, given the appalling precedent set by the supine behaviour of Eton? None!

Galeti Tavas
Galeti Tavas
3 years ago

I just fail to understand how you all, every last poster here, has gotten every thing of this incident so wrong. It is hate speech from the teacher to display this to the students. The Eton event was hate speech against the teacher. 100% opposite.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Galeti Tavas

Most of bile spewed out Eton was that someone had had the temerity to criticise the Gynarchy or as it is more commonly known that “.monstrous tyranny of women”

kathleen carr
kathleen carr
3 years ago
Reply to  Galeti Tavas

Adults are supposed to keep their temper and express their differences in a civilized way. For example my child said their teacher had hit them across the head. Instead of going to the school and resolving the situation should I have paid someone to ‘take’ the teacher out? Also is there a text-book with ‘Things likely to offend others, so best avoid’ available?

Ian Wigg
Ian Wigg
3 years ago
Reply to  kathleen carr

My father would have said “what did you do to deserve it.”

joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago
Reply to  Ian Wigg

as parents did years ago, respect your elders and people n authority. Eg police.

joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago
Reply to  kathleen carr

Being offended is part of life, we all experience it , for immigrant terrorists to protest to the point of murder is surely abhorrent to any civilised human being. The extreme Muslims are using every trick in the book to justify their violent murders, using the showing or discussion of cartoons to justify beheadings and terrorist activities. They will be stopped, nothing so certain, as I said in a previous post, if the government don’t react the public will.

Cheryl Jones
Cheryl Jones
3 years ago
Reply to  Galeti Tavas

It is not hate speech. Islam’s brittleness and lack of self-critique is the issue here. If they want to live in a Caliphate they should go to Iran.

joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago
Reply to  Galeti Tavas

You are questioning “every last poster”. Maybe you haven’t thought your comments are the ones that are questionable?

Natalija Svobodné
Natalija Svobodné
3 years ago

The west is failing to understand and value its achievements. Falling into the trap of thinking they were the “only people to use slaves”,
The value of free speech and thought served them on so many social issues still not yet tackled in other cultures!
All with precious free speech. It’s time the west recovered its courage and relearnt the west’s achievements and history not taught in schools, to once again stand and defend free speech, rational thought, freedom from religion and freedom of religion – equality regardless of race, sex, creed.

THOMAS SOWELL – THE REAL HISTORY OF SLAVERY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWrfjUzYvPo

Last edited 3 years ago by Natalija Svobodné
Cheryl Jones
Cheryl Jones
3 years ago

Thomas Sowell is a bonafide American hero.

Graeme Laws
Graeme Laws
3 years ago

Most of these posts end up with angels dancing on semantic pinheads. Freedom of speech means freedom to offend. We cannot have distinctive versions of freedom for each minority, religious or otherwise. The teacher in question might be an awful teacher, or a brilliant teacher. His judgement in this matter may be questioned. But as far as I can tell he has done nothing that should bring him into conflict with the law of the land. Threatening him, however, does contravene the law of the land.

joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago
Reply to  Graeme Laws

And there is one person on here who thinks he not only should be threatened but deserves any repercussions. Smacks of terrorist .

Joe Blow
Joe Blow
3 years ago

This mob must be removed from the school, by force if necessary. Their very presence, at a place of learning, is intolerable.
Their removal would help protect the wellbeing of the children at the school and the himan rights of ther people of this country. It would also create the delicious possibility of mob members bleating about their rights to self expression being restricted.

Last edited 3 years ago by Joe Blow
Mike Boosh
Mike Boosh
3 years ago
Reply to  Joe Blow

Delicious as that would be, it won’t happen. Can you imagine the repercussions if plod were to break up a group of purely Muslim protesters? The BBC had a field day over the feminists the other week, they’d wet themselves if BAMEs were next on the list

Joe Blow
Joe Blow
3 years ago
Reply to  Mike Boosh

Quite, I think you are correct, unfortunately. Maybe some ex-miners with nothing to do?

Robin Lambert
Robin Lambert
3 years ago
Reply to  Mike Boosh

You’re not allowed to Call them BAME..anymore

joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago
Reply to  Robin Lambert

That’s good, I can think of lots of other names.

joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago
Reply to  Mike Boosh

That’s why it’s time to “cancel BBC” and the newspapers with like thoughts .

Ralph Windsor
Ralph Windsor
3 years ago
Reply to  Joe Blow

Should you propose such a removal in Batley you would probably have your collar felt for non-crime hate speech.

Richard Lyon
Richard Lyon
3 years ago

To stand back for a moment: a vocal but still minority culture embedded within our own is managing here and elsewhere with increasing success to impose its world view on a society which it finds repellant, and which it is compelled as a sacred duty under its own ideology to replace.
Demographics is destiny. At current birth and death rates of the cultural groups comprising the United Kingdom, within the lifetime of our children this group will have achieved political majority–which is to say, the power to select and instruct our lawmakers.
At that point, hand-wringing and online petitions will be ineffective.
We can, I hope, distinguish between Enoch Powell-like “Rivers of Blood” speeches and a simple, straighforward extrapolation of where we will be if we maintain current course and speed. A multi-ethnic society is a vibrant, healthy, wonderful thing. A multi-cultural society, particularly one that carries an exponentionally growing subculture with an ideological imperative to kill its host (metaphorically and, at times, literially), is a recipe for disaster.
We have failed to recognise or maintain this most essential distinction. If we maintain this failure, then a point will come when it is unaddressable. At that point, we will have no option but to reconcile ourselves to whatever those laws turn out to be.

Last edited 3 years ago by Richard Lyon
Fraser Bailey
Fraser Bailey
3 years ago
Reply to  Richard Lyon

As you say, demographics is destiny. And on that basis, the UK and western Europe will be done within a few decades.

Robin Lambert
Robin Lambert
3 years ago
Reply to  Fraser Bailey

Boris is doing his best To Procreate like ”Noah”?..

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Robin Lambert

Yes indeed. How did the Bible put it?
Something like “spray your seed all over the planet”

John Standing
John Standing
3 years ago
Reply to  Richard Lyon

Why do you exclude Powell, who was prophetic and, indeed, the only moral mainstream politician since his speech to this day.

joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago
Reply to  John Standing

My dad, who is dead now, was a total believer, this man could predict the future. Cue the present.?

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Richard Lyon

So by ‘Darwinian Self Selection we should soon be rid of this Islamic nuisance?

Sandy Tatham
Sandy Tatham
3 years ago
Reply to  Richard Lyon

That’s why these RE classes are so dangerous for Muslim leaders, and why they will push hard against them. They know that their Muslim-born children are likely to view Islam differently when introduced to critical thinking. This is the best way to counter the demographics. The trend today in the Arab and Iranian world is for young people to leave Islam when they encounter critical thinking.

joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago
Reply to  Richard Lyon

We are talking about problems but not offering a solution. I leave it, as said earlier, to the great British public to act, as I’m sure they will be forced to do.

Margaret Donaldson
Margaret Donaldson
3 years ago

I completely agree with Mr Doyle’s point of view and so surely must many Muslims. The Shahadah states ‘ There is no God but God AND Muhammed is his prophet. For Muslims these are both truth statements. God is God and Muhammad is just a man. The behaviour of far too many Muslims could be construed as idolatrous in their attitude towards the sanctity of Muhammad and they could be accused of ‘shirk’. There is nothing intrinsically evil about depicting Muhammad either respectfully or rudely. And Muhammad was not God as the second half of the Shahadah makes clear, just a very great example of a devout man, special to Muslims. So this teacher must be defended as he was not breaking our country’s laws
Ironically this sort of intolerant fuss does Islam in Britain more harm than good.
By the way, Muslim parents are legally entitled to withdraw their children from RE. If no Muslim children are in the class, there will be no Muslims to be offended and the concept of freedom of speech can be debated freely, which is what happens in a good RE class. The MEN at the school gate could think about that.

Dorothy Webb
Dorothy Webb
3 years ago

The statement is “There is no god but Allah”. This is nothing like the concept of our God – introduced by the Jews many thousands of years ago. If there were no difference Muslims would not hate Jews as they do.

Jon Redman
Jon Redman
3 years ago
Reply to  Dorothy Webb

Al-Ilah was one of the phases of the moon.
Muslims worship the moon.

Robin Lambert
Robin Lambert
3 years ago
Reply to  Jon Redman

Moon phases in Western Calendar!

joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago
Reply to  Dorothy Webb

No god but allah ??? This is Great Britain, no one gives a shit about Allah, take your violent religion back to your country of origin and practice it there. I’ve heard you’re trying to take over the world, deluded fools, you’re doomed .

Jon Redman
Jon Redman
3 years ago

The Islamic claim is that when they talk about they’re talking about the Judaeo-Christian god. There are good grounds to think this is sales spin and that Allah is in fact the pagan moon god of Assyria and Sumeria. His name was Sin, as in Sinai.
http://www.pakistanchristianpost.com/special-feature-details/52

Last edited 3 years ago by Jon Redman
Paul N
Paul N
3 years ago
Reply to  Jon Redman

That sounds awfully like bunkum, John. Your linked article says:

while the name of the Moon-god was Sin, his title was al-ilah, i.e. “the deity,” 

If true, it merely suggests that the local title of “The deity” (God, if you will) was being used by Mohammed to refer to the one God he worshiped – the God of the Jews, of the Christians, and of his new community of faith – the God of the people of the book, as Islam has it.

