Main Edition
US
FR
The Batley protestors need a lesson in free speech (Photo by Christopher Furlong/Getty Images)
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.
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.
SubscribeThe 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.
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.
Reply to myself – sorry, the book is called Guerilla – completely different title.
Best comment here, and the most succinct by far. Thank you.
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?
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.
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).
Gott ist mit uns
Having God on your side isn’t quite the same as making sure those with other gods by definition deserve to die.
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.
Retanot King – with respect, fascism and national socialism are one and the same.
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.
Please don’t tell me you have a History degree.
It doesn’t much matter to the dead in whose name they were killed. They are still just as dead.
Crusades?????
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)
I think you will find Mao killed even more in the ludicrously named “Great Leap Forward” 1959-62.
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.
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
Indeed. I posed a similar comment earlier but it has been removed!!!
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.
I think you meant “razed” as in destroyed, not “raised” as in elevated.
Yes, I can never get the edit thing to work!
However now have a GGC to hand and can sort it out.
And add Rome to the list as well!
There’s always the future
Hear hear!
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.
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”.
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.
And that wee fellah in Cambodia, Pol Pot.
Only 3 million, not even a bronze!
As dictators go he was very much tin.
not for lack of trying, and only because the country he tyrannized had a small population.
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.
“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.
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.
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 –
If you think Mao is a creature of the West, you should return your “modern history” BA ASAP.
Explain.
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.
very good response to a confused person
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?
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.
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.
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!
Whataboutery.
Humans are violent. There aren’t any exceptions
The Jains ?
But not in the name of ‘religion’.
Not only is your comment inane on its face, it also has nothing to do with the subject being addressed.
It’s Vilde Chaye! Howdy bro. Still at Harry’s place?
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.
“Not only is your comment inane on its face”
Shouldn’t that be ‘on the face of it’?
Not to mention that Japan was responsible for the Pacific portion of the Second World War.
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.
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.
‘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.
Bad deeds back then don’t excuse bad deeds today.
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
Well said!
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.
How is UnHerd a shadow of its former self? Because now it allows counter-narratives?
No, counter-narratives have always been “allowed”, until this new regime, which removes posts. Unsaid is the new normal.
Don’t you recall the former Disqus system of discussion?
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.
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?
Well Sonny skied into a tree and is long dead, though Cher is still alive.
I got you babe.
“If the above teacher gets his I have zero sympathy.” – Charming
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.
I think it more likely that their excesses were were not hampered by a belief in something bigger than themselves.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
O for those happy centuries of the glorious Pax Romana, when hardly anyone gave a ‘fig’ about religion.
Not so great for the slaves, women or the conquered peoples of course but hey ho
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!
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.
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.
For goodness sake, are you finding some equivalence?
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.
“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.
Well said Peter Scott. Very well put indeed.
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.
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.
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.”
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.
What does RoP stand for?
Religion of Peace
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.
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.
Well said.
It’s a small thing, but people on here could also sign the petition linked to here in the piece.
I already have.
I signed the petition two days ago.
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.
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.
The current scaredy-cat Conservative Government is an embarrassment to the UK. But I fear that a Labour Government would actually be worse.
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.
Your fears are well founded. Labour has abandoned its old demographic in favour of new ones.
Most definitely, they would open the borders and let more of the bas**rods in.
Yes, it’s somewhat akin to negotiating with terrorists. It merely encourages the next demand.
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.
Surely you are aware that the liberal agenda for attacking religion does have one significant exception – or do you find that implausible?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Or in Batley perhaps.
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?
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.
Yes ‘they’ are in about the year 1389, just after the Peasant’s Revolt.
No chance!
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
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.
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.
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.
Or indeed the world.
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.
Go and have a lie down Sanford there’s a good boy
“I am most likely the most Right Wing poster here”, well in ons sense probably
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
If they can get away with the systematic rap e of schoolgirls getting away with this will be child’s play
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.
Can’t wait to see the Islamic equivalent of Father Ted
That would be an ecumenical matter.
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
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.
Well, the Old Bill in that locality don’t seem too keen to be on either case.
Don’t forget 30 years of no prosecutions for FGM!
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.
Hear hear, so very well said.
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.
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.
Silly – teaching an understanding of religion is not promoting -and ultimately no different than teaching kids about Marxism or Fascism for instance
It’s teaching about religion not forcing students to be religious.
Not when some of those students come into the class already indoctrinated with hatred.
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.
It is important for children to learn to consider abstract concepts.
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?
You should start teaching him Classics/Greats at the first possible opportunity.
At the end of the day the ‘rest’ are just ‘also ran’
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.
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.
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.
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.
Or find one for them, they would if the shoe were on the other foot. Provided the people in question lived that long.
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.
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?
“I’m offended because you’re offended.”
It’s a circular argument.
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!
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.
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”
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?
My father would have said “what did you do to deserve it.”
as parents did years ago, respect your elders and people n authority. Eg police.
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.
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.
You are questioning “every last poster”. Maybe you haven’t thought your comments are the ones that are questionable?
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
Thomas Sowell is a bonafide American hero.
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.
And there is one person on here who thinks he not only should be threatened but deserves any repercussions. Smacks of terrorist .
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.
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
Quite, I think you are correct, unfortunately. Maybe some ex-miners with nothing to do?
You’re not allowed to Call them BAME..anymore
That’s good, I can think of lots of other names.
That’s why it’s time to “cancel BBC” and the newspapers with like thoughts .
Should you propose such a removal in Batley you would probably have your collar felt for non-crime hate speech.
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.
As you say, demographics is destiny. And on that basis, the UK and western Europe will be done within a few decades.
Boris is doing his best To Procreate like ”Noah”?..
Yes indeed. How did the Bible put it?
Something like “spray your seed all over the planet”
Why do you exclude Powell, who was prophetic and, indeed, the only moral mainstream politician since his speech to this day.
My dad, who is dead now, was a total believer, this man could predict the future. Cue the present.?
So by ‘Darwinian Self Selection we should soon be rid of this Islamic nuisance?
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.
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.
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.
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.
Al-Ilah was one of the phases of the moon.
Muslims worship the moon.
Moon phases in Western Calendar!
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 .
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
That sounds awfully like bunkum, John. Your linked article says:
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.
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.
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.
Don’t give up, we need intellectuals .
Thank you for speaking up, Andrew.
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?
All of my comments were removed.
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.???
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.
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.
So agree, well said, goose and gander comes to mind.
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.
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!!
As John Burke may not have said, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”
So you basically live in fear of your fellow believers…. SMH
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.
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.
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.
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?
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?
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.
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.
Sorry to split hairs.I read an article which stated there were no gay muslims because islam and homosexuality were incompatible.
🙂
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.
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.
Yes truly pathetic.
O for the days of DISQUS; This censorship is dreadful.
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.
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.
Yes indeed, making religion a legally “protected species “ was idiotic .
We will rue the day some ‘idiot’ decided that.
It seems unfair too that religion has been singled out for special treatment – whilst political beliefs are not protected.
Yes, a national disgrace, that is not tolerated in France for example.
Me too!
Considering unsubscribing from Unherd as a result of my and others’ experience.
I was thinking of subscribing but not now. I thought Unherd was a refreshing change from the MSM,but it seems I was mistaken.
“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?
My old man had a favourite mantra that has always