Schoolboys punished with detention for refusing to kneel in class and pray to Allah

[chriz]

Schoolboys punished with detention for refusing to kneel in class and pray to Allah (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1031784/Schoolboys-punished-detention-refusing-kneel-pray-Allah.html)

Two schoolboys were given detention after refusing to kneel down and 'pray to Allah' during a religious education lesson.

=====

South Park episode about this in 5, 4, 3...

[dirtyrat]

Back in the 10th grade I remember one of our teachers bringing in an expert on jewish stuff. The woman proceeded to pass around trinkets, I didn't even bother looking at them, and Boy!; the looks I received from the lady and my classmates. My beef? I had no desire to learn about any religion while attending an public school.
---
I feel so sorry for the ones that actually "have" to (because of their parents) attend an catholic school or the like - all the time.

[DarkHunter]

I'm all for religious education, but THAT is ridiculous.

It'll be one of those rare occasions when the Fundamentalist Christian Right and the ACLU can get together....scary...

[Pickle Tickler]

Total idiocy right there. Then again, most teachers (MOST!) can be like that.

[LV426]

And yet I bet these same people who bitched are the ones who wish to have Christian prayer brought back into schools.

Ah well. I think the punishment for the praying is a bit much but I can see where the teacher might be coming from. In order to understand a religion sometimes you need to become a part of it or at least understand the motions.

[Galliard]

If they're going to force the kids to participate, that is wrong. It's kinda hard to understand most religions unless you've steeped yourself in its teachings, but still, taking it to the point of praying to someone who you don't believe in? I would've caused "holy" terror over that, not caring about the consequences.

[UNODRAGONE]

my only question is what happened to the first amendment?

[Vendetta]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the Daily Mail generally regarded as a pretty crappy tabloid-style paper in the UK?

my only question is what happened to the first amendment?
You might want to read the article before responding to this. It's in the UK, they don't have a 1st Ammendment.

[MidnightxSun]

Interesting situation...

Right now, I think the kids should have listened to their teacher, but, I really can't say because I wasn't there.

That's the difficult thing about this article...It only covers one side of the story and it doesn't say exactly go into detail about what the teacher said or how she proposed the idea. In the teacher's defense for all we know the rebels could've been turning her into the bad guy: Maybe the kids rebelled to get back at her for something. I wish we had more evidence than that...

[DarkWolf]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the Daily Mail generally regarded as a pretty crappy tabloid-style paper in the UK?
Yes. It's reknowned for blowing stories out of proportion and even making things up.

We don't have a first amendment, but we do have laws similar. I don't fully believe the article, since giving detention to kids for not praying to a specific deity is actually illegal and is grounds for instant termination of a teacher's license. Since this isn't being done, or even considered, means either the paper got things wrong (most likely) or the headmaster of the school doesn't know anything about teaching (unlikely).

Praying is not part of the RE curriculum, nor can it be by law. This is simple and common knowledge. Teachers are encouraged to expand on the curriculum in their own ways, yes, but they must remember - as they're informed during their training - anything outside the curriculum cannot be forced. If it is outside the curriculum the child (with parental backing) has every legal right to refuse participation. Actually, if the parent's so wish, they can remove the child from any class or the whole school at any time for any reason prividing they either undertake curriculum education of the child themselves or pay a small fee to forego the necessity of any education. There is no part of the curriculum that can, legally, be forced.

This knowledge is given to all teachers - it's part of the basic training they must take in order to become a teacher. The fact that neither the RE teacher, deputy headteacher, and the headteacher of this school knew this basic stuff makes it seem like the most pathetic of schools or it's probably just the paper screwing the story up.

[blueeyes]

We don't have a first amendment, but we do have laws similar.

No, Darkwolf, you really don't. The First Amendment not only recognizes rights, but is also entrenched against being changed, and protects against legislation which would infringe those rights by allowing the judiciary to invalidate unconstitutional law. The United Kingdom really doesn't have a comparable analogue to that. The closest that I'm aware of would be the Human Rights Act, which attempts to sync up the rights noticed by the European Convention on Human Rights, but that Convention specifically allows violations on freedom of religion that are codified in law.