Last edited 3 years ago by Paul N
Paul N
Paul N
3 years ago

Interesting point, Margaret. I have sometimes thought that using the term “blasphemy” to describe denigration of a man, however much peace may be upon him, seems to ascribe divine levels of respect to him – which is arguably, as you say, idolatry.

John Riordan
John Riordan
3 years ago

It’s already won. We decided some time ago that radical Muslims were permitted by law to impose the law against blasphemy upon non-Muslims. We did this by never upholding freedom of expression in any other context either: we permit people to be sacked for disputing the lies peddled by Black Lives Matter, we allow scientific reputations and careers to be destroyed for questioning the official narrative on climate change, the list goes on.
If you’re only getting angry at the point where some Muslim demonstrators in Yorkshire succeed in forcing a family into hiding because they are too intellectually fragile to cope with pictures of the Muslim prophet being presented in a context that should be understood by any reasonable human being, then you’re too late to the argument by about twenty years.

Last edited 3 years ago by John Riordan
joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago
Reply to  John Riordan

Don’t give up, we need intellectuals .

Ian McKenna
Ian McKenna
3 years ago

Thank you for speaking up, Andrew.

Last edited 3 years ago by Ian McKenna
John Standing
John Standing
3 years ago

Note to moddies:
If there is a more noble principle that the protection of a native people suffering betrayal by its own ruling class and a break-neck process of demographic replacement that class has engineered, will you kindly tell me what it is? And if you can’t think of one (because, of course, there isn’t one) why are you removing comments in support of the British natives right here and now? In essence, why is rejection of the foreignisation of our home something you disagree with? Do you even have a thought-out argument that isn’t just the usual blind “herd” behaviour?

Last edited 3 years ago by John Standing
Richard E
Richard E
3 years ago
Reply to  John Standing

All of my comments were removed.

joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago
Reply to  Richard E

The original comment is standing, supporters of his comments can read and agree with it. Has it now become a case of, unheard, unless you’re Muslim? You will be cancelled if not. Cancel culture.???

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
3 years ago

Teachers cannot be in the business of tailoring their pedagogic practices in order to appease the most intolerant elements of society. Nor should we be indulging those who feel that their particular worldview should be imposed on society at large.
And yet, both of these things are happening. The academy has descended into self-parody and the latter plays out through cancel culture, doxxing, and a host of other tactics that should be anathema to a free society. Maybe freedom is too big a burden for some. It can be messy, people might do things you or I don’t like, they might even screw up. So what, I say. Life is a contact sport.

Scott Powell
Scott Powell
3 years ago

We can learn from these tactics. Next time some ‘gendered pronoun’ rubbish is mentioned in a school, or white guilt nonsense, then do this. Claim an ‘unsafe environment’, demand sackings, etc, etc. They have to learn that the pendulum swings both ways.

joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago
Reply to  Scott Powell

So agree, well said, goose and gander comes to mind.

David McKee
David McKee
3 years ago

Excellent article: timely and well-said.
It would have been even better if it had come from a Muslim. However, I suspect Muslims who oppose this attempt at censorship are keeping their heads down. Sad, but understandable: we forget that the vast, the overwhelming, majority of victims of Islamism are other Muslims.

Aisha Akhtar
Aisha Akhtar
3 years ago
Reply to  David McKee

Yes. We keep our heads down – some of my die-hard Muslim friends haven’t said a word about this, because deep down, I think we are all ashamed at this show of intolerance but we darent admit it. It is practically a religious duty to kill a Muslim that condones blasphemy against the prophet … even God is in a grey area, because we can sometimes complain to Him about the situation he may have put us in – but the Prophet – oh no!! And rightly or wrongly, I just want to get on with my life, so… heads down it is. And the fanatics love it, because the whinging hand-wringers have given them a platform to moan about ‘safeguarding’ and ‘bullying’ and Islamophobia – safeguarding my foot!!

Last edited 3 years ago by Aisha Akhtar
Paul N
Paul N
3 years ago
Reply to  Aisha Akhtar

As John Burke may not have said, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”

Last edited 3 years ago by Paul N
Cheryl Jones
Cheryl Jones
3 years ago
Reply to  Aisha Akhtar

So you basically live in fear of your fellow believers…. SMH

Chris Scott
Chris Scott
3 years ago

When you have a belief system that requires a person to go into hiding, fear for of their lives, and in some cases are murdered, there is something seriously wrong with that belief system. Islam has too many apologists among the liberal ‘west’. In the name of ‘diversity’, ‘multiculturalism’ and tr$de, the political and academic establishment placate a religion that does not tolerate the western societies that are forced to tolerate it. In all my dealings with this religion, it’s adherents profess an exceptionalism that considers non-muslim an inferior species. Islam, like all religions, belongs in another place and time. The real problem we have in the UK and the west are not Muslims; the real issue are those who turn a blind eye to the crimes committed in its name and those who seek to exclude Islam from criticism and debate regarding it’s true nature in our society. The political and cultural left is chasing its tail by supporting every diverse group under the sun, but tries to explains away criticism of Islam as racism whilst conveniently ignoring its attitude towards LGBTQ+ and women which I consider a moral crime. If there is no sanction against its extremist elements, they will be emboldened to push the limits of people’s patients to the limit.

Andy Paul
Andy Paul
3 years ago
Reply to  Chris Scott

I can never understand how critique or examination of or opposition to Islam can be labelled as “racist”; after all it is a political, judicial and religious ideology that assumes considerable entitlement for itself and as such requires examination just like any other ideology. Like many others I have examined it and found it wanting; it does not warrant a place in the West.

Chris Scott
Chris Scott
3 years ago
Reply to  Andy Paul

Any criticism of Islam has to be packaged as ‘racist’ because other wise the left would have to confront its own contradictions in championing gender equality and LGBQ+ rights whilst staying silent about this particular religion’s extreme anomosity towards the gay community in particular. Islam can’t reinterpet the Koran as Christianity has reinvented the Bible.

G Harris
G Harris
3 years ago

If surveys are to be believed and the UK is becoming increasingly secular and apparently more tolerant as a result, it’s difficult to square this with the notion that it is essentially more tolerant of a faith that is, in many respects, far less tolerant of other faiths and of the increasingly liberal social mores of today.

What is it, I wonder, that makes those who would doubtless describe themselves as inherently tolerant intolerant of one group’s perceived intolerance but cheerfully tolerant of another’s?

Joe Blow
Joe Blow
3 years ago
Reply to  G Harris

Unfortunately, people might consider themselves more tolerant, but it is a canned, unconsidered and faux form of tolerance. It is the version fed to them by vacuous celebs and closed-minded BBC types – the “tolerance” that is essentially an omnidirectional enthusiasm where no belief (other than racism and misogyny, of course) is too stupid to tolerate. Tolerance actually requires understanding of the other view, and the ability to articulate why it requires tolerance.
I do not have to “tolerate” coffee or chocolate or Mozart piano concertos. I do have to tolerate the Guardian. I can explain what I do not like about it (it is the Breitbart of the left – actually worse, as Breitbart is not censorious) and also defend the why I support it still being there.
Perhaps the tactic should be to orchestrate a campaign to highlight islam’s inherent misogyny, anti-Semitism and its links to slavery?

Last edited 3 years ago by Joe Blow
Eleanor Barlow
Eleanor Barlow
3 years ago
Reply to  G Harris

Is someone paying you to come out with all this bollocks?
If secular humanism was so intolerant, it would have closed down the mosques long ago. Quite frankly I wish it had done because I’m sick of hearing the nonsense that you and your fellow travellers spout in defence of a belief system that hates and despises everyone who doesn’t share your values.

Dudden Hall
Dudden Hall
3 years ago

The Muslim Council has, “created a hostile atmosphere” for gay Muslims. So they can hardly accuse others of doing the same thing that they do.

Ron Bo
Ron Bo
3 years ago
Reply to  Dudden Hall

Sorry to split hairs.I read an article which stated there were no gay muslims because islam and homosexuality were incompatible.

Joe Blow
Joe Blow
3 years ago
Reply to  Ron Bo

🙂

Jon Redman
Jon Redman
3 years ago
Reply to  Ron Bo

PM Rafsanjani of Iran is on record as saying that “There are no gays in Iran”.
He’s certainly rooted out and killed a few of them but more keep being born.

Jack Ingham
Jack Ingham
3 years ago

So Unherd posts an article with a loaded title containing the word “Inquisition”, detailing an attack on freedom of expression.
Then goes on to delete comments on the article from people expressing their views.
Think it’s time for me to unsubscribe.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Jack Ingham

Yes truly pathetic.
O for the days of DISQUS; This censorship is dreadful.

Michael James
Michael James
3 years ago

There are many Muslim schools in the UK, where presumably no images of the Prophet may be displayed. Muslim parents are free to send their children to them.

