Quebec Pupil Wears Headphones to Avoid Hearing Music

[Guest American Woman]

Why do you make garbage up?

Oh, I couldn't make such garbage up.

I have a problem with Christians trying to change the curriculum, just like I would have a problem with Muslims trying to get music pulled out of the classroom or trying to force the schools to have segregated physical education classes.

You were applauding the religious point of view being excluded from the classroom - not calling for it to be respected as some's religious beliefs. You were applauding the government for only teaching evolution, which is against some Christians' values. Yet here is what you said in this very thread about Muslims and music in the classroom:

We shouldn't be forcing people to be exposed to something that they feel is against their religious values.

Yet you are fine with Christians for whom evolution is against their religious values being exposed to it in the classroom; you are, in fact, applauding it.

My problem is with religious zealots forcing their religious beliefs on others, but you seemed to miss that when you were quote mining.

Ummmm. Your problem, as quoted above, is with "forcing people to be exposed to something that they feel is against their religious values" - as you applaud that very notion with regards to evolution.

Edited December 23, 2011 by American Woman

[cybercoma]

I already noted that "exposed" was the wrong word and I've made it quite clear the difference between this child's circumstances and those of the Christian students. The difference is about forcing your beliefs on others through changing the curriculum versus reasonable accommodation for your beliefs. Christians in the circumstance wanted to be accommodated by forcing their beliefs on others. The same cannot be said for the kid wearing headphones. The corrolary to the Christianity curriculum problem would be if Muslims tried to have music banned in all classrooms because it didn't meet their values.

[olp1fan]

Give it up Cyber, AW exposed the hypocrite that you are

[jbg]

My point is that it's not up to you to decide what the "right" interpretation is. It's their religion.

It may be there religion but it's your country. You have a right not to be bossed around by them.

[The_Squid]

I noticed the question was avoided once again!

[cybercoma]

I noticed the question was avoided once again!

Just because you don't like the answer, doesn't mean I haven't answered it.

[The_Squid]

Just because you don't like the answer, doesn't mean I haven't answered it.

Your reasonable and mine don't intersect!

Edited December 23, 2011 by The_Squid

[Guest Manny]

Why are most of the threads always about Muslims??

[cybercoma]

Your reasonable and mine don't intersect!

That's why we have courts.

[August1991]

Why are most of the threads always about Muslims??

Well, we have a lot of threads about aboriginals too, and then threads (in many permutations) concerning whether Stephen Harper is an evil dictator or not.

----

After quick glance through this thread, I reckon that Muslims attract attention because radical Muslims hijacked planes and flew them into large US buildings - among other terrorist attacks around the world.

Like it or not, many people in the West view Islam as a threat to the modern, western world. They do not fear other religions or ideologies in the same way.

I think that this explains why people are more concerned about Muslim parents requesting that their child wear headphones to avoid hearing music.

Moreover, do you hold the same standards for other types of religious accommodation in our country? I mean, I didn't see you arguing that Jewish Montrealers should go to Israel if they want quiet on Rosh Hashanah. That case is arguably worse because they actually legislated their religious observance.

This was a municipal bylaw criticized by the Quebec government but without getting into the details of your comparison, the simple fact is that Jews are not perceived as a threat to the West or Western values. Edited December 23, 2011 by August1991

[The_Squid]

What does this poor kid do at recess and lunch? Is he segregated to a corner of the playground where no music will reach?

Kid doesn't stand a chance... this religious craziness borders on child abuse.

[cybercoma]

This was a municipal bylaw criticized by the Quebec government but without getting into the details of your comparison, the simple fact is that Jews are not perceived as a threat to the West or Western values.

Tell that to the passengers of the St. Louis. They may not be a "threat" now, but a generation ago they were. It shows how these sorts of ethnocentric perceptions change over time. Muslims are today's Jews or going back further Irish.

