Oh My!
And this is why we can’t have nice things.
The same attitude that lead to colonialism and imperialism. We must educate these ignorant savages, because we know better than they do!
What a disgusting bunch of bigots you people are. It’s been pointed out to you time and time again that there are indeed religious scientists, religious scholars, and non-religious people who believe in woo, and yet you find your ideas superior, and think it’s YOUR duty to tell other people what to believe, just as you condemn them for doing the same.
Oh right, you know better. :dubious:
Oh, please… Colonialism and imperialism have seldom had such generous (though misguided) motives. Economic exploitation has played a much larger role.
Who cares if there are religious scientists, ‘scholars,’ or woo-loving atheists? School is not the place to give religious people a platform to present non-fact-based learning. History and factual discussion of the existence of various religions, fine. Religious people reporting their beliefs as facts (because to them, they are), no. While I agree that it is bigoted to exclude some religions while allowing others, a general no-woo-at-public-school policy is not telling anyone what to believe or not believe.
Can you tell me what this particular student said about the cultural significance of the hijab that was not factual?
I’m not talking about what a particular student may or may not have said.
When a person actually believes in a religion, why wouldn’t they report its belief system as factual?
“These are the Ten Commandments” vs “Christians believe these are the Ten Commandments.”
The whole presentation series seems problematic.
Sure, and such people are hypocrites. Would pointing that out be bigotry?
Indeed, they are not necessarily stupid. I mentioned that earlier.
Yes, I do know better, if they “know” that a snake could talk, or that it’s somehow possible to save an animal species with only one mated pair, or whatever else. Their ignorance is not as good as my knowledge. Before 9/11 and the Bush administration, it was common for atheists to decide that they could leave alone the theist masses if only they would leave the rest of us alone, but far too many theists are incapable of doing that, and their actions have serious real-world consequences.
It’s been pointed out to you again and again that religion is a choice, and it’s not bigotry to have a problem with someone’s choices, specifically if such choices are factually incorrect, or have damaging consequences for the rest of us. Even if people did choose to be homosexual, consenting adults aren’t harming anyone else, and aren’t espousing anything factually incorrect. In contrast, all the incorrect claims espoused by the world’s religions are grievous errors indeed, and have no place being portrayed as factual or respectable.
The latter is exactly how I was taught.
Not all Christians are Biblical literalists. (In fact, the majority are not.) Not to mention, not all religious people are Christians.
A justification that has been used for a great many things, that has often lead to disaster. Doesn’t matter if you’re right.
No shit.
Being religious doesn’t automatically mean that someone will have “damaging consequences for the rest of us.” If a person is wearing a hijab, she’s not hurting you. That’s her choice to do so. You want people to respect your choice? Respect her’s.
That’s assuming the school is claiming that they are. All we were taught is that, “this what this religion believes, and this is why they do such and such.” No claim as to whether or not their beliefs are “factual or respectable.” Just that they exist.
HOWEVER, telling a girl who wears a hijab that’s she’s oppressed that you, a MALE know better, and it’s up to YOU to enlighten her, is racist, bigotted, and oh, btw, SEXIST as fucking hell.
Guess what? She’s not hurting you. And last time I checked, we have this little thing called the First Amendment, which means she can’t be prohibited from wearing said garment.
You’re a condescending, sexist, ignorant piece of rat shit. The White Man’s Burden, right? We must save those ignorant savages from themselves, those stupid ragheads, amiright?
The rest of us are stuck living in a world where people who are ostensibly adults talk to the sky and inflict their delusions on others.
The sight of a hijab literally pains me, and is a tangible and visible reminder that women are not truly considered people by much of the world. This is upsetting. Of course she should not be prevented from wearing anything she wants, including a swastika, but I don’t have to not mind looking at it.
I respect her right to make this choice, but not the choice itself. All choices are not equal.
I know that. Those were just the most obvious examples.
Sure it matters. How could it not? Pursuing a goal based on a faulty premise is much worse than pursuing a goal based on a correct premise, all other things being equal, right?
You don’t seem to understand this, such as when you call me “racist.” Religion is not race. We are all born as atheists, and remain that way until (usually) our parents start lying to us.
Not necessarily automatically, but I don’t trust them not to. They’re already buying into an empty promise, and it doesn’t stop there.
It’s a conspicuous symbol of something that really does stand a good chance of hurting me, and you! I don’t expect people to respect my choices, and I am under no obligation to respect hers.
Yeah, but if someone is getting up and espousing their religion, but there is no opportunity for it to get challenged, that’s the same thing. Religion gets a free pass, and that’s very, very dangerous.