Last edited 3 years ago by Michael James
Eleanor Barlow
Eleanor Barlow
3 years ago

The worst thing we ever did was to make religion a protected characteristic in equalities legislation. This has given more prominence to the lunatic fringes that would like to crush any kind of humour or criticism against their misbegotten beliefs.
I hope somebody is supporting the teacher – he should be treated as a national hero rather than be disgraced and at risk of losing his job due to the tantrums of a few hysterics.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Eleanor Barlow

Yes indeed, making religion a legally “protected species “ was idiotic .
We will rue the day some ‘idiot’ decided that.

Eleanor Barlow
Eleanor Barlow
3 years ago

It seems unfair too that religion has been singled out for special treatment – whilst political beliefs are not protected.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Eleanor Barlow

Yes, a national disgrace, that is not tolerated in France for example.

Chris Waghorn
Chris Waghorn
3 years ago

Me too!
Considering unsubscribing from Unherd as a result of my and others’ experience.

Last edited 3 years ago by Chris Waghorn
Eleanor Barlow
Eleanor Barlow
3 years ago
Reply to  Chris Waghorn

I was thinking of subscribing but not now. I thought Unherd was a refreshing change from the MSM,but it seems I was mistaken.

michael stanwick
michael stanwick
3 years ago

We mustn’t let the Care Bears win.”
I would argue this issue has some similarity to gross national and/or global environmental impacts and those who harangue or scald or attempt to inform the general populace of the perceived problem when, specifically, the common individual is weighed down dealing with the burden of their own life and lacking the resources or know how to seriously attempt a solution to a national or global problem.
This issue of ideologically motivated haranguing and bullying of others who do not share the doctrines of the ideology, through cancelling, intimidation etc, is a national threat and again, I would argue, beyond the scope of most individuals to deal with.
As such, perhaps it requires an authoritative position statement, and action if necessary, from those in a position to represent the institution and its employees that are under threat – namely the Secretary of Education?

hugh bennett
hugh bennett
3 years ago

My old man had a favourite mantra that has always stuck in my mind, that the piper always has to be paid….Towards its peak the British Empire had a Muslim population of nearly twice as large than the empire’s Christian population. The BE included roughly half of the world’s Muslim population i think?. I recall reading that 400,000 Muslim soldiers of the British Indian Army fought for Britain during World War I, where 10- 15% were killed in action, similar happened in WWII.
There is another saying about a Trojan Horse !
That said, I also recall reading a paper by Medhi Mozaffari, over a decade ago, that concluded that, despite many differences among the different Islamist groups, their final objective all remained the same. That they all seek global re-instauration of Islamic might and domination.
I can see it now ….a new “Danelaw”, this time Islamic law held in force across the Midlands of England, and that might be the most peaceful outcome …. we`re all Doomed Mr Mannering !! keep smiling amigos.

Gladys Melia
Gladys Melia
3 years ago
Reply to  hugh bennett

You are correct that India provided many soldiers to fight in the Second World War. Not sure of the numbers but they would have been, not just Muslims, but also Sikhs (India, of course, was not divided until after the war). I’ve also read that they were all volunteers. So the British Empire must have done something right.

Jack Walker
Jack Walker
3 years ago

The sad fact is that the government will do plenty of hand wringing, as have previous governments, but will do nothing, absolutely nothing to deal with this issue.
We are no longer a free speech society. Our so-called leaders are a bunch of mealy-mouthed cowards, and whichever side of the political divide they are on they will not speak out against the Islamification of this country.

Last edited 3 years ago by Jack Walker
Mark Preston
Mark Preston
3 years ago

Why has my first comment been deleted? I thought UnHerd was all about discussion?

John Standing
John Standing
3 years ago

Unherd, obviously part of the pee-cee herd, is busily making native Brits … well, unheard.

Johannes Kreisler
Johannes Kreisler
3 years ago

Yes, that line caught my eyes too.
Sure freespeech is a darling thing to have, but at the current state of affairs i’d say it’s pretty much down the list of acute priorities. That breathless pearlclutching about freespeech but sweet farkall about much bigger elephants in the room was what turned me off of Sp¡ked, even though they have a somewhat better stable of journos (or just fewer token blix?).
Indeed the protestors are not going to worry about not being able to mock religion (much on the contrary, hence the protest) – and for the rest of us a machete to the neck may present a more dangerous trend than not being able to mock religion.

Last edited 3 years ago by Johannes Kreisler
Tony Pearson
Tony Pearson
3 years ago

So Unherd, when are you going to support this standpoint by publishing the images? There is a legitimate public interest now

stephen f.
stephen f.
3 years ago

Unherd is becoming Unsaid.

Mark Harvey
Mark Harvey
3 years ago

I cannot understand why a vocal minority of Muslims should wish to protest against the school and the teacher concerned, to such an extent that the individual is now in hiding under police protection. Having blown the issue up out of all proportion, one could be forgiven for thinking these local Muslims appear either fundamentalist, racist, or both. Surely our society has far more serious and extensive issues to confront? Covid-19, the climate crisis and the ongoing Brexit shambles spring to mind…

John Standing
John Standing
3 years ago
Reply to  Mark Harvey

They are not our society. They are Muslims and we are required to conform to Islam. That is what it’s all about.

Last Jacobin
Last Jacobin
3 years ago
Reply to  John Standing

They might not be part of your society. They are part of mine and I am what you would probably call ‘native British’.

Stephen Bellamy
Stephen Bellamy
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

Are you happy that they are a part of your society?

Catherine Newcombe
Catherine Newcombe
3 years ago
Reply to  Mark Harvey

How society responds to this is absolutely crucial. It is essential we have a mechanism to complain or debate a difficult issue without resort to threats of violence. If violence wins then how can we talk properly about anything.

John Standing
John Standing
3 years ago

When have we ever been allowed to discuss any aspect of race and immigration? Certainly not since Powell was silenced by Heath.

Catherine Newcombe
Catherine Newcombe
3 years ago
Reply to  John Standing

Powell was before my time, but looking back I can see the gradual erosion of freedom to speak uncomfortable views especially on racial integration/cultural integration, leaving us where we are today.
From my time at school, I think there was a certain inbuilt arrogance that our British way was so clearly superior how could any incoming culture not immediately see and adjust itself in line with it. It was unseemly to be seen to stare or comment while the incomers struggled with the separation of politics and religion as it was not their fault, they had merely not been educated appropriately and like bad manners at the dinner table, one ignored missteps in visitors hoping they quickly realised and corrected their error. To point it out would have been quite rude so one remained silent. I had no idea I was being taught to be dreadfully patronising, but am not sure how much of that attitude was simply an attempt at face-saving.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago

I attempted to reply on Powell, but the subject is verboten on UnHerd and my comment was deleted.
As know doubt, this one will be.

Last edited 3 years ago by Charles Stanhope
Andy Martin
Andy Martin
3 years ago

but am not sure how much of that attitude was simply an attempt at face-saving.”
And moreover, given the present age of theocratic bullying, completely ineffectual.

Andy Martin
Andy Martin
3 years ago
Reply to  Mark Harvey

Thanks Mark for making the point that these bed sheet wearing bearded theocratic bullies are ( I hope,) a minority within the Muslim community. As the saying goes, ‘the squeaky wheel gets the grease,’ and as a result, this vociferous minority have managed to disrupt classes in this school and forced the teacher to go into hiding.
Although I assume it’s a vocal minority, I wonder why the majority don’t try harder to shut down these medieval maniacs?

Paul N
Paul N
3 years ago

Joe blow said:

“This mob must be removed from the school, by force if necessary. Their very presence, at a place of learning, is intolerable.”

Peaceful protest is a fundamental right in our democracy – even for repressive islamic parents. If they are preventing teachers from getting to work, or threatening or intimidating them, that’s a different matter.
But I’m not sure we need a law that additionally penalises them for being noisy or inconvenient. That could too easily be turned against anyone who is unpopular with some authority figure.

Last edited 3 years ago by Paul N
Joe Blow
Joe Blow
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul N

You missed the last part of my post, which was that my motive was to provoke the delicious irony of them making your point.
That said, we do not allow angry and threatening mobs outside abortion clinics, so they should not be allowed to block schools.

Dorothy Webb
Dorothy Webb
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul N

The teacher concerned has gone into hiding! This is hardly a “peaceful protest”. Sounds like threats and intimidation.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Dorothy Webb

He’ probably on his way to Eton, they have a vacancy I gather.

Andy Martin
Andy Martin
3 years ago

That vacancy will be more likely filled by someone who would bleat on about how in the interest of promoting diversity, and inclusion, the hateful views of the teacher at the Bately school who showed his class Islamophobic images should not be tolerated.

Paul N
Paul N
3 years ago
Reply to  Dorothy Webb

You may have missed the bit where I said:  “If they are preventing teachers from getting to work, or threatening or intimidating them, that’s a different matter.”
But I am concerned that our right to protest may be under attack by the Home Secretary. It’s necessary to defend speech you don’t like – otherwise it’s not free speech so much as the freedom to agree, which isn’t a lot of use in a democracy.

