I'd need to see the actual text of the book before reaching a conclusion about what is taught.
Similar things could be said about material in Huck Finn.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Agreed.
Though it certainly raises a really, really big red flag.
And it should be noted that Huck Finn is a dated work of fiction. If it's a text book in the traditional sense, it's current, non-fiction, and is meant for instruction, not literary analysis and interpretation.
Still, I'd want to see the actual text before making snap decisions.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Lyrhawn, I'm with you on the distinction between a work of fiction and a textbook.
I'm extremely disturbed, and would love to see the actual texts.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
But what if these are scholarly works from previous eras, and the offensive sections really aren't being used? I could see that happening.
That said, there's a private "Christian" school in my area that teaches as part of its religious cirriculum that only the "Saved" are worthy to enter Heaven, so children should not associate with the "unsaved." Along with several other teachings that could foster an awful lot of prejudice. (One of my friends growing up got pulled out and sent to my public school when her mother and father learned that that was what she had been taught.)
Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
Check your rumors carefully. When I was a kid, I was assured by a kid at school that there were no doors in my house (how we got in I don't know), and that there was a button you could push that would make all the walls disappear.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Isn't that a scenario from Super Mario Brothers 3? Did the walls disappear or turn into coins?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I'd like to have more information before expressing outrage. In order to be outraged, I'd have to assume that everyone from the school who was quoted is completely lying. I don't have enough blind rage or bias residing in me to do that.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
That doesn't mean that her school uses those parts of those books.
Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: Isn't that a scenario from Super Mario Brothers 3? Did the walls disappear or turn into coins?
No, but when I told my momma, "Don't make me go 'Zelda' on you," I had to restart the level.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
She's appearing in public without wearing a burqah, which might be one small sign that the school might not be exactly as potrayed.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: That doesn't mean that her school uses those parts of those books.
You mean it's okay to use books that say that so long as they don't use those parts? Are you serious?
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
Can't find anything else, though, and it appears the school has been doing it for awhile. So, never mind.
Posted by Mig (Member # 9284) on :
A text book at an Islamic school funded by Saudi Arabia referes to Jews as "apes" and Christians as "pigs"? I'm shocked! Shocked! I find this hard to believe! WE shouldn't jump to any conclusions on this. This seems terribly out of character for an Islamic school funded by Saudis. What are we going to hear next? That the school faculty supports the nuking of Isreal, violent Jihad, homocide bombers and commemorates 9/11 by burning an effigy of Bush and Blair? Nah. What are the odds?
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
I know that the Bible contains a lot of stuff that I wouldn't want children to be taught without also teaching them at least some of the context. I can just see the headlines, "Christians teach from a book that includes baby killing!"
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: That doesn't mean that her school uses those parts of those books.
You mean it's okay to use books that say that so long as they don't use those parts? Are you serious?
First of all, that's not what I said, although in context, it might be okay. I said that we don't know whether they're actually teaching children that, whether they're actually using parts of those books that say those things, but if you want, I'll elaborate. Since I don't know exactly what they're teaching or how they are using the text, I can't tell you if it's okay or not. I don't support use of the N-word or the perpetuation of racial stereotypes of African-Americans, but I am not opposed to children reading Huck Finn in school, or other books from a previous era that may portray those stereotypes, as long as they are taught appropriately and part of the discussion is the history of that word or those stereotypes and why that is not okay. We read part of Mein Kampf in one of my HS classes, that doesn't mean anyone was condoning the ideas in it. Learning about the history of your culture, including how your culture and/or religion has traditionally mistreated or marginalized others, is important. It's important so those things don't get consciously or unconsciously carried forward.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Well put, Your Highness.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Agreed.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mig: A text book at an Islamic school funded by Saudi Arabia referes to Jews as "apes" and Christians as "pigs"? I'm shocked! Shocked! I find this hard to believe! WE shouldn't jump to any conclusions on this. This seems terribly out of character for an Islamic school funded by Saudis. What are we going to hear next? That the school faculty supports the nuking of Isreal, violent Jihad, homocide bombers and commemorates 9/11 by burning an effigy of Bush and Blair? Nah. What are the odds?