It's a country with lasting blasphemy laws on the books, allows only a specific brand of Christian to sit in a certain chair, and who's (figure)head of state is also automatically the head of a large religious group.

As for the trustworthiness of the story, it seems to be covered by a number (http://news.google.com/news?q=Alsager+High+ School&ie=UTF-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&hl=en&ncl=1225887017&sa=X&oi=news_result&resnum=4&ct=more-results&cd=1) of different news outlets, at least enough for source bias to be a questionable cause.

And I think everyone here is a bit too intelligent for the claim that teachers wouldn't violate rules. We're capable of breathing, after all.

[MorganaFang]

This is a great way of generating more hatred for the muslim culture.

Should have just been optional. As open minded as I am I do not think I would have done it either. Just generally not religious, nor do I like getting on my knees.

[MidnightxSun]

Yes. It's reknowned for blowing stories out of proportion and even making things up.

We don't have a first amendment, but we do have laws similar. I don't fully believe the article, since giving detention to kids for not praying to a specific deity is actually illegal and is grounds for instant termination of a teacher's license. Since this isn't being done, or even considered, means either the paper got things wrong (most likely) or the headmaster of the school doesn't know anything about teaching (unlikely).

Praying is not part of the RE curriculum, nor can it be by law. This is simple and common knowledge. Teachers are encouraged to expand on the curriculum in their own ways, yes, but they must remember - as they're informed during their training - anything outside the curriculum cannot be forced. If it is outside the curriculum the child (with parental backing) has every legal right to refuse participation. Actually, if the parent's so wish, they can remove the child from any class or the whole school at any time for any reason prividing they either undertake curriculum education of the child themselves or pay a small fee to forego the necessity of any education. There is no part of the curriculum that can, legally, be forced.

This knowledge is given to all teachers - it's part of the basic training they must take in order to become a teacher. The fact that neither the RE teacher, deputy headteacher, and the headteacher of this school knew this basic stuff makes it seem like the most pathetic of schools or it's probably just the paper screwing the story up.

Wow! They're like the Fox News of the UK! lol

[Vendetta]

For the record, it doesn't seem like anyone was being made to PRAY to Allah, only to demonstrate how Mulsims pray. I think that's a pretty important distinction to make.

[chriz]

For the record, it doesn't seem like anyone was being made to PRAY to Allah, only to demonstrate how Mulsims pray. I think that's a pretty important distinction to make.

So you'd be cool with non-Christian kids being made to participate in a Christian ceremony (say, baptism, including being dunked) as long as it was only going through the motions?

[punxnotdead]

I probably wouldn't have participated either.

[ThrasherCub]

So you'd be cool with non-Christian kids being made to participate in a Christian ceremony (say, baptism, including being dunked) as long as it was only going through the motions?

I'd be more reserved about that one simply because it's someone else doing it to you, which makes it a bit harder to control the "just going through the motions" bit.

But so long as it really is just going through the motions and it's plain old water that actually doesn't bother me too much.

Does anyone know if the religion class these kids were in was something mandatory or something they signed up for?

[Rascaduanok]

So you'd be cool with non-Christian kids being made to participate in a Christian ceremony (say, baptism, including being dunked) as long as it was only going through the motions?

I had to do that at my school every day during assembly for 7 years…

[LV426]

Actually if it's a religion class that is discussing, teaching, and exploring different religions then I can see no problem with making kids demonstrate the practices of other cultures as long as it is legal and does not cause harm to themselves or others. There's no reason that students themselves can't get on their knees on a prayer mat or have water sprinkled over them in a mock religious rite. Of course I can now see religions clamoring for a halt to that because it would be degrading to act out and demonstrate their practices without actually belonging to the religion.

[MorganaFang]

It's the whole getting on your knees thing that is off putting to me because my knees are pretty much gone from basketball and bummer genetics.

Ok, so it was a religion course, but should failure to participate really earn a student detention? In any other course it would be a lowered grade or failed class. Like in biology, you do not get held after school for failing to disect the fetal pig, you get an F on the assignment.

[Vendetta]

So you'd be cool with non-Christian kids being made to participate in a Christian ceremony (say, baptism, including being dunked) as long as it was only going through the motions?
If it's a class on religion, then YES. Last time I checked, in school they make kids do all sorts of things they don't want to do or don't "believe" in.