Jeff Mason
Jeff Mason
3 years ago

The author is more than a little bit ‘holier than though’ and a lot hypocritical. He rails against ‘conservative’ parents for complaining about school curricula when they have every right to. They are their children, after all. They don’t belong to the state and neither does the school. All aspects of the government- schools included – belong to the citizenry. I don’t know the ages of the children in question but parents don’t like paying taxes to have schools undermine their beliefs. The author wrote, “…should we be indulging those who feel that their particular worldview should be imposed on society at large.” Does that apply to his worldview or the worldview of radical leftists who are infesting the educational system in ever increasing numbers? It is funny how ‘freedom of expression’ only seems to apply to those the left agrees with. How about we not undermine anyone’s religious beliefs be they Christian, Muslim or atheist. How about we focus on things like reading, mathematics, history, civics and science. We have millions of children who don’t know who their representatives are, the history of their country or what the Pythagorean formula is, but they know which pronouns are currently in vogue.

Colin Shingler
Colin Shingler
3 years ago
Reply to  Jeff Mason

How about we ban religion being taught in schools? I think as an atheist that would be the fairest way to proceed. Problem is we only represent just over 40% of the electorate but it has gone up by 46% in 10 years. See most of us see what is happening we are being enslaved by ridiculous nonsense from the Holy Joes. Time for change Religion should be kicked into touch. AMEN

Paul N
Paul N
3 years ago
Reply to  Colin Shingler

In today’s world, some level of religious literacy may be a good thing – if only to understand where people are coming from. It’s not as though R.E. in schools is about converting the poor wee mites.

Colin Shingler
Colin Shingler
3 years ago

With the Govt and authorities constantly running scared of these situations that constantly arise its time for the people to act for them. I propose we have a referendum on immigration and ban the Muslim sects creating havov in the world. Many many muslims are being caged into being quiet and fearful of sects like Deobandi. In fact the Medina Muslims in my opinion will never accept anything that is not their way. So folk the good old British Public and I include the hundreds of thousands of Muslims who truly want peace in our land need to stand up and say enough is enough WE WANT A REFERENDUM ON IMMIGRATION. And we want it now.

Paul N
Paul N
3 years ago
Reply to  Colin Shingler

I don’t.

joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul N

You’re just one person, you won’t really have a lot of influence.

Terence Fitch
Terence Fitch
3 years ago

Allow people in Europe who are living in pre Enlightenment age and who would be more at home in a Europe of the Thirty Years’ War and you get superstition and fundamentalism. Islam means submission. As with Leninism the individual doesn’t matter. The basis is not being allowed to think for yourself- you must submit, and let’s be clear, so must inevitably everyone else they believe.

Charles Rense
Charles Rense
3 years ago

The prohibition against depicting Mohammad is a rule for Muslims to follow. There is no reason people of other faiths (or no faith) should be expected to abide by it.

And strictly speaking, it applies to all prophets. So depictions of Jesus (whom Islam also recognizes as a prophet) should be just as offensive. And even more strictly speaking, it has historically applied to all human depictions as well. This is why the Islamic artistic tradition is known for stunning geometric designs: because people weren’t allowed to draw anything else.

Furthermore, some Christian sects also feature this prohibition. You aren’t supposed to engage in iconography, because that places the imagery of the figure ahead of their teachings. And all of this has its roots the graven images commandment and idolatry commandment handed down by Moses. Which makes sense coming from a religious movement reacting against the ancient Egyptian tradition of depicting their pharohs as literally gods on earth.

If you choose to carry forth this concept to the modern day, that’s your choice. You don’t get to make it for anyone else.

Also, no one knows what mohomad looked like, so there are no images of him anyway.

Mark Preston
Mark Preston
3 years ago

I wonder what will happen when the LGBT community realise that they’ll be thrown under the bus by mainstream politics in order to avoid offending the muslims?

Steve Craddock
Steve Craddock
3 years ago

I think the root of many of our problems in our society stems from the utter fear and helplessness that we as individuals feel when confronted with a mob or a tribe of closely connected individuals.

Our leaders have worked hard over the years to strip away our protections and ties of race, religion, place and community and even family. We have all been lulled into passive acceptance that our leaders and their tools of protection and control, the law, courts and the police will protect us and give us justice.

But when we are exposed to a group that has these tradditional personnel protections and ties still in place we suddenly realise the huge crime that has been done to us by our leaders.

The fact that is thrown into sudden stark relief is that the tools of protection and control put in place by our leaders, for which we have given away our birth rights, were never ever intended to benefit us at all. They were enacted to soley to protect and nuture our leadership class and their offspring and for ever tighten their grip on us to ensure we continue to support their decadent and amoral existence.

Bob Rowlands
Bob Rowlands
3 years ago

Has anyone started a crowdfunding page for the teacher yet?

Peter Jackson
Peter Jackson
3 years ago

It seems unreasonable and unrealistic to place the burden of defending freedom of expression – in the face of the threat of murder – on schools and RE teachers. The government should step in and place these cartoons on every advertising hoarding in the country and broadcast them as public service adverts on TV for about a year. The exercise should be repeated every time Baroness Warsi opens her mouth

Joe Blow
Joe Blow
3 years ago

Oh well. Pity really. I had high hopes for Unherd. This will be my last post, Censoriousness has seemingly infected here too. I was waiting and watching before I paid to subscribe. Glad I waited.
Bye folks. It was fun.

Robin Lambert
Robin Lambert
3 years ago
Reply to  Joe Blow

Try Parler GAP or some other News media..

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Joe Blow

Sorry you’re off, I enjoyed your apposite belligerence and your pithy asides.
All the very best. “Never say die!”

Jack Ingham
Jack Ingham
3 years ago

Mufti Mohammed Amin Pandor, one of the community leaders who met the school’s leadership, told protesters that the school understood that what happened was “totally unacceptable”.
“We’ve asked for an investigation, an independent investigation, and we have asked also for some of us to get on the investigation’s panel,” Pandor told the remaining protesters. “That is what we’ve asked for, whether they do it or not, we can’t force them.
“We’re going to work with the school to ensure that in the future things like this don’t happen.”
Qari Asim, chair of the Mosques and Imams National Advisory Board and imam of the Makkah mosque in Leeds, said: “People have a right to express their concerns and hurt but protests can’t always achieve what can be achieved through constructive dialogue. Fair investigation by the school, in consultation with the parents, should be allowed to take place. We do not want to fan the flames of Islamophobia and provoke hatred or division.”

Simon Cooper
Simon Cooper
3 years ago
Reply to  Jack Ingham

isn’t that the definition of a witch hunt?

Jack Ingham
Jack Ingham
3 years ago
Reply to  Simon Cooper

I don’t think “constructive dialogue” and “witch hunt” are quite the same thing…

Last Jacobin
Last Jacobin
3 years ago
Reply to  Jack Ingham

Seems like a moderate and reasonable response.

Johnny Sutherland
Johnny Sutherland
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

Not really – it seems as though its already been decided – in their view.

John Lewis
John Lewis
3 years ago

Agreed. It can be translated as “do exactly as we tell you and there won’t be any more trouble”.

Chris Waghorn
Chris Waghorn
3 years ago

Cannot help but remember the wise – but vulgar – words of an army chaplain in 1972, “Religion, my dear boy, like masturbation, is an office best observed in the privacy of one’s home”. His point was, I seem to remember, that if all religions adhered to this simple principle there would be a bit less contention in the world.

Paul N
Paul N
3 years ago
Reply to  Chris Waghorn

A totally private faith with no effect on morality or behaviour outside of the home seems like a complete waste of time and space. Arguably that’s part of the problem with many churches.
Christ called his followers to be salt and light – to be visible and to preserve what is good in the world. It’s a call more honoured in the breach than the observance.

Last edited 3 years ago by Paul N
Paul Goodman
Paul Goodman
3 years ago

This head teacher reminds me of the Police forces in Rochdale and Rotherham with all the hallmarks identified in IOPC Operation Lindon.
I have signed the petition started by the students at Batley to get the RS teacher reinstated.

Sandy Tatham
Sandy Tatham
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul Goodman

I hope you read the ‘conditions’ of the reinstatement? That it was “Islamophobic” to show the cartoons, that the cartoons will never be shown again. That teacher can never safely teach there again.

Simon Neale
Simon Neale
3 years ago

One thing that strikes me about this case is how completely irrational the complaints are. Had the teacher in question raised the topic of blasphemy, referred to a few cases across different religions, and focused on the Mohammed cartoons issue, he would have been perfectly OK, providing he didn’t show any actual images.

That would have meant a roomful of teenagers, most of them Muslims, imagining images which in all probability would have been worse than the real thing. (“What could they possibly be like to cause death threats? Made him look ugly? Look stupid? Making out that he was violent? Maybe naked, or doing stuff to kids…dogs?…pigs?…”)

As soon as he clicks on an innocuous cartoon, though, it’s end of career and fearing for his life.

Paul N
Paul N
3 years ago
Reply to  Simon Neale

Might have been safer to do what you suggested. And in the next lesson, to ask if anyone googled the cartoons, and continue from there.
But I’m guessing he underestimated the power of sheer lunacy.

Andrew Thompson
Andrew Thompson
3 years ago

I’m afraid like this teachers career, western civilisation is already over. ‘All done bar the shouting’ as the saying goes.

