PDA

View Full Version : Should Grandma die for naming a teddy bear 'Muhammad'?


Jae Onasi
11-30-2007, 09:08 AM
For those of you who like Fox/more conservative news: Link (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,314111,00.html)
For those of you who like CNN/more liberal news: Link (http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/africa/11/30/sudan.bears/index.html)

This seems like such an extreme reaction for giving a teddy bear a name that is commonly used for Muslim males. I thought Sudan had more important issues to deal with than this.

tk102
11-30-2007, 09:58 AM
Now all the Sudanese children have learned how to deal with substitute teachers they don't like.


Sorry, the whole situation is so absurd to me (and probably most non-Muslims) that I have a hard time even addressing the rationale.

Point Man
11-30-2007, 10:28 AM
What a bunch of loonies! How can it be a crime to name a bear Muhammad? Why are the parents of all those children named Muhammad not arrested and executed?

Rogue Nine
11-30-2007, 10:30 AM
That would curtail about half the world's population.

Jason Skywalker
11-30-2007, 10:48 AM
Strange. And here i was, thinking that we were free of speech and of calling teddy bears whatever we feel like.

Prime
11-30-2007, 11:02 AM
This seems like such an extreme reaction for giving a teddy bear a name that is commonly used for Muslim males. I thought Sudan had more important issues to deal with than this.There is nothing more important that promoting and upholding religious intolerance!

So this is the face of the Devil!

http://www.foxnews.com/photoessay/photoessay_2788_images/1129071618_M_teacher7.jpg

SilentScope001
11-30-2007, 11:10 AM
Okay, this is terrible. Terrible indeed. Plays into the hands of those who want to use this as another clause of why Islam is evil, and into the hands of those who want to claim Islam is being insulted, etc.

But's that is why there's Heaven and Hell.

1) To be fair, I actually can understand. Assigning a name to a teddy bear can be seen to demean that name. It's like stating "Bongs for Jesus". Sure, free speech and all, and Jesus is a common name, but associating it with bongs is just surely wrong. Plus, the teddy bear is a toy, so calling it "Jesus" just make the toy look comparble to Jesus, which is just wrong. So I can see why some people are upset. But since I know many people don't want to listen to the other side and just scream at one side, I'll just shut up now. Being devil's advocate is not exactly conductive to living a long life.

BESIDES, the teacher is sentenced to 15 days in prison. No execution. She'll be somewhat fine.

2) Just because I believe in a religion does not mean that I can be associated with whatever thing SOMEONE else does. It's mind-numbingly annoying. It's an angry vent, but it's something I want to keep in mind. People don't walk in lock-step, you know.

Muhammad Abdul Bari, secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain, said Sudanese authorities had “grossly overreacted.”

“Gillian should never have been arrested, let alone charged and convicted of committing a crime,” he said.

[Okay, so this article is still pro-Mohammed Teddy Bear, but it does have some quotes from the Sudanese protesters and lecturers, so I like it:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2007/11/30/2007-11-30_sudanese_call_for_teddy_bear_teachers_de.html ]

Marius Fett
11-30-2007, 11:19 AM
The Sudanese government have gone too far...

All the women let the kids do was let them name a teddy a name they know and love....

If anything this shows respect for Islam because it shows they love and respect Muhammed enough to name they're bear after him....

They've stepped over the line.....

SilentScope001
11-30-2007, 11:22 AM
You know who I really hate now? The Media.

Because here they are, focusing about this conterversy, and I know it's a good conterversy, but that's NOT IMPORTANT.

A lethal Ebola virus that has killed at least 16 people and infected 51 others in western Uganda is a previously unknown strain, health authorities said Friday."

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5j8JhykvCqpuWN9lWD4ZjGnYZeA_g

All sides in the fighting in Democratic Republic of Congo's North Kivu province are killing and raping civilians and looting on a scale not seen in years, the International Committee of the Red Cross said on Thursday.

http://africa.reuters.com/top/news/usnBAN025649.html

...And instead, the media worries about a teddy bear and a person who's going to be sentenced to 15 days in prison. Shame on you, Media. SHAME ON YOU.