I’m actually more concerned that she and her co-religionists will oppress me. Such people are causing problems throughout the West, and anywhere else they have settled. They hassle women on beaches in Australia, refuse to pick up passengers with alcohol or seeing-eye-dogs, have the same objections to science as too many other theists, kill a Dutch filmmaker and some of the staff of a Parisian newspaper and try to kill a British novelist because of the victimless crime of blasphemy, try to hamstring successful sex-ed programs, and so much more. I know that “Eurabia” is a myth, but the problems are real.
It was not always thus. The first waves of (for example) North Africans to settle in France were not exactly known for being devout. Unfortunately, these days the situation is far different. Christers and, in some places, Haredi Jews cause enough problems. We don’t need to be adding to our allotment of sexually repressed, uptight, superstitious nitwits, and allowing this sort of thing to go unchallenged is doing exactly that.
Also, I said nothing about race. Racism is the belief that different “races” of humanity have genetic differences leading to some sort of hierarchy of abilities. That is untrue.
The First Amendment means that the state cannot prohibit her from doing so, but private entities can. It also means that the state cannot privilege her superstition over that of anyone else, or the lack of any such superstition.
I am condescending in the face of self-defeating stupidity, yes. I’m not sexist; and I am clearly much less ignorant than you. Yes, actually, we do have that burden, but skin color matters not. We have to save them from themselves, but we have to save ourselves from them as well.
Here is some footage from an Australian atheist convention, at which an all-male bunch of Muslims showed up to angrily protest. The convention-goers (not all white, if that matters to you) weren’t weakened by any of your milquetoast sentiments, and they showed the beardos who was boss. I love the same-sex couples making out in front of them.
You may have heard of The Book of Mormon, a highly successful Broadway musical which mocks Mormonism, and Mormonism richly deserves mockery! Could that be done safely regarding Islam?
I think it’s condescending and bigoted to say that Muslims just can’t handle criticism of the sort directed at, say, other religions.
Did I say you couldn’t criticize religion? Fuck no. I said you shouldn’t be arguing over it in a public school, genius. That whole thing about neutrality?
People like you are exactly WHY she felt the need to explain herself and her culture.
And no, Anaman, she is not “literally” paining you. Look up the difference between literally and figuratively, dumbass.
It was genuinely optional. My son did not attend this actual event because he wasn’t really that interested in learning more about the Hijab in particular. He already knew a lot of Islam because of his his group of friends is so diverse. There was no fall out or stigma for not going. No pressure to attend.
I should add this was not an assembly or anything like that. It was one girl in particular with some of her friends giving a talk and demonstration before school and at lunch time in the library.
I guess the others in that schools have option to listen or ignore that talk.
Like hell! The school instituted sharia law and the children were forced to behead one another.
Hmm. Nope. No cactus fucking here.
Only physical pain is real?
Wow.
“The sight literally pains me” isn’t a good argument when used against “the gays,” and it isn’t a good argument when you use it. Your own inability to tolerate something only tells us about you.
Yes, it does. In this case, what is says is that the second-class citizenship of women throughout the world, a situation ever-reinforced by the vast majority of religions, is deeply upsetting to me.
I have clearly stated that she should be free to wear whatever she wishes. If she walks about topless wearing a hijab, with a swastika drawn on her chest in lipstick, I will be the first to defend her right (not her legal right, obviously, thanks to oppressive anti-woman laws) to do so, in spite of my personal distaste for her sartorial choices.
The only similarity here to anti-gay bigotry is that even homophobic bigots have the right to feel whatever they feel when looking at something, as do we all.
If other kids attending aren’t allowed to ask tough questions, and if religion is given a free pass and not treated as fair game, the there is a serious double standard. If you can’t argue over it, it shouldn’t be brought in. And yes, people like me are on to her (or her elders, to be precise), despite all their efforts at spin.
Good; that’s an important point.
All the different religions can’t all be true. That’s true on a metaphysical level, but it’s even more relevant on a physical, real-world level, because of the societal consequences I describe. It must be fair game.
Also, there’s something else in this discussion that usually gets lost. I mentioned earlier that I really feel for kids trapped in religious environments. It’s often said that, if religious types can refrain from pushing their Bronze Age nonsense on others, then it shouldn’t be a problem. Fine, but what about their offspring, who aren’t given the choice or the chance? One of the purposes of education should be to break those strangleholds, which is why it’s so important for kids to come into contact with others not like them, with everything up for discussion.
This is goofy, and I say that as a committed atheist. If Kid A says, “I don’t eat bacon because I’m Jewish,” Kid B should be able to say, “why do you deny the divinity of Jesus?” You’re talking about secondary (or even pre-secondary) schools. Are we also supposed to encourage arguments about whether 2 and 2 really equal 4? Should PETA kid be allowed to harangue “I brought a bunny” kid on Show and Tell Day?