Pay no attention to the MIG behind the curtain.
Mig, I could show you AT LEAST 3 schools within the US...Christian Schools (at least they claim to be)....who say the same thing. That doesn't make them mainstream, nor does it make it excusable.
Posted by airmanfour (Member # 6111) on :
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen:
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: That doesn't mean that her school uses those parts of those books.
You mean it's okay to use books that say that so long as they don't use those parts? Are you serious?
First of all, that's not what I said, although in context, it might be okay. I said that we don't know whether they're actually teaching children that, whether they're actually using parts of those books that say those things, but if you want, I'll elaborate. Since I don't know exactly what they're teaching or how they are using the text, I can't tell you if it's okay or not. I don't support use of the N-word or the perpetuation of racial stereotypes of African-Americans, but I am not opposed to children reading Huck Finn in school, or other books from a previous era that may portray those stereotypes, as long as they are taught appropriately and part of the discussion is the history of that word or those stereotypes and why that is not okay. We read part of Mein Kampf in one of my HS classes, that doesn't mean anyone was condoning the ideas in it. Learning about the history of your culture, including how your culture and/or religion has traditionally mistreated or marginalized others, is important. It's important so those things don't get consciously or unconsciously carried forward.
When reading parts of Mein Kampf and Huck Finn I'm sure a teacher is there to tell their students to take a step back from the material, and explain that the world isn't as it is being portrayed.
We're discussing an institution funded by an ideology that has been known to possess the world view expressed in the offending textbooks. I don't think those literary experiences are mirrored here.
Edited for clarity
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:When reading parts of Mein Kampf and Huck Finn I'm sure a teacher is there to tell their students to take a step back from the material, and explain that the world isn't as it is being portrayed.
I've never read Mein Kampf, but the racism in Huck Finn is shown in ironic light-- so the world SHOULD be as Twain's point (if not the literal text) says it should.
Context, context, context-- I'm not willing to hold an opinion until I have enough information to base that opinion upon.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Well, at least they support the theory of evolution. After all, Jews *are* apes (as are we all).
Can't relate to the comment on the Christians being pigs though.
But yeah, context. The Bible has passages that condone genocide and gang raping women before sodomizing men. However, these passages sound a lot better in context.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Can't relate to the comment on the Christians being pigs though.
I hear we taste like bacon.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: But yeah, context. The Bible has passages that condone genocide and gang raping women before sodomizing men. However, these passages sound a lot better in context.
Not that I've noticed, no.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
quote:Originally posted by blacwolve:
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: But yeah, context. The Bible has passages that condone genocide and gang raping women before sodomizing men. However, these passages sound a lot better in context.
Not that I've noticed, no.
I agree. Even in context, they are still pretty horrifying.
Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: The Bible has passages that condone genocide and gang raping women before sodomizing men. However, these passages sound a lot better in context.
Are you referring to the story of Sodom (in which the perpetrators were punished by God with fire and brimstone), or the story in Judges (in which the perpetrators were slaughtered by their countrymen)?
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
I find the story of Sodom, where Lot is counted as righteous for offering his daughters to be gang-raped, pretty disturbing, personally.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
Funny, my Bible doesn't even suggest that Lot is righteous for doing that.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
It's pretty disturbing that anybody would offer his daughter up for gang-rape, evil arch-villian or not.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
quote:Originally posted by Will B:
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: The Bible has passages that condone genocide and gang raping women before sodomizing men. However, these passages sound a lot better in context.
Are you referring to the story of Sodom (in which the perpetrators were punished by God with fire and brimstone), or the story in Judges (in which the perpetrators were slaughtered by their countrymen)?