Sabretooth
11-30-2007, 11:43 AM
Sudan isn't what I'd call the most liberal nation in the world. They are an authoritarian government, a backward state, plus devout Muslims. The "crime" Gibbons has done is equivalent of naming your donkey "Jesus", residing in the Vatican City and all that during the times of Medieval Inquisition - add the crusades for good measure.

Also, I will quite frankly say that the reason the controversy is being raised up is that the teacher is white and British. There must be countless other ordinary men and women who are being "punished" for ridiculous reasons across the African nations.

This is what makes me really sad. :(

mimartin
11-30-2007, 11:57 AM
Why are the parents of all those children named Muhammad not arrested and executed?Because unlike like the evil western influenced infidel teddy bear the child will grow up to do great things in the name of Muhammad. Anyone remember Mohamed Atta?

This an arrogant woman who came to our country, cashing her salary in dollars, teaching our children hatred of our Prophet Muhammad," he said. I know my childhood teddy bear taught me to hate little bears named teddy. Evil little bear always getting me in trouble.

Darth Xander
11-30-2007, 12:09 PM
She should be punished but not through death!

Marius Fett
11-30-2007, 12:12 PM
Why should she be punished?

She did nothing wrong!

Darth Xander
11-30-2007, 02:26 PM
Muhammad is a comman name among the Indian culture!

mimartin
11-30-2007, 04:33 PM
Muhammad is a comman name among the Indian culture!
Jesus is a common name in the Mexican culture and in the Hispanic culture of the Southwest (including Texas). That said I don’t see anyone around here wanting to imprison or bludgeon someone to death if they name a teddy bear Jesus.

Muhammad being a common name only makes this story more ridiculous. How does anyone know the bear is not named after Muhammad Jones the butcher down the street and the name has nothing to do with the Prophet Muhammad. It could be the little kids name or his brother’s or his father’s name.

adamqd
11-30-2007, 04:50 PM
I will quite frankly say that the reason the controversy is being raised up is that the teacher is white and British.

I'm quite offended by your statement, but sadly it is probably true... but this doesn't take anything away from the fact that the angry mob want execution for a women who "let" her pupils name there own teddy! Ridicules

Totenkopf
11-30-2007, 04:50 PM
Because unlike like the evil western influenced infidel teddy bear the child will grow up to do great things in the name of Muhammad. Anyone remember Mohamed Atta?

Hey don't forget this pair, either:
General Mohamed Farrah Aidid
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed

Just more proof that it often takes just a few knuckleheads to screw it up for everyone else.

@Silent Scope--If she had merely been censured/reprimanded for "cultural insensitivity", you'd have a point about this being blown out of proportion. Sort of like shooting a guy for jaywalking. ;) Really, anything beyond expulsion/deportation is excessively draconian.

Corinthian
11-30-2007, 05:25 PM
Xander, I take it you're not a big fan of the whole "Freedom of Speech" thing?

tk102
11-30-2007, 07:21 PM
And Corinthian I thought you were a big fan of criminals getting what they deserve.

This teacher broke Sudanese law by insulting Islam. She was tried and convicted. I'm surprised you're asking anything about free speech in this case.

Arcesious
11-30-2007, 07:48 PM
Jeez... this world of ours is such a mess... even more thna i thought after hearing the tragic tale of that poor woman. (i'm being serious, not sarcastic.)
I could go rename my dog Hitler or Mussolini here in the U.S and i wouldn't be sent to jail. but i'm not planning on doing that. i think i'll stick with my dog's anme being Lassie. *everyone looks at me wierd* what? i liked the lassie movies.

John Galt
11-30-2007, 10:04 PM
Jeez... this world of ours is such a mess... even more thna i thought after hearing the tragic tale of that poor woman. (i'm being serious, not sarcastic.)
I could go rename my dog Hitler or Mussolini here in the U.S and i wouldn't be sent to jail. but i'm not planning on doing that. i think i'll stick with my dog's anme being Lassie. *everyone looks at me wierd* what? i liked the lassie movies.

My cousin actually had a German Shepherd named Adolf.

This is a travesty of justice, but that's what happens when one mixes religion and government...

Web Rider
11-30-2007, 10:06 PM
My cousin actually had a German Shepherd named Adolf.

Adolf used to be a pretty sound German name to name your kid, till Hitler came around.

but the Hitler comparason is a bit bad since Muhommad wasn't a genocidal tyrant. not the greatest of guys of course like any religious figure, but no Hitler.