Johannes Kreisler
Johannes Kreisler
3 years ago

I find the Chinese regime (not the people) abhorrent, but they got something else right too: population control. Not only they averted imminent decrepitude with the drastic one-child policy, but they also provide an example to the thirdworld that it’s doable.
I’m a bit torn on the Uyghurs though – pretty much the only muslim people i like, not the least because they are regarded as closest kins to us Hungarians. They are much unlike the regular variety of muslims, their history, origins, culture, everything is different. Oh well, i’m not a “bit torn” after all, i’m on the Uyghurs’ side on this one.

Helen Wood
Helen Wood
3 years ago

Of course one cannot condone or ignore violent or threatening behaviour or dictatorial demands from Muslim groups outside the school..But I would like to comment on one idea here, that tailoring pedagogic practice should not be influenced by those pupils or families who are adhere to particular religous dogmas or sets of precepts. Presenting a lesson on a controversial faith issue by using an image of the prophet -regarded by some Muslims as forbidden and thus offensive and insulting -does imply a position taken by the teacher and school that there will be some strong benefit from this such as opening the minds of the (mixed) faith communities of pupils attending there. Surely then before using satirical cartoons in the lesson you would want to explain and discuss why an Islamic belief system
bases sacred devotion on the premise of non representation -and to make this concept salient to the pupils in the class who if Christian-may be completely unfamiliar with such notions? To just present the Charlie Hebdo /Muhammed cartoon in an RE class without doing this would be a lesson that is superficial , sensationalist or muddled about its aims. But if the educational aim of fostering understanding and insight into the Muslim Faiths notion of the sacred -including prohibition of certain images were to be achieved in the lesson- then this would hopefully inculcate some understanding and respect for such tenets . This should then lead teachers from a rational and enlightened perspective of loco parentis to an understanding that to impose controversial images upon Muslim children might be traumatic. These chlldren are situated within a context of authority ie their Mosques and their parents -who define and frame ideas as respectful or insulting .
To contradict in one lesson the premises of elder family members which deeply influence these pupils – is to place some of these children in a conflicted position. Even if they like and respect their teacher and believe in his good intentions..there is a sense that this is a large moral conceptual and emotional burden being imposed on 13 year old adolescents .Whereas, 6th formers or undergrads who are more emotionally mature and capable of taking up independant stances as they move into the wider world may enjoy the anti authoritarian message of the cartoon -a 13 yr old may well be very shocked by the context -which resulted in a beheading -and in igniting huge hostility between host communities and Moslem immigrants.
Thus in my view re the issue of free speech in play here..there is a moral choice which can be exercised by a liberal humanist teacher and responsible practitioner -to refrain from exercising such speech( in a particular context) and in so refraining- transmit the laudable virtues of respect for different faiths to these children.

Jack Ingham
Jack Ingham
3 years ago
Reply to  Helen Wood

Excellent comment.

Helen Wood
Helen Wood
3 years ago
Reply to  Jack Ingham

Jack has rightly selected the moderate responses from the Muslim spokespeople to work towards resolution of this inflamatory situation. The msm should do likewise and see that free speech is important but not the only element in this…the sensible views of many Muslims must be communicated.

Jennifer Britton
Jennifer Britton
3 years ago
Reply to  Helen Wood

Perhaps a history lesson on instances of religious intolerance (no dearth of instances: St Bartholomew’s massacre immediately comes to mind) and their consequences would have made the point to those 13 year old students without the teacher’s being forced into hiding and potential sacking. Clearly the students got the point of the lesson … the claimed spokesperson did not or would not get its point.

Education used to be about preparation for living in and succeeding in general society. No longer, unfortunately.

Johnny Sutherland
Johnny Sutherland
3 years ago
Reply to  Helen Wood

I may be totally wrong but that reads to me that the teacher should have been careful not to do anything that might upset the parents. If I’m not wrong I must say its rubbish. Remember is the US we seem to be having an expression that math is white supremacy.

Helen Wood
Helen Wood
3 years ago

I think as Jennifer says..the point of the lession if about tolerance and free speech would have been put across better by using a different example or image not so controversial.

Chris Dale
Chris Dale
3 years ago
Reply to  Helen Wood

One of the themes of the lesson was on blasphemy

Weyland Smith
Weyland Smith
3 years ago
Reply to  Helen Wood

The fascists at the gate are not delivering cosntructive criticism following a Lesson Obseration.

Anakei greencloudnz
Anakei greencloudnz
3 years ago
Reply to  Helen Wood

So the lesson in tolerance and free speech would have been put across better had the teacher self censored, thereby circumnavigating both the awkward free speech and tolerance issues?

Helen Wood
Helen Wood
3 years ago

The free speech and tolerance issues could be illustrated by other images. Showing the CH cartoon is not a demonstration of tolerance of Islam. Teachers decide all the time whats appropriate material or not when planning a lesson…if you want to call it censorship then ok…Id call it sound pedagogic practice.

Paul N
Paul N
3 years ago
Reply to  Helen Wood

It might have been better – but the teacher seems not to have acted in an unreasonable or deliberately offensive manner. So with the lesson having been given as it was, the headmaster should have stood up for his staff and for their academic freedom. Maybe he was intimidated – though that hardly makes his craven statement OK.
I get that it’s useless to tell the truth in ways that make people cling more firmly to their falsehoods – but whether the teacher was unwise, he did not behave unreasonably, and should have been defended.

Last edited 3 years ago by Paul N
Helen Wood
Helen Wood
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul N

Yes. And the RE curriculum should be talked through by all members of staff including the Head so theres collective responsibility but also to pre empt this kind of issue blowing up.

Hale Bopp
Hale Bopp
3 years ago
Reply to  Helen Wood

I agree actually. I don’t think people are considering the kind of conflicted position this would put Muslim children in and how it uses a child like a rope in a tug of war match of ideologies and loyalties. I also, as a teacher, think I would have made the call to talk about the case and allow discussion and debate and yes it would be important but I wouldn’t have chosen to show the pictures. It would be like agreeing that yes it’s important to teach about porn and to discuss people’s different views about and the claimed harms of pornography etc but knowing you don’t need to show them pornography in order to have that discussion. The more I think about it the more I think actually looking at the cartoon would add nothing to the lesson. Presumably the guy had a head of department though and generally a SACRE would have input on the curriculum also so it’s a lot on one guys shoulders unless he unilaterally decided to do this

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago

UnHerd is in what we used to call a state of FUNK.
A very unfortunate state of affairs.

Perhaps Mr Sayers will bestir himself and proffer an explanation?

Simon Burch
Simon Burch
3 years ago

I don’t think that either the US or the USSR ‘rode to the rescue’ in WW2; especially the USSR which had a non-aggression pact with the Germans. They were both attacked and effectively forced into it.

Last edited 3 years ago by Simon Burch
George Bruce
George Bruce
3 years ago
Reply to  Simon Burch

I was meaning more from the UK`s point of view without their help we were going to lose eventually.
Agreed about the USSR, by the way, but I think the USA wanted their war with Japan and got it.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Simon Burch

Without US financial support we would have been bankrupt by December 1940, just as we had been in late 1916.

Post war, Mr Attlee’s utopian dream, the Welfare State, would not have been possible without copious amounts of US largesse.

It is all too easy to, ignore these humiliating facts.

antoon van coillie
antoon van coillie
3 years ago

In my schooldays, Ovid’s Ars Amatoria were not translated & discussed at Catholic schools: what a loss for the pupils this was….

William Murphy
William Murphy
3 years ago

One teacher at my Catholic school in 1970 told us that, years earlier, he and his fellow teenagers in Ireland used the Vatican’s Index of Forbidden Books as a guide to the books worth reading. Seeing that so many of those banned books are nowadays unobtainable or unreadable, it might not have been the best guide.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  William Murphy

What were the films of that period that the good old ‘Kerrygold Republic’ banned?

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago

Good job they didn’t let you near Catullus.

Paul N
Paul N
3 years ago

I remember our copy of Caesar’s Gallic Wars had the bit about Germanic tribes nude bathing censored.

Vijay Kant
Vijay Kant
3 years ago

There is a danger that the present fashion of Intolerance in Islam could spread among other religious groups. So, before that happens, all democratic countries in the world should come together (under the UN) and agree on a law or a principle that basically states that: “No religious sentiment shell be recognised or respected”. This needs to be explicitly stated, as religious people do not comprehend the abstract idea of freedom of speech.

Sandy Tatham
Sandy Tatham
3 years ago
Reply to  Vijay Kant

Under the United Nations? With the 57 member strength of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in the UN, I doubt you would have much success on that platform.

Retanot King
Retanot King
3 years ago

The greater tragedy is that the hyper-puritanism of social justice activists is in itself a (non-deist) religious order. It has much in common with the backward Islamic mindset, and the mindset prevalent five centuries ago in Europe. Complete with its own prophets, angels, devils, and moralistic belief system. That is why social justice goes to bat for other intolerant ideas such as Islam and reverse racism, as it is fundamentally anti-rationalism, anti-enlightenment and anti-science.
As Karl Popper has said, once liberal democracy becomes tolerant of intolerance, that can only end in the demise of liberalism. Liberalism wishes to settle arguments by its superior principles and through dialog, so it eschews the use for force. But its enemies on the contrary know they have no arguments or facts, and any acquiescence to an argument is a blow to their own ideology. So they endeavor to build a force and settle the power struggle through the use of force.

