Teachers drop the Holocaust to avoid offending Muslims

[DogOnPorch]

Well you did throw in the "...yet , at least" thing. They just might in our lifetime

Yup...Creationism does not belong in public schools. Nor does Holocaust denial and/or the skirting of same.

My point was Kansas wants to teach creationism stemming from religious belief , and the UK teachers dont want to teach something stemming from religious belief.

And I agree. Except it is the students and not the teachers in the UK case. But it adds up the same. As well, the Holocaust was an event as opposed to some fairy story out of an old book about how we think we are the centre of the entire Universe.

My opinion can be summed up in this little ditty from the Python boys.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Science Rules!

---Bill Nye

[Remiel]

The Crusades must also be taught. They are at least as important in defining the would we live in as the Holocaust. An objective history of the period will not shed much credit on anyone, Christian or Muslim.

Of course the Crusades must also be taught, but I think the lessons would be better spent on those in the 16-18 range rather than the 11-14 range. Of course, I suppose part of the problem is that history tends to be elective at that age.

I don't recall exactly what history we were taught before Grade 11, I think it was the middle ages in public school, maybe a dash of ancient and Crusades, with some World War stuff, then more World War stuff in grades 9 and 10. Only when I got to grade 11 did I have the option of taking ancient history, and then by a complicated circumstance of scheduling, I ended up taking the OAC history course in grade 12, which covered from Louis XIV up to Bismarck and Realpolitik, I think. In fact, it seems to me that we are completely lacking in the curriculum in Ontario when it comes to the history of Asia, which is rather odd, since a number of revolutionary inventions came from there.

[M.Dancer]

The Crusades must also be taught. They are at least as important in defining the would we live in as the Holocaust. An objective history of the period will not shed much credit on anyone, Christian or Muslim.

Of course the Crusades must also be taught, but I think the lessons would be better spent on those in the 16-18 range rather than the 11-14 range. Of course, I suppose part of the problem is that history tends to be elective at that age.

I don't recall exactly what history we were taught before Grade 11, I think it was the middle ages in public school, maybe a dash of ancient and Crusades, with some World War stuff, then more World War stuff in grades 9 and 10. Only when I got to grade 11 did I have the option of taking ancient history, and then by a complicated circumstance of scheduling, I ended up taking the OAC history course in grade 12, which covered from Louis XIV up to Bismarck and Realpolitik, I think. In fact, it seems to me that we are completely lacking in the curriculum in Ontario when it comes to the history of Asia, which is rather odd, since a number of revolutionary inventions came from there.

I remember King Richard, Couer de Lion.....meeting Saladin..........

[kimmy]

Actually...it's due to Holocaust denial. They haven't done that in Kansas public schools...yet, at least.

Well you did throw in the "...yet , at least" thing. They just might in our lifetime

My point was Kansas wants to teach creationism stemming from religious belief , and the UK teachers dont want to teach something stemming from religious belief.

While I'm hardly a scholar of Islam, I'm pretty sure that neither the Quran nor the Islamic faith proper have any stance at all in regard to the veracity of events occuring 1300 years after Mohammed's death.

There is a difference between a religious belief and a belief held by religious people.

As for these teachers, they can ram this notion the same place they stuffed their festive halal chickens.

-k

[geoffrey]

Pardon my ignorance. Why would a Muslim be offended by teaching of the Holocaust?

[JerrySeinfeld]

Pardon my ignorance. Why would a Muslim be offended by teaching of the Holocaust?

GREAT question.

[Wilber]

Pardon my ignorance. Why would a Muslim be offended by teaching of the Holocaust?

Antipathy toward Israel perhaps.

[Remiel]

While it does seem rather bizarre to deny the Holocaust for any reason, it probably stems from Muslims' objection to the fallout, the creation of Israel. A rather common tactic when there is a disagreement, is to discredit the other sides justification, right? Thus Muslims and Holocaust denial. Not right in any way, but kind of predicatable.

[Jerry Galinda]

”The Pre-Celtic peoples, of which the Basque are the modern descendants are the 'first' inhabitants of Spain to the best of our knowledge. Then came the Celts, then the Romans, then the Vandals, then the Visigoths, then the Muslims, then the Christians.”

Almost correct – despite the fact that Christians were before the Muslims – it show your “objectivity”.

”Tough one... got a time frame for me to work with? There is evidence of Homo Erectus, Homo Habilis and Homo Sapiens all passing through this region circa 50,000 to 1,000,000 years ago.”