The thing is, one could present the former without the latter (i.e., without the parts in parentheses) and have it look completely different when not in full context.
That is your point, I take it. It's also the point of others in the thread who are asking for more information.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
I can't speak specifically for the schools, but there are plenty of evangelical Christian sects that teach some pretty awful things about Catholics, which are a type of Christian.
Posted by PrometheusBound (Member # 10020) on :
"When reading parts of Mein Kampf and Huck Finn I'm sure a teacher is there to tell their students to take a step back from the material, and explain that the world isn't as it is being portrayed."
Not usualy, no. For one thing, Mein Kampf is so over the top that students, having grown up in a world where almost everyone is oposed to Hitler's ideas, don't need to be told that it is wrong.
And, yeah, Huck Finn is, as Scott pointed out, an anti-racist satire.
It seems that, if this story is true, we should be hearing about it from mainstream British sources soon. Note that the Evening Standard is a tabloid.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Damnit. I should really stop making ambiguous sarcastic comments.
My whole post was tongue-in-cheek. I don't seriously believe that the textbook promotes evolution my calling Jews "apes". Similarly, I don't seriously believe that genocide or offering up a daughter for rape sounds particularly good in any context.
My point is that there is a possibility that the passages are being used in a historical context to explain the development of Islam, but from the testimony of Mr. Cook and the pupils, I find that highly unlikely.
My citation of the Bible was simply meant to show that if indefensible passages exist in the Bible, it is likely that similarly indefensible passages exist in the Koran which is in its simplest form, a sequel to the Bible.
To summarise, it is unsurprising and indeed likely that portions of their religious material is indefensible in or out of context. To summarise the summary, throwing rocks in glass houses as in this clueless comment from the article:
quote: If this was turned around and a Christian or Jewish school had books like this there would be outrage. I am sick and TIRED of the double standards.
PS: I'm a little surprised that the focus in the response to my comment is on the rape and not the genocide, considering that rape is relatively minor compared to genocide. I'm not really sure what to make of that.
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
"Can't relate to the comment on the Christians being pigs though."
Ain'tcha ever heard of cannibals and missionaries? Just another way of sayin' that Christians are not on the dining menu of good Muslims.
[ February 08, 2007, 01:30 PM: Message edited by: aspectre ]
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by Will B: ... or the story in Judges (in which the perpetrators were slaughtered by their countrymen)?
I was referring to the former, which has been well covered by others.
However, looking at the latter, I find that even more odd. The perpetrators were not slaughtered by their countrymen, but by a army. Furthermore, the army did not only slaughter the perpetrators, but their families, their animals, and all their cities for good measure. I'm not sure going Keyser Soze on entire cities in retaliation for rape is a lesson we should be teaching modern children.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mucus:
quote:Originally posted by Will B: ... or the story in Judges (in which the perpetrators were slaughtered by their countrymen)?
I was referring to the former, which has been well covered by others.
However, looking at the latter, I find that even more odd. The perpetrators were not slaughtered by their countrymen, but by a army. Furthermore, the army did not only slaughter the perpetrators, but their families, their animals, and all their cities for good measure. I'm not sure going Keyser Soze on entire cities in retaliation for rape is a lesson we should be teaching modern children.
It was a society in which such acts had been unknown for centuries. When it happened, it wasn't like a rape happening in New York City. It was like a nuke being set off in Los Angeles. The strong response came after the tribe of Benjamin didn't take steps itself to wipe out such actions.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
I find it harder to condone genocide of innocent men, women, and children no matter what the provocation.
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
What is the point of arguing about the value of this textbook to this school when we don't know the details of how it is being used, when we don't know what the actual intent of the school is, and when none of us are associated with or impacted by this school in any way?