Joseph Berger
Joseph Berger
3 years ago

a very worthwhile article, purists suggest differentiating between “Islamism” the aggressive destructive branch that believes it is necessary to either convert or eradicate all those who disagree – and the religion “Islam” which some of its adherents claim is “peaceful”.
Unfortunately, the behaviour of too many who march in the name of islam and attempt to suppress any criticism or even satire in the name of Islam, make it very difficult for most people to see any difference.

Andy Yorks
Andy Yorks
3 years ago
Reply to  Joseph Berger

That’s because there is no difference.

Andy Yorks
Andy Yorks
3 years ago

Remember when Pope Benedict quoted the opinion of Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Palaiologos: “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached”.

Mark Lilly
Mark Lilly
3 years ago

The Batley School incident is a test of the sincerity of the government’s commitment to freedom of speech – a test it has failed.

Simon Cooper
Simon Cooper
3 years ago

That’s definitely an option, not a great one though. At what point do we decide who we are willing to upset and who not, will these protected people be informed of their inability to handle criticism? Will the government decided who is too feeble (or too violent) to cope, or will those decisions been given to academics (with their clear grasp of real life outside the ivory towns of academia) or perhaps to the ‘victims’ themselves? I mean, it works really well with hate crime reporting, where someone who may be a third party to the event can independently judge the motive for it and on that basis report the (pseudo)crime.
I do hope your comment was tongue in cheek, if it wasn’t you might want to consider the implications of how the application of that would kerb your rights to do almost anything.

vince porter
vince porter
3 years ago

Cancel culture is making strange bedfellows. The only way religion can compete with Darwin, among the great majority of people who can read and write, is to put Darwin in jail. Cancel culture seemingly agrees.

John Standing
John Standing
3 years ago
Reply to  vince porter

Well, cancel culture is white-hatred.

Kelvin Rees
Kelvin Rees
3 years ago

Thinking about it means talking about it. And that impossible without visualisation.

Deb Grant
Deb Grant
3 years ago

Good article. I just wish that people who still believe in fairytales were able to rationalise their virtue signalling for what it really is and begin to understand why people nowadays aren’t fans of conservative religions, particularly fundamentalist Islam. All I have to do to understand it is to consider the damage terrorism has done in my lifetime, in Ireland as well as in the Middle East.

John Dewhirst
John Dewhirst
3 years ago

It has become almost farcical with a rag-tag bunch at the school gates protesting whose grasp of secondary education has probably been minimal at best. And yet these guys dictate the agenda. It seems that education has – and is – no defence for the mainstream.

Last edited 3 years ago by John Dewhirst
kinelll086
kinelll086
3 years ago

Last week in the Times Giles Coren described easter as “jesus laid an egg and a bunny came out” and ” A bloaty chocolate vomfest tagged onto a fairy tale” Had he used a similar description of Islam he would have been “forced” to apologise although I doubt that the times would have printed that.
We can offend any religion in any way as long as that religion does not threaten us with violence

Sandy Tatham
Sandy Tatham
3 years ago
Reply to  kinelll086

That’s so true. Thank you.

Andrew Baldwin
Andrew Baldwin
3 years ago

Well said, Andrew. Since you mentioned the Charlie Hebdo cartoons, let me say that I clicked on a link to read the UnHerd story by Guyan Mitra, “I Showed My Children the Charlie Hebdo Cartoons”, with the explainer below: “As a teacher, I’ve found that the most common response has been, ‘is that it?’” It was intriguing for me, since that was my reaction to the rather tame cartoons of the founder of Islam published in the Jutland Post when I saw a lot of them that were reprinted in Calgary’s Western Standard. When I clicked on the link though, I got sent to a separate tab, called “Think Again” with other UnHerd content available, but not the Guyan Mitra op-ed. What is happening here? Have I entered The Twilight Zone?

James Wardle
James Wardle
3 years ago

In 2003 Iraq had 1,500,000 Christians but it is now 150,000. In one attack a 4 year old boy saw his prents shot dead in a church and kept running into the terrorists shouting stop and why. Eventually they were so annoyed they shot him. When we talk of backlashes and words causing offence and are violent, I beg to differ. Iraqi Christians were some of the oldest Christian settlements dating back to the time just after Christ.
Mohammed married a girl under 10 and consummated around 9or 10, but the details are sketchy. Various arguments are used to excuse it, but it is what it is. There’s a problem in those communities following the infamous honour killing and women gfrom that community did a documentary saying this is a problem. You have to admit you have a problem. Charlie Hebdo shoyld be on every re syllabus to explain how extremism works and why freedom of speech is important. The school should just reinstate him providing it was in the context of a lesson. Violence is unacceptable and he should be protected. It’s a drawing not even a criticism of the muslim faith just a fact. That cartoon sparked a terrorist attack. Sorry but it did. Did yoj know about 4 yr old lads being murdered? No but Christian persecution is increasing. In Iraq, Christian pregnant women and children were beheaded in the oppressionwhich resulted in 1000scfleeibg. Thanks Tony B. Spectacular own goal.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago

He might get a job at Eton as long as he doesn’t mention the Patriarchy.

Conversely the former Eton master might do the same as long as he doesn’t mention the Prophet.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago

Eartha Kitt, that unforgettable voice, and a onetime resident of Batley, how interesting.
Perhaps it was the inspiration for
‘Just an old fashioned Girl’ :

“I like Chopin and Bizet
And the songs of yesterday,
String quartets and Polonesian carols.
But the music that excels
Is the sound of oil wells
As they slurp, slurp, slurp into the barrels”.

Mike K
Mike K
3 years ago

Hilarious,as ever.

Paul Ashton
Paul Ashton
3 years ago

Your posts upset me. Why don’t you do the polite thing and stop posting?
Hopefully you can see the answer to your question.

Jack Ingham
Jack Ingham
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul Ashton

The answer to the question is that you then have a reasonable discussion about what exactly it is he’s said in his post that upsets you.

Cheryl Jones
Cheryl Jones
3 years ago

Then perhaps you would be happier far far away from such a depraved society.

Terence Riordan
Terence Riordan
3 years ago

A most important fight on the hands of those of us who believe in free speech. It is crucial that people can express their views and can be questioned and discussed with about the basis. We can agree to disagree and all live in peace. We can also maybe change or modify our views which is great. These people who impose their righteousness on others are out of line and the appalling misuse of social media gives them power. The sooner we classify Social Media platforms as publishing houses and subscribers have to submit real identities the better. Of course religions and race themes are prime organisational tools for bigotry from many directions.

Penelope Lane
Penelope Lane
3 years ago

Surely there is only one point that is relevant here: Britain has no blasphemy laws. So discussing a cartoon of any religious leader is not against the law.
The protester spoke in the name of “the Muslim community”, so clearly the complaint was religious in nature.
It seems to me that Britain has got itself into a right old muddle by allowing social justice issues to be confused and conflated with religious issues. Religion and society are two different things. They operate on different levels and require different guidelines and constraints.
Noone is criticising the Pope when he speaks out in support of the poor and dispossessed. That is because, unlike the Batford protestors, he does it without relying on any violent aspects from his religion to support his appeals. Similarly with the Dalai Lama when he speaks out in favour of democracy. In each case, the leader is making a clear political or social justice statement.
So British Muslims need to be clear too: protest about political discrimination or social injustice per se, but don’t even think of bringing religious wars into it.
Seen in that light, the Batford teacher has no case to answer.

Glyn Reed
Glyn Reed
3 years ago

These men gather in a threatening group outside a school over the course of several days and the police watch on. On Good Friday, police closed down a Good Friday church service in Balham.

Penelope Lane
Penelope Lane
3 years ago
Reply to  Glyn Reed

If we are to assess your comment, you need to give some detail about the closing down of the church service: Why did it happen? What was the context?

joycebrette
joycebrette
3 years ago
Reply to  Penelope Lane

Why did it happen, I would hazard a guess at social distancing, have you slept through the pandemic?

Jack Ingham
Jack Ingham
3 years ago

Draping a big swastika outside your house is extremely offensive to a lot of people. You don’t do it because it upsets people. If you do, then expect some criticism.
People have protested the cartoon, so now there’s a debate about freedom of expression and how we do it in a way that’s coherent for all society.
Not quite an inquisition.

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
3 years ago
Reply to  Jack Ingham

suggesting that a group includes “women with penises” is upsetting to people, mostly because of its sheer stupidity. Yet the ones who dare criticize that pronouncement are the ones who are attacked. When white people are branded as racist for simply being white, that is also offensive but I don’t hear this same “don’t offend them” philosophy.
It seems that the issue is not causing offense, per se, but causing offense among certain groups. And it’s not like the school itself drew up the cartoon. At some point, it might be useful to stop treating certain groups as being little more than whiny children incapable of handling life.

Jack Ingham
Jack Ingham
3 years ago

Thought it was 72?

Terry Mushroom
Terry Mushroom
3 years ago

Could well be the algo thingies. A test is to reword your entry.

Charles Rense
Charles Rense
3 years ago

Did you include any swear words?

Jack Ingham
Jack Ingham
3 years ago

That’d be the rational response Nick, but does spoil the “inquisition” narrative the article’s going for.