Edited December 23, 2011 by cybercoma

[cybercoma]

What does this poor kid do at recess and lunch? Is he segregated to a corner of the playground where no music will reach?

Kid doesn't stand a chance... this religious craziness borders on child abuse.

Denying your child blood transfusions is child abuse. Not listening to music because you want your mind free from the messaging that it inarguably uses to indoctrinate people is not really child abuse. It's just strange.

[Wilber]

This would be funny if it wasn't so sad. A parent actually believing they could prevent their child from hearing music is delusional to the point of mental illness in itself. And what about that kid going through life surrounded by all those mentally ill people who do listen to music. THE HORROR!

[cybercoma]

For the record, I think it's a pretty stupid belief, but I can see where they're coming from. We don't even notice all the ways that we're bombarded by music: in your car, on television, in just about every store on the planet, in restaurants, even walking down the street some establishments pump music out into the sidewalks or during festivals. You seriously couldn't get away from music if you tried and I don't think anyone thinks about that. Certainly those that do probably don't think it's a problem. However, start unpacking the messages that you're bombarded with constantly in pop songs and it becomes clear that perhaps there's something more insidious about this culture. It could be seen by visitors from hundreds of years ago as Orwellian. They would probably wonder what these messages are that are constantly being played everywhere they go. Who is sending them? Why are they sending them? What do they mean? It's just that it seems so natural to us to have music playing all the time that we no longer even hear the soundtrack of our lives, so it strikes us as odd when a group of people stand up and say, "this soundtrack is offensive and harmful to our spirits." It raises important questoins, but I think it's stupid to believe you can avoid it all and to force your child to miss out on classes because you don't want him to hear the class singing their ABCs.

Edited December 23, 2011 by cybercoma

[August1991]

Tell that to the passengers of the St. Louis. They may not be a "threat" now, but a generation ago they were. It shows how these sorts of ethnocentric perceptions change over time. Muslims are today's Jews or going back further Irish.

St. Louis? To my knowledge, neither Jews nor Irish a generation ago hijacked airplanes and flew them into tall buildings killing thousands. There is no Jewish nor Irish equivalent to al-Qaeda or Osama bin Laden.

IMHO, it is wilful ignorance not to see this aspect of the issue.

Denying your child blood transfusions is child abuse. Not listening to music because you want your mind free from the messaging that it inarguably uses to indoctrinate people is not really child abuse. It's just strange.

No one is saying that parents should lose the right to forbid their children from listening to music.

The problem is that the State is now involved in this decision. In a sense, the problem arises because we have a State education system. And I thought, cybercoma, that you usually support the idea of a State monopoly in areas such as health and education.

But as I say, despite the interesting moral arguments in this thread, this is not why this is such a hot-button issue. Jehovah's Witnesses have not conducted terror campaigns against westerners and they are not perceived as a threat.

Edited December 23, 2011 by August1991

[Hydraboss]

Could be a new movie here in the works. Footloose : Islam

Okay, seriously, this has got to be the winning post in this thread.

Frickin hilarious.

[cybercoma]

St. Louis? To my knowledge, neither Jews nor Irish a generation ago hijacked airplanes and flew them into tall buildings killing thousands. There is no Jewish nor Irish equivalent to al-Qaeda or Osama bin Laden.

IMHO, it is wilful ignorance not to see this aspect of the issue.Well in my opinion it's willfull ignorance to associate all Muslims with the actions of radical zealots who have a political agenda that they back with their religion. The Norwegian killer fighting to protect wholesome Christian values and keep immigrants out of his country isn't a representation of Christianity, although he used its values for his political agenda. All the innocent civilians that were killed in Iraq and Afghanistan were killed as a result of the commands of a President that went on record to say that God told him to go to war. Catholics and Protestants murdered each other in the streets of Belgrad for their political whims backed by religious values. There is all kinds of violence in this world backed up by religion, but that does not mean everyone or even a majority of the people of that religion follow it. While all al-Qaeda terrorists may be Muslim that does not mean all Muslims are terrorists and it's incredibly ignorant to even suggest as much.