Posted by Shigosei (Member # 3831) on :
I'm afraid, as a former student at a Christian private school, that I'm going to have to agree that some Christian schools aren't much different. Quite frankly, I think being told I'm going to hell is a much greater insult than being called an pig. (And I'm quite happy to acknowledge my status as a primate.) I suppose calling someone a pig is more impolite or crude, and it's certainly less acceptable in our society. However, I think saying that someone is going to hell is incredibly nasty. It took me years to get over my fear of going to hell. I never have worried much about being an animal.
Additionally, I saw some bizarre things in my textbooks. For example, when I was in elementary school, we had a workbook with questions that we filled out regarding the things we read. This included that gang-rape story in Genesis. However, I don't recall much in the way of overt anti-homosexual sentiment at the school, though there probably was some. Oh, and there was the snippet in the science textbook about how Christians shouldn't get ulcers because they shouldn't have stress. The stupidity of claiming that stress is a sin aside, even I (a middle schooler) knew that ulcers were caused by H. pylori bacteria more than stress.
I don't think it's a good thing to use textbooks which refer to Christians as pigs or Jews as apes (at least without acknowledging that Muslims, Buddhists, Christians, atheists, and all humans are also apes). I'd probably want to see the textbooks and the context. If the students avoid those sections of the textbook, or if the teacher points out that those statements are not appropriate, I would be less concerned. However, my general feeling is that this isn't okay, but probably can't be stopped since this is a private school.
Posted by BlueWizard (Member # 9389) on :
While IF this is true it is certainly bad, I'm not sure I buy it. The news media is terribly corrupt now days. Almost beyond belief. News is no longer about reporting the news, it's about 'creating preception'. It is about creating sensation so you can sell more laundry detergent.
Keep in mind that the references to 'pigs' and 'apes' is based on someone's interpretation of what is being said, and as with the examples referenced from the Bible, without context they don't mean much, especially when resented in an inflamed media 'preception' article.
This is more about how the media has completely lost it's ability to report facts in a fair and objective way, and in a reasonable context.
If this is true then it is certainly bad, but I can't tell how much is media 'spin' and how much is objective fact.
Steve/BlueWizard
Posted by TheGrimace (Member # 9178) on :
I think we can only take this two different ways at the moment (without further reliable information about the situation)
1) Assume that these books are in fact being used to perpetuate racism and hatred. When you do that there's not much to do other than throw up your hands in frustration and say "well, that's pretty much expected" coming from the source it is coming from (a nation/culture that freely teaches these things on its own grounds). You must also realize that if these concepts are being taught now with these books, there's little chance that removing the books is going to change anything, the concept is really being taught by the teachers and administration. Sure it may be helpful to keep bringing instances of this to the light, but the only people (in general) that are going to be all up in arms about these teachings are those that are being called pigs etc, not the people that have any power to institute changes in the curriculum. it's kinda like getting in an uproar because skinheads are teaching racism at skinhead camp...
2) Give them the benefit of the doubt, since we don't know any better for certain, and assume that the books are being used like the works of Twain (and others). I think we've pretty clearly shown that just because a book shows certain verboten views in certain areas and in a certain context it doesn't mean that the book is entirely without value, so whatever exhasperation you are expressing Lisa is quite misplaced.
I'll say that personally I wouldn't be suprised either way, but without any more definite knowledge I'll refrain from making any judgements.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Pointing out that there are Christians schools that do the same thing is in no way a useful argument in rebutting those who condemn Muslims that may be doing it.
I went to a Lutheran private school, and it was not a perfect experience. I had a gymnastics coach hurt my feelings because I insisted on observing the sabbath, I had a teacher tell blatant inaccuracies about my religion to the class, but I had a teacher who let me explain Mormonism for 30 minutes to a class. I had a Lutheran teacher who taught eastern Asian religions and did a wonderful job doing so.
We had interfaith chapels where all religions from Atheist to Zoroastrian could present on why they felt their beliefs were beautiful. Should I have gotten upset that Mormons were not listed under the Christian category in the program? The agnostic presenter was permitted to speak of God quite disrespectfully, but he was allowed to do so.