[chriz]

If it's a class on religion, then YES. Last time I checked, in school they make kids do all sorts of things they don't want to do or don't "believe" in.

Sorry. Liar.

[RQ]

And yet I bet these same people who bitched are the ones who wish to have Christian prayer brought back into schools.
I totally agree with LV on this.

Also, all - ALL - religion needs to be banned from schools. No religion class, no let's-see-how-they-do-things class. Have an anthropology class if that's what you want. Learn about whole cultures rather than outdated and ignorant superstition.

[Vendetta]

Also, all - ALL - religion needs to be banned from schools. No religion class, no let's-see-how-they-do-things class. Have an anthropology class if that's what you want. Learn about whole cultures rather than outdated and ignorant superstition.
I know this is going to seem REALLY out of character for me, but I actually disagree with this. I think when we don't actually teach about a wide variety of religions (not just one or two) we risk the same thing that happens to this day: the majority of kids believing whatever their parents tell them. I mean maaaaybe, by the time they're 20 or so, they might've learned about some other religions, but by then it's too late, and they're probably already inculcated.

I believe cognitive scientist & philosopher Dan Dennett has some excellent things to say on the matter, and he IS an atheist. He calls religion a natural phenomena, and as such thinks it should be studied and taught as rigorously as other natural phenomena. If you don't mind watching one of his excellent TED talks (25 minutes) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTepA-WV_oE), he addresses a lot of this, and actually relates it better than I could (although I don't agree with him 100%, but I figure the dude is a couple of orders of magnitude smarter than me, so I submit to his greater expertise.)

[RQ]

I will watch the video later when I get home from work.

Reserved!

[greggchamberlain]

And yet I bet these same people who bitched are the ones who wish to have Christian prayer brought back into schools.

Ah well. I think the punishment for the praying is a bit much but I can see where the teacher might be coming from. In order to understand a religion sometimes you need to become a part of it or at least understand the motions.


true.

but then to punish children for not wanting to take part in a demonstration of how another group practises its religion, and to also punish the ones who do participate for "not doing it right", is contrary not only to the concept of teaching but also to the precepts of the religion in question (or pretty much any other religion or philosophical group).

[Vendetta]

true.

but then to punish children for not wanting to take part in a demonstration of how another group practises its religion, and to also punish the ones who do participate for "not doing it right", is contrary not only to the concept of teaching but also to the precepts of the religion in question (or pretty much any other religion or philosophical group).Greg, I don't know what school YOU went to, but uhh yeah, if you don't do the class work, yeah, you usually fail.

Look, if I'm a math teacher, and I've just taught a lesson on fractions. If you don't know that 1/8 + 3/8 = 1/2, yeah you're gonna fail my math test.

[LV426]

When I was in school class participation was part of the grade. If you didn't participate you got a zero if you didn't do it correctly you were given a chance to correct but then continued failure was given a zero. It has to do with multiple factors, one of which was learning to follow directions and paying attention.

[Vendetta]

Maybe these kids just had ADD. Awww...

[Galliard]

Big difference between quizzing a kid on how it's done, and being forced to demonstrate.

[LV426]

Big difference between quizzing a kid on how it's done, and being forced to demonstrate.

Didn't you have to show your work in school? I don't know why everyone is so freaked out about kids being asked to demonstrate that they have A. Learned the subject and B. can show how it is performed. Class participation is part of any curriculum and sometimes you have to get up off your ass and actually show you are paying attention or that you know what you are doing such as getting up in front of class to work a problem on the board or doing sit-ups in gym class, or dissecting a frog. Hell I refused to dissect the frog, I thought it was inhumane and it didn't follow my beliefs. I had a damn good reason but I still got an F for it. Sometimes life isn't fair, get over it.

[Vendetta]

Big difference between quizzing a kid on how it's done, and being forced to demonstrate.
Did they never have PE where you come from?

This isn't rocket science here people.

EDIT: Yeah, LV's example of the frog is probably better. Still not rocket science though.

