Once again I am disheartened by the proclivity of this nation’s “educators” to confuse tolerance with bending over backwards to appease opposing views.
http://www.twincities.com/mld/pioneerpress/13891898.htm
Personally, I agree that a person’s religious beliefs should not have to be compromised as long as they do not compromise or impose upon the beliefs of others. I do not believe that one’s convictions need to be enforced upon others. I also believe that if your religion prohibits you and your children from drawing a family portrait or a picture of a dog, then you should be free to draw a rock or a stick instead, receiving full credit for the assignment. But to take away the right of other children to draw Mommy, Daddy and Rover under the big oak out back is a disgusting display of poor judgment on the part of our teachers. If we continue to bow under the guise of tolerance to those who are most intolerant, how do we ever expect them to see that there are two sides to every coin? What we should be teaching is that our way of life is as important to us as theirs is to them, and while we recognize and respect their beliefs, we expect the same in turn. That’s called compromise, and it is a far greater lesson than blind tolerance.
10 comments:
Where is the main stream press outrage when the scool went to the imam to ask what they could draw? If the school had gone to a priest and ask the same question you can bet there would have been storm, because religion had become involved.
What happens next, when they go to the school and says our kids must wear X and not to hurt their feelings everybody should. Does this mean the school then goes back to the imam and ask him what the proper attire is for all the students at the school?
I agree. And while they're teaching art, why not a little art history. They could learn about Muslims of the Mughal Dynasty from the 1300's to 1700's that conquered lands from Pakistan to Northern India. Art was allowed to flourish through the patronage of three emperors Akbar, his son Jahangir, and his son, Shah Jahan. Akbar, as ruler of much of India, married a Hindu princess and dreamt of bringing together Muslim, Hindu, and Christian thought. He hung Dutch landscapes and Christian subjects on his library walls and called upon his artists to record both non-fiction and fiction. There exsists a history of the emperor called the Akbar Nama full of figures of humans and animals. Akbar's appreciation of painting wasn't shared by orthodox Muslims but that's the nature of art, it is subjective. Akbar, as quoted by his historian Abu'l-Fazl, defends his views of art and Islam: "It always seems to me, that a painter has very special means of recognizing God, for when he draws a living thing, and contemplates the thing in detail, he is driven to thinking of God, Who creates the life which he cannot give his work, and learns to understand God better."
from Far Eastern Art
by Sherman Lee
Thanks for listening,
~A~
This is not about art or religion, it is about giving away little bit by little bit your culture and freedom under the banner of diversity and multi-culturalism, without anybody even questioning about what is happening.
Why does an imam have to be consulted about what is to be taught, but not a priest or a rabbi, or whoever?
I don't belive anyone is "giving away" a part of their culture or freedom. If anything freedom is being granted; the rules are pushed to their limits to incorporate the curriculum, which is probably standard for all the kids in that grade across the district, and these students with a particular religious belief.
We have already made allowances for other variations within a classroom; consider the Jehovah's Witness kids that don't participate in the Pledge of Allegiance.
I simply would like to see a little balance within the story. My point in bringing up Akbar is that radical protesters only represent themselves, not everyone. I question whether the families of students that make up the 70% are all so extreme in their beliefs: Hawi Muhammed said her parents don't mind if she draws people once in a while, but "God … doesn't like people to draw a lot," she said.
I imagine that the art projects were very successful and effective and nobody complained for years before the fanatics got all loud 'n' shit.
~A~
Once again the point was missed. If the parents do not want their kids to draw a person, so be it just like the Jehovah's Witness kid don't have to say the pledge. The question is why should the school ask an imam what a class can draw? This is not the standard for setting curriculums.
This was new this year, and the real problem is, nobody is questioning why the school is asking an imam what the class can draw and not other religious leaders and people outside the school administration. This was a class of all students, not just muslim kids.
Again the question is, what happens the next time a group complains about a dress code, do you go back to the imam?
I would argue that the church leaders representing the J. W. made it known to the district that these kids did not have to engage in any activities that compromised their faith, the Pledge, the Thanksgiving play, the Halloween Day parade etc., things the others kids participate in.
I would also argue that they asked the imam because he is an expert. The "lunch lady" does not choose what the kids are served for lunch, she has the menu dictated to her by an authority on nutrition. Similarly, the curriculum is made up of subjects and topics chosen by a group of educational experts or administrators that decide what the kids need to be taught and tested on. Therefore, it is logical that the principal ask the imam about the lessons because obviously those who planned them initially were not Muslim. The curriculum was also decided upon to best suit the majority of students, not all of them. That is the same reason why, at this individual school, the lesson was altered to best suit the majority.
The next time there is a problem, the school authorities will probably seek out those experts who best represent the group with the problem, whether it's the imam or the nutritionist or the district official unhappy with test scores.
~A~
Wait a minute, even if the school asked a person of knowledge about how to treat the J.W. kids, it was not dictated to all students.
But the truth is, if the school asked any regilious individual advice about a school curriculum, there would be hell to pay. Like prayer in school.
You are exactly right, but the parades and parties are still held and those that can participate do and those that don't, don't. There was probably a dozen or less J.W.s at my highschool, I only knew of two for sure out of 600 or so in my graduating class. It would be ridiculous to change to suit so few. But this school has a different ratio. The lessons are still the same, they just switched from self portraits to landscapes or whatever so that more kids could take part. They are trying to teach the same stuff just without getting their school blown up.
I wonder if the school is private. How is it that all the Muslim kids go to this particular school anyway?
You're right also, if they were attempting to teach some Koran before naptime?!? No way...
It is a public school, if it were private this would be a non-dicussion.
I can't believe we have to live in fear of having a school blown up if we don't do as the imam says.
Yeah, or if someone else does what he says...
Post a Comment