I'm going to agree with Lisa in that my Bible does not say Lot offered his daughters to be gang raped. If a student asks, "Whats up with God commanding the Israelites to slay every man, and man child, but allow the women to be taken as wives by the Israelites? Is it impossible to simply state that that is what appears to have happened, and that you are not God nor can you speak for him and his reasonings? Or to delve even deeper and say something is perhaps lost in the translation, or that your understanding of Israelite and Canaanite culture is not up to snuff? That perhaps with research a studious student might understand that situation better?
It's literally impossible to ethically control everything teachers are going to teach our children. Its impossible and unethical to police what parents say to their children.
But from my experience its entirely possible to have a Christian run school that teaches its students effectively. With what I have seen of Islam it is also possible within the scope of their religion as well.
My 3rd grade teacher was a Muslim convert because he married a Muslim. He explained to us some of it's basic tenets, and when Ramadan came, he explained to us why our Muslim classmates were fasting during the day and asked us not to tease them. They didn't serve hot dogs at my cafeteria or sausage mcmuffins at the McDonalds in Malaysia but I certainly didn't feel snuffed because of it.
quote: 2) Give them the benefit of the doubt, since we don't know any better for certain, and assume that the books are being used like the works of Twain (and others). I think we've pretty clearly shown that just because a book shows certain verboten views in certain areas and in a certain context it doesn't mean that the book is entirely without value, so whatever exhasperation you are expressing Lisa is quite misplaced.
Lol I got off on a tangent when I should have just quoted this and said, "I agree."
[ February 08, 2007, 05:15 PM: Message edited by: BlackBlade ]
Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
quote:The perpetrators were not slaughtered by their countrymen, but by a army. Furthermore, the army did not only slaughter the perpetrators, but their families, their animals, and all their cities for good measure. I'm not sure going Keyser Soze on entire cities in retaliation for rape is a lesson we should be teaching modern children. [/qb]
The army you're referring to was a militia formed from the perpetrator's countrymen: men of Israel, killing Benjaminites (Benjamin being one of the tribes of Israel).
We seem to keep getting hung up on a confusion between reporting something and endorsing it.
[ February 08, 2007, 05:16 PM: Message edited by: Will B ]
Posted by TheGrimace (Member # 9178) on :
just a quick correction BlackBlade: Lisa doesn't deny that Lot did what others are suggesting, only that it was never directly praised as a right action.
that whole section (in the translations I've read) is somewhat unclear, but when presented in context I've always had it explained that this is exactly what Lot was doing. There definately isn't any direct praise for this action, but one might think that a couple of angels would rebuke him for proposing such an idea (but all of this is conjecture).
Even if you accept the various explanations as to why these behaviors are acceptable/understandable under the circumstances or that they are not condoned, they still make the Bible/Torah a text that contains genocide, the act of offering one's daughters to be mass-raped, etc. Which is on par with the claims being made of these "questionable" texts. I don't think it's the case, but from the given article any book that contains a phrase such as: "some racist figures believe that Jewish and Christian people are no better than swine" could be one of those in question.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
TheGrimace: Thank you for pointing that out about Lisa's comments.
Just so you understand my point of view, for Mormons the specific passage on Lot is mistranslated erroneously and in the "correction" it states that Lot in fact pleads with the mob not to violate his daughters or the men who have visited him.
Obviously Mormons at 12 million are a small minority, but thats how I see things. I think there are many events depicted in the Bible that have lost their original details and meanings. I am slower to condemn events depicted especially in the Old Testament because of that belief.