[blueeyes]

I suppose we shouldn't mind if a PoliSci class involves a graded demonstration? Nothing for real, of course, just mandate some posters on sticks for a given political party, a short march, and some simple chants?

No, I don't see that particular one flying particularly well.

I've got no problem with people acting religious on their own, and I think teaching people about the variety of religions out there is rather important. Call them outdated and ignorant if you want, they form the basis of how a majority of the population sees their own world. I can scarely see that as unimportant or irrelevant.

But the point where you start forcing them to 'go through the motions' of a religion that they don't believe in, you insult them and you insult the religion.

[ThrasherCub]

Also, all - ALL - religion needs to be banned from schools. No religion class, no let's-see-how-they-do-things class. Have an anthropology class if that's what you want. Learn about whole cultures rather than outdated and ignorant superstition.

Look up "Culture." To learn about a "whole culture" requires learning about their beliefs, which oddly enough are often religious.

Further, can you not see the possible harm of this? Not teaching about religion in school is not going to kill religion; it still exists at home. What it will do is cripple efforts to prevent religious prejudice via education on the topic.

And finally, I ask what the harm is in learning about religions.

[blueeyes]

And finally, I ask what the harm is in learning about religions.

People might believe them.

No, seriously. That's the nature of religions: they're not falsifiable, and they tend to resonate with humans. If they didn't, they wouldn't make it off the ground in the first place. We teach a lot of things that are false, incorrect, or plain useful lies, but whether that's geocentrism, heliocentrism, or the dozens of different models of the atom that are complete bunk, they're all easily falsifiable by the time you understand why the difference matters. Treating things any other way terrifies a lot of teachers.

And that's understandable. Even ignoring the concerns about more theological parts of various religions, look at the most basic tenets of some of them. Take Sikhism. It's a fairly tame religion -- essentially humanism with a very minimalistic and hands-off diety strapped to the side -- but strict adherents are mandated to always carry a knife and never cut or dye hair. That's the sort of thing that can worry people. The various rants and criticisms about Christian thought are easy enough to find.

[ThrasherCub]

People might believe them.
What is inherently wrong with believing a religion?

[LV426]

I would prefer that religions be taught in an impartial manner. Not buy a specific denomination but in a classroom setting where the WHOLE religion is discussed both pros and cons and what events have transpired, both good and BAD. If kids are taught all sides of religions there would be fewer fanatics in the world and they would be more likely to make up their own minds. Why? Because knowing is half the battle, G.I. Joe!

[Hoplite]

well, i'm not quite sure about how authentic the article is....if it's not, then i've got nothing to say...but if it is true, then "you can not force me practice the religion of others, no way!!:mad:"....those teachers are stubborn

[LV426]

well, i'm not quite sure about how authentic the article is....if it's not, then i've got nothing to say...but if it is true, then "you can not force me practice the religion of others, no way!!:mad:"....those teachers are stubborn

Then don't sign up for the class. Besides they aren't making you practice it just demonstrate aspects of the religion.

[RQ]

Religion belongs in the home, in private, away from the general population. It SHOULD be an intimate and cultivated family belief, not a cookie-cutter, mass-market belief structure.

Also, I acknowledge that learning about a culture will involve discussing its spiritual practices - but I agree with LV, the good as well as the bad should be taught from a completely objective point of view. Well, as objective as the rest of history, anyway.

Another point: I was operating under the assumption that the kids understood what was going on, but rejected praying to a deity they didn't believe in - it wasn't just a classroom exercise to them. If that's the case, don't they have every right to disobey under the first amendment?

If it was just brattiness and an unwillingness to participate then yeah, they earned their Fs.

[UNODRAGONE]

Religion belongs in the home, in private, away from the general population. It SHOULD be an intimate and cultivated family belief, not a cookie-cutter, mass-market belief structure.

Also, I acknowledge that learning about a culture will involve discussing its spiritual practices - but I agree with LV, the good as well as the bad should be taught from a completely objective point of view. Well, as objective as the rest of history, anyway.

Another point: I was operating under the assumption that the kids understood what was going on, but rejected praying to a deity they didn't believe in - it wasn't just a classroom exercise to them. If that's the case, don't they have every right to disobey under the first amendment?