Rev7
11-30-2007, 10:28 PM
You have to remember that not all nations aloow freedom of speech, and all that goes with that. I do think that the Sudanese government has gone a bit far with this though. Freedom of speech (in this case naming) is something that I think that most of us have taken for granted. The Sudanese government made their choice, and just because we think that something may be wrong with that choice, their is really nothing that we can do.

TK-8252
11-30-2007, 10:32 PM
Wow. I'm starting to think we should stop sending food to Sudan.

John Galt
11-30-2007, 10:48 PM
Wow. I'm starting to think we should stop sending food to Sudan.

I don't think we should've ever been sending food to the Sudan in the first place.

Corinthian
11-30-2007, 11:29 PM
I don't recognize unjust governments, TK. The Sudanese Government is scum, and no better than organized criminals in my book. I didn't exactly shed a tear for the Duke of New York, either. Just because I support criminals getting what I deserve doesn't mean I agree with every law. I'm a conservative, not a sheep.

Also, I think your comment qualifies as baiting. As a moderator, you should really show a better example.

Rev7
11-30-2007, 11:42 PM
The Sudanese Government is scum, and no better than organized criminals in my book Yes they may not be the best government out there, but if they were that bad, don't you think that the superpower nations would try to intervene? Say for instance, The Iraq Wars, we went over there to generally (IMO) to try to 'correct' their government, so to say...

Totenkopf
11-30-2007, 11:42 PM
Well, given that it was Sudan, I'm not surprised it happened there. However, I also think that we shouldn't be sending ANY aid to most of these hopelessly corrupt regimes UNLESS we're actually going to oversea distribution of said aid. Otherwise, it's likely to be used to fatten the wallets of the dictators/warlords and their cronies. We may be stuck w/corruption in our own system, but that's no reason to subsidize or underwrite 3rd world tyrants.

@Rev7--he was referring to post #19.

Jae Onasi
11-30-2007, 11:43 PM
I don't recognize unjust governments, TK.

Naw, we'll just shoot them all and ask questions later. ;P

Arcesious
11-30-2007, 11:59 PM
Unjust governements need to be put down. for example Hugo Chavez of Venezuela... he's a tyrant who wants power and is trying to brainwash kids in venezualan schools into thinking communism is good.

tk102
12-01-2007, 12:13 AM
Also, I think your comment qualifies as baiting. As a moderator, you should really show a better example.I sought clarification in light of some of your recent posts. You have proven yourself consistent for what it's worth. No flames intended or pursued.

John Galt
12-01-2007, 01:28 AM
Unjust governements need to be put down. for example Hugo Chavez of Venezuela... he's a tyrant who wants power and is trying to brainwash kids in venezualan schools into thinking communism is good.

I agree, but it's not our business to put them down; it is the business of the people they are oppressing. By the same token, we should not be propping up unjust or dictatorial regimes(Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, et. al.). Outside overthrow of such governments rarely work without causing blowback, as shown by the US reinstatement of the Shah in Iran, which precipitated unintended diplomatic consequences(the hostage crisis in '79, and subsequent hostilities with Iran)

True change should come from the governed(i.e. revolutions, or electoral democracy, which is basically a series of scheduled nonviolent revolutions), as it is, as Voltaire said, difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.

Web Rider
12-01-2007, 01:38 AM
Unjust governments tend to put themselves down. If we stop sending them aid or buying stuff from them, they'll crumble. Their own people will eventually establish something they feel comfortable with. At which point the world can take a peek, make their own judgments, and then choose if it's worth supporting.

We REALLY need to be more picky with who we help. We shouldn't help everyone "just 'cause".

Rev7
12-01-2007, 01:49 AM
We REALLY need to be more picky with who we help. We shouldn't help everyone "just 'cause".
Me personally, I wouldn't say picky, but rather more wise with who we help. Other than that I agree 100% with what you said. I think that America is way too open in a lot of areas...

El Sitherino
12-01-2007, 02:03 AM
So, because of a government, the innocent people should suffer?

Technically, wouldn't that make us no better than them for doing this? People are stupid, doesn't mean everyone should be penalized for it. I mean, if we think about it like that then millions of people should just be beaten, killed, and slaughtered.