Last edited 3 years ago by Jack Ingham
Juilan Bonmottier
Juilan Bonmottier
3 years ago
Reply to  Jack Ingham

So, in the interests of this ‘politeness’ where is the line drawn? Biden the other week excused genocide, amongst other atrocities, in China based on a sort of politeness for another country’s ‘cultural norms’. Politeness is all very well for a dinner party where you don’t want too much trifle jettisoned around the room, but not much good in the conflict of ideas where meaningful things are up for free and impassioned discussion.
I think your definition of politeness is not politeness at all, but appeasement resulting from fear of causing offence.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago

In fact UnHerd is very rapidly becoming Der Sturmer.

A Spetzari
A Spetzari
3 years ago

React to accusations of being intolerant…with intolerance

John Standing
John Standing
3 years ago
Reply to  A Spetzari

Kindly explain why it is “intolerant” for a native people to reject the foreignisation of its land.
Oh but you can’t, can you. You just got carried along with the liberal la-la multiculti lying, and somewhere along the line you forgot the right to life and land of the natives – and worse, you learned to dehumanise that right.

Paul N
Paul N
3 years ago
Reply to  John Standing

What is “foreignisation”?
Does it include making up words that are not “Queen’s English”?

Last edited 3 years ago by Paul N
Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  A Spetzari

Did the Army teach you that?
If so, no wonder it has ‘gone to pot!

Richard E
Richard E
3 years ago
Reply to  A Spetzari

It’s being intolerant to intolerance.
A bit like being intolerant to murder, intolerant to child abuse, intolerant to crime….
Get it now?

Last edited 3 years ago by Richard E
Roger le Clercq
Roger le Clercq
3 years ago

Can somebody explain what Retinopathy of Prematurity has to do with this article please? (RoP?) From line one of the discussion I have been sinking into vituperative and incoherent rants which are to me disappointing. Otherwise I think the article has a point which is not addressed by most of the comments that follow. Kindly help in crossing the road will be appreciated.

Colin Shingler
Colin Shingler
3 years ago

Zola 1840 -1902
Civilization will not attain to its perfection until the last stone falls from the last church onto the last priest.
And here we are 21st Century and still they defile the world. I think that tells you all you need to know about religion.


Layla Kaylif
Layla Kaylif
3 years ago

” I am sure that many pupils are disturbed by the anti-Semitic Nazi propaganda cartoons that are routinely included in history textbooks, but they serve an important function in the learning process”. 
Interesting..so you are comparing the Charlie Hebdo cartoons to anti-semitic Nazi propaganda…. I assume the Nazi propaganda is not used as a history lesson on freedom of speech? Rather, to demonstrate the evils of anti-semiticism? In contrast, my understanding is that the cartoon images are not shown in the class to condemn the cartoonists as ‘anti-islamic’, rather than to defend freedom of speech…?
In other words, the issue here is clear: no-one defends freedom of speech if the language is deemed ‘anti-semitic’…however all defend freedom of speech if the issue is deemed ‘anti-islamic’.
It is clear that people do not respect the sacredness of the prophet mohammed and that anti-islamic feeling is the driver of the defence of freedom of speech. Which is fine. But lets call it was it is.

Trevor Lloyd
Trevor Lloyd
3 years ago

I am a teacher of Religious Studies in a West Yorkshire school (not the school involved in this controversy). Although I think there has been an over-reaction, and the exploiting of it by different groups for their own purposes, it is wrong to present this sad episode as being about free speech vs religious conservatism. It would have been totally possible to raise the issue of free speech and blasphemy and discuss it openly, as well as raising points about violence arising from different religions (I have done both myself several times) without showing a cartoon of Muhammad which the teacher must surely have known would be offensive to a number of the students in the lesson. It was unnecessarily provocative – to what end?

Richard E
Richard E
3 years ago
Reply to  Trevor Lloyd

Spineless pandering.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Richard E

Precisely.

Charles Rense
Charles Rense
3 years ago
Reply to  Trevor Lloyd

It would have been totally possible for George Carlin to make his point about swearing on TV without using so many dirty words too. Yours is an old, and timid argument.

Penelope Lane
Penelope Lane
3 years ago
Reply to  Trevor Lloyd

You miss the point: there is no reason why a cartoon of Muhammad cannot be shown in the UK, where we have no laws against blasphemy. Trying to prevent this freedom is to import an alien legal concept which does not belong here.
When will people stop confusing religious questions with social and political issues? Showing a picture of Mohammed is a purely religious issue, not a socio-political one. It must be dealt with as such, meaning there is no case to answer.

Paul N
Paul N
3 years ago

Richard E says: “Islam in incompatible with Western values” and then goes on to apparently argue for expulsion as a “solution”.
But expelling all members of a particular religion simply because of their religion is not particularly with modern Western values though, is it? We have moved on since 1609.

Is UnHerd’s comment threading broken today?

Last edited 3 years ago by Paul N
Johnny Sutherland
Johnny Sutherland
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul N

I downvoted you because I’m not sure that “we’ll tolerate anything” and “we’ll alter to your culture” is moving on.

Joe Blow
Joe Blow
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul N

We do not allow people in certain jobs if they are members of the BNP (righty so, in my view) . Presumably from your post, you would allow BNP members to serve as police officers and teachers?

Paul N
Paul N
3 years ago
Reply to  Joe Blow

Not sue where you imagine I said that.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul N

Don’t you mean 1941-45?

Paul N
Paul N
3 years ago

Joe Blow writes: “The idiot-left place muslims highly on the victimhood hierarchy
I don’t believe in a hierarchy of victim-groups (though in a world with real victims there clearly can be differences in the degree of suffering that these victims experience).
But I honestly can’t recall any mainstream left wing figures claiming that some victims are inherently more deserving than others due to their race or faith. Who were you thinking of that makes such a claim, and when did they make it?

Last edited 3 years ago by Paul N
Joe Blow
Joe Blow
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul N

Why do you think men identifying as women are supposed to be allowed in women’s changing rooms? Because on the left, trans-angst trumps women’s.
Why do you think Rotherham went unaddressed for so long? Why was Sarah Champion sacked? Because on the left, muslim angst trumps abused girls’ rights.

Last Jacobin
Last Jacobin
3 years ago
Reply to  Joe Blow

There is no unitary opinion in the ‘left’ on the apparent conflict between trans rights and women’s rights to safe places. There’s a lot of discussion and hopefully some compromise solution will come out of it that protects the rights of both.
Do you have any evidence that the Police Force in Rotherham was a hotbed of leftism in the 1990s and 2000s?

Michael Meddings
Michael Meddings
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

The council was certainly left. Bold emphasis is mine.
The failure to address the abuse was attributed to a combination of factors revolving around raceclass and gender—contemptuous and sexist attitudes toward the mostly working-class victims; fear that the perpetrators’ ethnicity would trigger allegations of racism and damage community relations; the Labour council’s reluctance to challenge a Labour-voting ethnic minority; lack of a child-centred focus; a desire to protect the town’s reputation; and lack of training and resources.
(From Wiki)

Paul N
Paul N
3 years ago
Reply to  Joe Blow

I have no view on who should use women’s toilets. Women, perhaps 🙂
Rotherham went unaddressed for ages because of racism (loosely defined) and an unwillingness to tackle difficult issues. Lots of scandals go unaddressed. Maternity ward deaths in Staffordshire. Jimmy Saville. Cleveland social services. Windrush. Abuses of power, generally. It’s not always racism, though clearly it sometimes is. Often it’s just people not doing their job, in the hope of an easy life, or to avoid repercussions.
So who, exactly, is saying that victims from the muslim community are, by virtue of their faith, more deserving?

Last edited 3 years ago by Paul N
Last Jacobin
Last Jacobin
3 years ago

I don’t think this teacher should necessarily lose their job (that’s up to whatever process is gone thorough by their employer), I don’t support threats of violence or intimidation, I don’t support protesting at school gates and I don’t think this teacher was Islamophobic or hateful. I think the main organised religions of all brands are given too much credence and authority in UK society but I take the liberal stance that it’s not my place to prevent people believing what they want or worshipping as they want if it doesn’t hurt others. I don’t really even support the idea of Religious Studies – I think it should be rebranded as Philosophy or Politics or Cultural Studies or be included in Sociology and treat the study of secular beliefs as having the same importance.
If I were a teacher of Religious Studies, I would find it difficult to justify ignoring the question of the perceived conflict between religious faith and free speech, or not to discuss the murders of Samuel Paty and the satirists of Charlie Hebdo. While there is nothing wrong with acknowledging the potential offence that depictions of the Prophet Mohammed might cause, it is not a sufficient reason to avoid the topic altogether. 
The teacher in this case could have done all of the above without deliberately using an image that they knew would be offensive and distressing to many of their students. No-one is asking them to ‘ignore the topic altogether’. It would have been more instructive to debate with the class why it would or would not
I deo be appropriate to share the image. Unless the teacher was very naive they must have known what impact their action would have. And to be that naive would be demonstrating professional incompetence.
I am sure that many pupils are disturbed by the anti-Semitic Nazi propaganda cartoons that are routinely included in history textbooks, but they serve an important function in the learning process. 
This is a false comparison. There is no stricture within Judaism prohibiting the creation of images of anti-Semitic cartoons.
It’s sad to see so many of the responses to this Opinion Piece suggesting Muslims are the enemy, natives are under threat, civilisation is under threat, the country is being taken over and so on. These opinions remind me more of the Chinese Government’s reaction to the Uighurs than anything to with the ‘British’ values they are meant to be defending.
I don’t expect this to be popular point of view within these pages.