If it was just brattiness and an unwillingness to participate then yeah, they earned their Fs.

as V pointed out to me this happened in Europe, I thought the same thing at first cause in the article it doesn't really state that and the first comment is from the USA but if you look around the page you can tell it's from Europe some where. But I agree whole heartly with everything else you said, religion should be private not broad casted

[ThrasherCub]

Religion belongs in the home, in private, away from the general population. It SHOULD be an intimate and cultivated family belief, not a cookie-cutter, mass-market belief structure.

As far as actually believing it is concerned I full heartedly concur. However I'm thinking more about just understanding other religions in general. Many religions have views that make other religions seem backwards, misguided, or downright evil, and while some of it certainly comes from doctrine a lot of it comes for terrible misconceptions and overall just not knowing a damn thing about the religion in question. A very common one is that satanism is full of ritual sacrifice of animals and babies, despite the fact that rules 9 and 10 of the Earth are not to harm children and not to harm animals except for food and self-defense.

[Vendetta]

I suppose we shouldn't mind if a PoliSci class involves a graded demonstration? Nothing for real, of course, just mandate some posters on sticks for a given political party, a short march, and some simple chants?
Are you SERIOUSLY trying to compare a PoliSci class to a grade-school level class on religion?

But the point where you start forcing them to 'go through the motions' of a religion that they don't believe in, you insult them and you insult the religion.
Please explain how this insults anyone but narrow-minded bigots? And if it insults them, well more power to it.

[greggchamberlain]

Greg, I don't know what school YOU went to, but uhh yeah, if you don't do the class work, yeah, you usually fail.

Look, if I'm a math teacher, and I've just taught a lesson on fractions. If you don't know that 1/8 + 3/8 = 1/2, yeah you're gonna fail my math test.

hi, folks...finally got a block of free time to return to the discussion...

yep...failure, without reasonable cause, to take part in an approved curriculum activity does result in sanctioned penalties to the student.

my question here is whether or not what the teacher wanted the students to do was part of the approved curriculum of activities.

also, i would like to know just how much the teacher actually knew about Islam to be considered "expert" enough to conduct any demonstration of standard muslim prayer techniques and also be able to "grade" the students on how well they themselves perform those techniques.

seems to me that an appreciation of Islam, its origin, history, and place in the modern world is possible through assigned text readings (from a good reference source, mind you) and classroom discussion (how in-depth, etc. kind of depends on the grade level...would not expect elementary kids to talk about and/or argue religion at the same level as, perhaps, high school seniors or college/university-educated grads). there is no need for students to have to take part in any simulated prayer session.

if the teacher had wanted to do this kind of "hands-on" demonstration, first i would expect him or her to make sure it met the approval of the school AND the parents of the students. student participation in field trips and some other school activities always require parental permission and i would expect something like this that pertains to religious practices to fall under that "parental permission required" heading.

given that, i would also rather than the teacher had sought out an imam or at least an actual practising muslim to serve as a guest speaker to explain this sort of thing, rather than rely on his/her own amateur understanding. but if the teacher insisted on "going it alone" i certainly do not approve of him/her daring to penalize students for not doing everything exactly as it should be done given that i am not certain the teacher has sufficient expertise to judge.

certainly God/Yahweh/Allah would be more forgiving of children.

[blueeyes]

Are you SERIOUSLY trying to compare a PoliSci class to a grade-school level class on religion?
... Yes?

Are you seriously comparing a PhysEd or BioLab to a grade-school level class on religion? At least the PoliSci demonstration would be a matter of opinion.

Please explain how this insults anyone but narrow-minded bigots? And if it insults them, well more power to it.

Sikhs, for example, would be narrow-minded bigots? Pretending to take up the actions of the Khalsa, then violating the prohibitions and requirements attached to such a thing, is considered one of the religion's greatest sins. The texts speak better of an individual that stays a Sahajdhari most of their life than one who even pretends to act as a Kalsa and later breaks with the requirements.

This isn't that unusual. All the Abrahamic religions prohibit all forms of false worship, with Christianity in particular finding even 'real' worship done for the sake of looks to be a bad thing.

Nor should it be surprising. I don't think I'd like people just playing along with morality as long as teachers are watching.