Rev7
12-01-2007, 02:15 AM
Who ever said that we have to help in the first place? The U.S. government/military/president chooses who we support/help. All that I am saying is that we as a country should just make practical and wise choices. I am not saying that in some ways we are not already doing that, but we, as a country should start to prepare for the future. Prices for nearly everything in the U.S. are going up, and with that happening it sets off a chain reaction. With that eventually people can't afford to go to work because of gas prices and with food prices continuing to go ( partially because we are helping other nations and exporting it, then causes the price to raise) up we won't be able to eat. With our military cut short, how will we defend ourselves? I mean there are National Guardsmen in Iraq. National Guardsmen(women) are supposed to be in the United States. That is what I am trying to get across.

mur'phon
12-01-2007, 03:34 AM
All that I am saying is that we as a country should just make practical and wise choices.

What is a wise choice? Is it what benefits the US the most? Is it what saves the most lives?

Who ever said that we have to help in the first place?


No one said you have to, but I would guess most people see saving other peoples lives as a good thing.

Prices for nearly everything in the U.S. are going up, and with that happening it sets off a chain reaction.

They always have thanks to inflation, as far as I know the US isn't facing a depression.

With that eventually people can't afford to go to work because of gas prices

Even if that happens don't you think someone will find an alternative for gas? Necessity is the first cousin of invention, so I wouldn't be so worried. Even if nothing is invented, I seem to remember things like: bikes, trains etc, not needing gas.

and with food prices continuing to go ( partially because we are helping other nations and exporting it, then causes the price to raise) up we won't be able to eat

You are also sometimes burning food to keep prices high, again, unless the US is facing a depression, I wouldn't worry.

With our military cut short, how will we defend ourselves? I mean there are National Guardsmen in Iraq. National Guardsmen(women) are supposed to be in the United States.

You still have quite a sizeable force in the US, besides, who would attack the country with the largest and most sophisticated nuclear arsenal?

If we stop sending them aid or buying stuff from them, they'll crumble.
I agree in part, I think aid should be sent, just not distributed by the (local) government

Totenkopf
12-01-2007, 04:03 AM
With our military cut short, how will we defend ourselves? I mean there are National Guardsmen in Iraq. National Guardsmen(women) are supposed to be in the United States.

You still have quite a sizeable force in the US, besides, who would attack the country with the largest and most sophisticated nuclear arsenal?

I doubt anyone would seriously try to invade the US in its current form. With over 200 million firearms and several (tens of?) million people with military and paramilitary experience, it would a fool's errand. If you thought Afghanistan was tough.....

El Sitherino
12-01-2007, 05:14 AM
Prices for nearly everything in the U.S. are going up, and with that happening it sets off a chain reaction.

More than just the U.S. is affected by it's monetary woes.

With that eventually people can't afford to go to work because of gas prices
And that will only get worse if we cut ourselves off and isolate.

food prices continuing to go ( partially because we are helping other nations and exporting it, then causes the price to raise)
Considering the large amount of food going over there isn't strictly government (and what is is very, very small). A lot is private donations. Some from private food banks. Not to mention, that is mostly corporations becoming greedy, like the gas prices. It is also affected by the previously mentioned gas prices.
With our military cut short, how will we defend ourselves? I mean there are National Guardsmen in Iraq. National Guardsmen(women) are supposed to be in the United States. That is what I am trying to get across.
That has nothing to do with this, that is poor planning on the part of a GOP controlled regime. You're mixing issues, most likely due to some poor connection between Islam=terrorism.

Anyway, anyone thinking naming a teddy bear Muhammed is some religious jab is a fool. It's probably that the kids are muslim, a popular muslim name is Muhammed and it's variations. They chose it just like in the western world one would name a bear "John" or "David". This woman, I highly doubt, was trying to stage some religious protest denouncing Islam. The issue here is aggression influencing politics. People are pissed in these nations, have no idea where to point the finger for their misfortunes, and they take it out on easy targets. Simple psychology.