Posted by TheGrimace (Member # 9178) on :
BlackBlade, don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not saying that the Lot case is completely clear cut (or at least I don't know that it is, all the translations that I've read have been somewhat fuzzy at best) nor that translations/understandings of the old Testament are perfect, just that when using the kind of broad strokes and wording used in the original article, the Old Testament could easily fall under similar accusations.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by TheGrimace: BlackBlade, don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not saying that the Lot case is completely clear cut (or at least I don't know that it is, all the translations that I've read have been somewhat fuzzy at best) nor that translations/understandings of the old Testament are perfect, just that when using the kind of broad strokes and wording used in the original article, the Old Testament could easily fall under similar accusations.
oh, I have already acknowledged that completely. I already posed a response to a student asking about a certain questionable event that took place in the Old Testament.
Just to summarize, I believe a Christian run school and a Muslim run school are both capable of educating students effectively and ethically.
I just think its a waste of time to say, "You can't get upset at a Muslim school for doing that, Christian schools do too!" As if any of us have taught or run a school that does those things.
I had a missionary companion who complained that I was too distracted from my work, I responded with, "Well you get distracted too!" He replied, "That does not change the fact that you are distracted."
Christian schools could all be run by the devil and full of iniquity, that does not change the fact that this Saudi Arabian school could be teaching bigotry to it's students.
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
So there is going to be an inquiry into what the school is teaching. And it looks like the school is taking action to have the controversy die down. linky
Interestingly, nothing about this textbook issue or any odd teaching practices were picked up on in the recent school OFSTED inspection.
Posted by TheGrimace (Member # 9178) on :
on a lighter note, this reminds me of my chemistry textbook in highschool. on the right margin there would be little asides on certain portions of the book, such as other things one could do with an equation and whatnot.
One of these asides decided to comment on some particularly ugly numbers in some calculation or another and for whatever reason started with "damn!" so, being the sarcastic obedient Catholic school students we were we mockingly took offense at the book swearing at us and brought it to the attention of the teacher it's amusing what can slip past proofreaders and whatnot.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote: BB: Pointing out that there are Christians schools that do the same thing is in no way a useful argument in rebutting those who condemn Muslims that may be doing it.
Indeed. Good thing that I do not intend on rebutting them one little bit. What I'm saying (as foreshadowed by my "glass houses" comment) is that those condemning Muslims for having passages in their textbooks that insult followers of rival religions as "apes" or "pigs" should also follow their principles in condemning any schools that have books that depict say, gang-rape or genocide. To do otherwise would be hypocritical.
I for one am not afraid to condemn both genocide AND insulting people as pigs. In this case, I have no problem condemning this school, especially in light of the last article with this:
quote: A textbook dated 2005/2006 allegedly asks the reader to "give examples of worthless religions... such as Judaism, Christianity, idol worship and others".
In another textbook for 12 and 13 year olds, dated 2004/2005, the author allegedly says that a Koranic verse, which talks of turning people into monkeys and pigs, is about Jews and Christians.
Doesn't look like the context is particularly good, especially for the first one.
quote: BB: But from my experience its entirely possible to have a Christian run school that teaches its students effectively. With what I have seen of Islam it is also possible within the scope of their religion as well.
Its also possible to have a Pastafarian run school that teaches its students effectively. But just because we *can* teach students effectively, despite who is running the school, doesn't mean we *should* run the school that way.
quote: The army you're referring to was a militia formed from the perpetrator's countrymen: men of Israel, killing Benjaminites (Benjamin being one of the tribes of Israel).
We seem to keep getting hung up on a confusion between reporting something and endorsing it.
You mean it's okay to use books that say that so long as they don't endorse those parts? Are you serious?
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
Lest we get too smug, look at Rwanda: Roman Catholic 56.5%, Protestant 26%, Adventist 11.1%, Muslim (4.6% Pre-Genocide, 14% Post-Genocide)... Due to the widespread involvement of both Roman Catholic and Protestant clergy in the genocide and the shelter and protection given to members of both ethnic groups of all religions by Muslims, widespread conversion occurred causing the Muslim population to jump from 4% to 14%.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
it's amusing what can slip past proofreaders and whatnot.