Nevertheless, my point remains that Jews and the Irish were both seen as threats to our society in their respective eras. These opinions change over time. The Japanese were also put into internment camps because they were seen as a threat. The Chinese were given a head-tax because they were seen as a threat. This happens generation after generation. Muslims just happen to be the Other of the day.

But as I say, despite the interesting moral arguments in this thread, this is not why this is such a hot-button issue. Jehovah's Witnesses have not conducted terror campaigns against westerners and they are not perceived as a threat.

You're right. The problem is that perceptions are deceiving and we have media to thank for shaping those perceptions. Just to give you an example, FOX does an exceptionally poor job of actually informing people according to many recent studies. This is where people's perceptions come from. CNN isn't sending a filming crew to peaceful places in the Middle East. It puts more eyeballs on TV screens if there's things blowing up or people being killed. You talk about how many people are being killed, but fail to account for the innocent people killed by the wars that we've waged. Are their lives less valuable or are their deaths acceptable because they were just hundreds of "accidents"? Is it because we have a noble purpose to our wars that their deaths are ok? Would their families see our purposes as noble?

Yes, August, you are right. Perception is everything.

[msj]

It could be seen by visitors from hundreds of years ago as Orwellian.

George Orwell (really Eric Arthur Blair) lived from 1903 to 1950 and the world didn't see his books "Animal Farm" and "Nineteen Eighty-Four" until the late 1940's and early 1950's.

If we had visitors from hundreds of years ago they would not know what the term "Orwellian" even means.

Now, where's that face-palm emoticon?

[cybercoma]

George Orwell (really Eric Arthur Blair) lived from 1903 to 1950 and the world didn't see his books "Animal Farm" and "Nineteen Eighty-Four" until the late 1940's and early 1950's.

If we had visitors from hundreds of years ago they would not know what the term "Orwellian" even means.

Now, where's that face-palm emoticon?

Are you being serious here or are you just trolling?

[Guest American Woman]

For the record, I think it's a pretty stupid belief, but I can see where they're coming from.

Of course you can.

[Guest American Woman]

To my knowledge, neither Jews nor Irish a generation ago hijacked airplanes and flew them into tall buildings killing thousands. There is no Jewish nor Irish equivalent to al-Qaeda or Osama bin Laden.

IMHO, it is wilful ignorance not to see this aspect of the issue.

Exactly. Couldn't agree more.

[TimG]

Not listening to music because you want your mind free from the messaging that it inarguably uses to indoctrinate people is not really child abuse. It's just strange.

Music is an important part of the human experience. Denying your child access to music is no different than refusing to teach your kid to read. An outright prohibition is child abuse.

How would you feel if parents told their female children that they had to leave the classroom if a male teacher entered the room?

[The_Squid]

However, start unpacking the messages that you're bombarded with constantly in pop songs and it becomes clear that perhaps there's something more insidious about this culture.

Their religious beliefs do not say "don't listen to pop music with bad messages". It says don't listen or play ANY music. No lullabies to your children.... no playing guitar... no listening to Italian opera.

To try and couch it that they are trying to protect their kids from Lady Gaga is false.

[cybercoma]

Their religious beliefs do not say "don't listen to pop music with bad messages". It says don't listen or play ANY music. No lullabies to your children.... no playing guitar... no listening to Italian opera.

To try and couch it that they are trying to protect their kids from Lady Gaga is false.

This thinking isn't unique to Islam. It extends from Stoicism which sought to avoid having their souls corrupted by the passions. Undoubtedly music incites passion. I think it's a silly philosophy, but it's not as if they're just making crap up. Moreover, the United States (not so much Canada) was built on Puritan mores, which saw asceticism as one of the highest values. All I'm saying is that their prohibition raises interesting questions that the rest of us should consider, not the least of which is the messaging in the music that we're bombarded with and can't avoid.