Sabretooth
12-01-2007, 07:22 AM
Muhammad is a comman name among the Indian culture!
Islamic, you mean. :p

On some more thought, I've come here:

Muhammad, despite being a common name, isn't just an average name, like Joe or Bob. It has religious connotations and is an honourable name. Gibbons, is Christian, white and British. She's teaching Sudanese kids (who are black and Muslim). She names a teddy bear "Muhammad", which is the name of the holiest person in Islam, and the most important one. What now? The people think she's come to convert them and piss on Islam. So they take out all their counter-anti-Islam rage on her. It's saddening. :(

This teacher broke Sudanese law by insulting Islam. She was tried and convicted. I'm surprised you're asking anything about free speech in this case.
That's what I'm saying. This is Sudan, a completely different place with a completely different set of rules. You can't even say that the teacher is guilty or not, because this isn't happening in your average democratic nation. It may look barbaric from our perspective, but she is wrong, sinful and evil from their perspective. You can't say that our view is better than theirs. That's just the world with its dozens of nations, all of them wierd.

mur'phon
12-01-2007, 07:44 AM
That's just the world with its dozens of nations, all of them wierd.
QFT

Salzella
12-01-2007, 09:22 AM
Who ever said she was going to 'die'? Her punishment was either: 40 lashes, prison or a fine, then deportation, none of which, you will notice, are lethal...

PoiuyWired
12-01-2007, 09:31 AM
Who ever said she was going to 'die'? Her punishment was either: 40 lashes, prison or a fine, then deportation, none of which, you will notice, are lethal...

QFE. There is no mention of anything close to execution. And Death Threats are done by the extremists, not the government.

Jae Onasi
12-01-2007, 11:11 AM
Who ever said she was going to 'die'? Her punishment was either: 40 lashes, prison or a fine, then deportation, none of which, you will notice, are lethal...

There were riots in the streets following the announcement of the sentence, and they were calling for her death. She may well be in danger in the transfer from prison to the point where she leaves the country, and quite possibly after if someone decides to hunt her down wherever she ends up after that for offending the religion.

Web Rider
12-01-2007, 03:16 PM
And with many calls for harsher punishment, I wouldn't be surprised to see the government say... "oh, we're such a herald of democracy, we need to give our people what they want."

Rev7
12-01-2007, 03:26 PM
That has nothing to do with this, that is poor planning on the part of a GOP controlled regime. You're mixing issues, most likely due to some poor connection between Islam=terrorism.
No, no, no. I was simply giving an example on what I said about the Natl. Guard. I WAS NOT trying to 'mix issues'. I was also only listing off, what I think could happen. Thats all...

Salzella
12-01-2007, 04:20 PM
There were riots in the streets following the announcement of the sentence, and they were calling for her death. She may well be in danger in the transfer from prison to the point where she leaves the country, and quite possibly after if someone decides to hunt her down wherever she ends up after that for offending the religion.
Perhaps, but really, you could say the same for any criminal, and since she's being deported back to the UK, I think the danger of any sort of outside attack is minimal to be honest. Most people outside of these prosecuting her think it's a farce anyway. And my point was that there is no chance she will directly be put to death for her crimes.

Web Rider
12-01-2007, 07:04 PM
Perhaps, but really, you could say the same for any criminal, and since she's being deported back to the UK, I think the danger of any sort of outside attack is minimal to be honest. Most people outside of these prosecuting her think it's a farce anyway. And my point was that there is no chance she will directly be put to death for her crimes.

MOST criminals have nothing to fear, since MOST criminals are petty criminals. Did some drugs, got caught, robbed a store, got caught. Nobody's going to kill you for that. Heck, even most murderers and rapists don't have to worry about maniacs attacking them on their way to prison.

because SANE people believe that death is not the end-all answer to crime.

Corinthian
12-02-2007, 06:08 AM
I'm surprised you're asking anything about free speech in this case.


Didn't address this in my last post.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.

Of course, the Sudanese don't recognize any of that. This case proves how corrupt and deranged the Sudanese government is. Not that you really need any proof on how evil they are.

adamqd
12-03-2007, 04:10 AM
As of about 10 minutes ago she has been pardoned, and will be released later today, she must immediately leave Sudan though....

Corinthian
12-03-2007, 04:34 AM
Why do I have a sinking suspicion she's not going to survive the trip to the border or the airport or whatever?

mur'phon
12-03-2007, 04:43 AM
Why do I have a sinking suspicion she's not going to survive the trip to the border or the airport or whatever?

Because Al-Bashir hasn't been to keen to please anyone outside Sudan?