Last edited 3 years ago by Last Jacobin
Gladys Melia
Gladys Melia
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

There is nothing in the Koran that forbids images of Muhammad. It is the Immans who have brought in this ruling.

Last Jacobin
Last Jacobin
3 years ago
Reply to  Gladys Melia

Thanks for clarifying that.

Paul N
Paul N
3 years ago
Reply to  Gladys Melia

However Islam gets its rules not just from the Koran, but also from sayings attributed (with varying degrees of certainty) to the Prophet Mohammed, and from a body of interpretation and precedent (which many branches of Islam believe to be “closed”, no longer changing as the world changes).
Maybe some of that is where the “pictures of the Prophet” thing comes from. Certainly they and the Jews don’t do religious art in the way the Christian tradition does. Maybe they interpret the whole “graven image” and idolatry prohibition in the shared religious writings more strictly.

Last edited 3 years ago by Paul N
Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

It’s sad to see so many of the responses to this Opinion Piece suggesting Muslims are the enemy, natives are under threat, civilisation is under threat, the country is being taken over and so on.
What do you suppose is driving those responses? Could it have anything at all to do with how the loudest Muslims conduct themselves? Part of immigrating is that you now have the duty to assimilate into the host society. That equation cannot work in reverse, not if the host society is to remain as such.

Last Jacobin
Last Jacobin
3 years ago
Reply to  Alex Lekas

47% of Muslims in Britain were born in Britain. They are not immigrants and cannot be held responsible for their parents not assimilating, as you see it.

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

That doesn’t answer the question. By your math, 53% of the Muslims there were not British-born, yet they chose to move there. If a bunch of Brits moved to a Middle Eastern country, should that nation be required to adopt their ways or would they be expected to fit in?

Last Jacobin
Last Jacobin
3 years ago
Reply to  Alex Lekas

Muslims in Britain do fit in. I live, work and socialise with many Muslims.

Philip Burrell
Philip Burrell
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

I absolutely agree with you Mark. Here in Leicester, they are fitting in fine, joining community groups, charities, helping to run local sports teams etc. Like the Afro-Caribbeans who came here in the 50’s and 60’s and the Ugandan Asians who fled from Idi Amin in the 70’s, Leicester has absorbed them all and become a richer, more diverse and peaceful community. The second and third generations will be fully integrated into the community with increased marriages between the the different religious groupings and even more likely the rejection of those religious traditions. There is no enemy within despite what people want to believe. Ignore the bigoted loudmouths from all religious persuasions and talk to the sixth formers in your local school to see what the future looks like.

clem alford
clem alford
3 years ago
Reply to  Philip Burrell

I have been involved with the south Asian communities for half a century or more. When there were few of each group Hindu, Muslim and Sikh there was no real problem. But as the numbers have increased they have segregated and built their own community requirements and it has become a bit like India. Ghettos have emerged with areas where mainly, Sikhs living around Gudwarahs. Hindus around Mandirs and Muslims around Mosques, They all vie for the government tokenist grants and are courted by the politicians of all political parties for votes. Now religion plays a part in politics and even Muslims stand as their own ‘religious community. Look what happened in Tower Hamlets.
Lutfur Rahman decision – Daily Politics, 23rd April 2015 – YouTube

Andy Martin
Andy Martin
3 years ago
Reply to  Philip Burrell

I’m sure you know that Muslims are not one homogenous community. You cannot compare the largely Mirpuri diaspora communities in Rochdale and Rotherham with the mostly non-Mirpuri Muslims in Leicester.
If you talk with Muslims about regional differences and especially with those with the surname ‘Khan’ and especially if they are from Lahore, you will understand that they are not a by any stretch, a happy uniform religious community. For various reasons the ‘Khans’ look down on the Mirpuris and tend to blame them for the bad reputation that Muslims in the UK have been getting.
Moreover, the Ugandan Asian dispora included Muslims, as well as Hindus.
Since the early seventies, race relations in Leicester have always been fairly harmonious. This may be attributed to a good mix of (mostly?) Hindu, with also Muslims, and West Indians, not to mention the largest Hindu Diwali Festival outside of India.

Mark Preston
Mark Preston
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

In a Guardian poll over 50%of UK muslims admitted to wanting to see homosexuality made illegal. Those views do not fit in or are you OK tolerating their intolerance?

michael harris
michael harris
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

But they can be held responsible for not assimilating themselves; those of them who have decided to hold out for the old ways-

Catherine Newcombe
Catherine Newcombe
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

One point of showing the cartoon is to enable a supervised and reasonable discussion of the issue in an adult reasoned and controlled manner. Where the adults take responsibility for covering a difficult but essential topic. If no images were used at all , the students would only walk out of the class Googling the images anyway, risking their own safety if seen to be being proactively looking for the images.

Last Jacobin
Last Jacobin
3 years ago

The part of society that does those things in the UK is actually a tiny number of individuals. It’s a fair question to ask why some people deliberately go out of their way to seriously offend 6% of the population for no discernible purpose other than to offend.

Fraser Bailey
Fraser Bailey
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

You seem to have no understanding of the way in which Islam has come to dominate so much of the earth’s surface over the last 1,400 years. Sadly, it is probably too late to prevent the Islamification of the UK and western Europe. Presumably you are quite happy with that.
Are you even aware of what happened in Iran in 1979 when the Leftists (such as yourself) thought they were taking control after removing the Shah, only to be ruthlessly exterminated by the Islamists?

Last edited 3 years ago by Fraser Bailey
Last Jacobin
Last Jacobin
3 years ago
Reply to  Fraser Bailey

I don’t believe the UK is being Islamified. I think it’s quite likely the growth of the proportion of the population that declares itself as having ‘no religion’ or being very loosely affiliated to a faith in the way many Christians, and many of Muslim heritage, already are will become the majority.
I don’t think it’s particularly useful to conflate 1979 Iran with 2020 UK. You could argue the 1979 revolution was the result of Churchill’s 1953 coup which was designed to prevent Iran becoming more left wing – as it was heading.

Fraser Bailey
Fraser Bailey
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

I agree with you with regard to the 1953 coup which was, I believe, engineered in the interests of British oil companies. A very bad business.
I raise the issue of 1979 because the Left always sides with Islam. For the moment, Islam will tolerate the Left as its useful idiots. But when it gains enough power, the Left will quickly be dispensed with.
Moreover, Islam is not only a religion, it is a system of government and law etc. I simply don’t understand why you think this is going to out differently to everywhere else that Islam has seeded itself of the last 1,400 years. Already there are Islamic political parties in the Netherlands and Belgium, and possibly also Sweden. You can’t stop it now.

Robin Lambert
Robin Lambert
3 years ago
Reply to  Fraser Bailey

The Left George Galloway fell out with Sundry Former Colleagues..

Sandy Tatham
Sandy Tatham
3 years ago
Reply to  Fraser Bailey

“You can’t stop it now”. I hope you are wrong. The internet is the silver bullet and everyone can at long last access translations of religious material in their own languages. There is a growing trend for Muslims to leave Islam when they encounter the ideas of critical thinking, though it’s not always apparent because in most Muslim-majority countries it’s still not safe for them to speak out.

Alex Lekas
Alex Lekas
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

so are you opposed to offending groups in general or just those characterized by small numbers? When defending and explaining a foundational principle like free speech is cast as some purposeful attempt to offend a group, then just say you oppose free speech and at least be honest about it.

Last Jacobin
Last Jacobin
3 years ago
Reply to  Alex Lekas

Free speech could have been explained and defended without causing the offence, in this instance. The comment I was responding to seems to have been deleted so the context of my response is somewhat lost.

Johannes Kreisler
Johannes Kreisler
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

Offence is perceived, NOT caused.

Charles Stanhope
Charles Stanhope
3 years ago

Perfectly put, well done Sir!

Last edited 3 years ago by Charles Stanhope
Judy Johnson
Judy Johnson
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

I agree in that, if someone takes offence where none is intended, that is their choice. However, if someone knows what is offensive to a particular group and it is possible to express free speech in an alternative way, that is courteous. If there is no reasonable alternative, in this case describing the cartoons and explaining that they are not being shown because that would be offensive, would be a reasonable alternative.

Johnny Sutherland
Johnny Sutherland
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

Its also a fair question to ask why we don’t do something about them.

Andy Martin
Andy Martin
3 years ago

Basically I agree with Johnny.
Just be aware that showing cartoons of Mohammed will drive some Muslims into a homicidal rage, it isn’t worth the risk of getting knifed, so why do it?
Instead by all means don’t shy from confronting those members of the Muslim community who believe that child marriage to first cousins, nikah marriage, honor related violence, FGM and all the other cultural habits and beliefs that should not be tolerated in any civilized society are acceptable.

Vijay Kant
Vijay Kant
3 years ago
Reply to  Last Jacobin

It is their right to offend! All religions offend and insult my intelligence, but I still tolerate them.

Andy Martin
Andy Martin
3 years ago
Reply to  Vijay Kant

But do religious nut jobs tolerate you?