Argumentum ad absurdum – as if you don’t know what about is talking.

Obviously Jews and Christians were before muslims

”Well, first in Egypt is highly debatable, but as for the choice between the Coptics and the Muslims, clearly the Coptic Church predates the Muslims.”

It’s obvious – that muslims were invaders in Egypt.

The problems are between Muslims and Christians and Jews .

Ethnic and historical arguments appears when is describing problems of Palestine or Balkans and so on.

The first reconquista appeared in Spain – then the most famous in Palestine.

Greece, Bulgary, Spain, France (Poittiers),Balkans, Istanbul, Hungary- Wien and so on – muslims were invaders.

Europe was attack by muslims for ages.

The Celtiberians , the Romans, the Vandals, the Visigoths – “disappeared” - Spaniards – from ethnic point of view - are descendants of this ethnoses.

[Jerry Galinda]

”The Pre-Celtic peoples, of which the Basque are the modern descendants are the 'first' inhabitants of Spain to the best of our knowledge. Then came the Celts, then the Romans, then the Vandals, then the Visigoths, then the Muslims, then the Christians.”

Almost correct – despite the fact that Christians were before the Muslims – it show your “objectivity”.

”Tough one... got a time frame for me to work with? There is evidence of Homo Erectus, Homo Habilis and Homo Sapiens all passing through this region circa 50,000 to 1,000,000 years ago.”

Argumentum ad absurdum – as if you don’t know what about is talking.

Obviously Jews and Christians were before muslims

”Well, first in Egypt is highly debatable, but as for the choice between the Coptics and the Muslims, clearly the Coptic Church predates the Muslims.”

It’s obvious – that muslims were invaders in Egypt.

The problems are between Muslims and Christians and Jews .

Ethnic and historical arguments appears when is describing problems of Palestine or Balkans and so on.

The first reconquista appeared in Spain – then the most famous in Palestine.

Greece, Bulgary, Spain, France (Poittiers),Balkans, Istanbul, Hungary- Wien and so on – muslims were invaders.

Europe was attack by muslims for ages.

The Celtiberians , the Romans, the Vandals, the Visigoths – “disappeared” - Spaniards – from ethnic point of view - are descendants of this ethnoses.

[Remiel]

Can you, like, stop double posting already?

Oh... and since we are talking about geography here, it is completely possible that Muslims may have come to Spain before Christians, *despite* Christianity predated Islam by several hundred years.

[Jerry Galinda]

“Oh... and since we are talking about geography here, it is completely possible that Muslims may have come to Spain before Christians, *despite* Christianity predated Islam by several hundred years.”

Is it geography ??? Not Policy and History !!

“it is completely possible that Muslims may have come to Spain before Christians” - It means that you don't know History at all.

Many such "smart people" avoid offending Muslims and "forget" about facts.

“Forget” about “Holocaust” , who and when was invader and so on.

Your statement show your “objectivity”.

[Jerry Galinda]

Pardon my ignorance. Why would a Muslim be offended by teaching of the Holocaust?

GREAT question.

Very interesting question !!

[Jerry Galinda]

Pardon my ignorance. Why would a Muslim be offended by teaching of the Holocaust?

Antipathy toward Israel perhaps.

That's all ?

[noahbody]

Pardon my ignorance. Why would a Muslim be offended by teaching of the Holocaust?

Antipathy toward Israel perhaps.

That's all ?

I assume they are doing it because those with extemist views are likely to sympathize with Hitler. Not teaching the holocaust is an insult to every soldier who sacrificed their life in WW2 and all who survived.

The education curriculum isn't broken, immigration policy is.

[guyser]

I assume they are doing it because those with extemist views are likely to sympathize with Hitler. Not teaching the holocaust is an insult to every Canadian who sacrificed their life in WW2 and all who survived.

The education curriculum isn't broken, immigration policy is.

You do know that we are talking about the UK dont you?

[Wilber]

Pardon my ignorance. Why would a Muslim be offended by teaching of the Holocaust?

Antipathy toward Israel perhaps.

That's all ?

Maybe not all but a good part of it. Look at how Jews in general and Israelis in particular are portrayed in much Arab media. Difficult to reconcile that with the idea that Jews were the victims of one of the most diabolical crimes in history.

[Remiel]

So, I mixed up my words. Roman Catholics converted the Gothic kings in the 5th century (no mention of the people in what I am looking at), and the Muslims took Iberia in the beginning of the 8th. However, it does mention that the first identifiably Christian kingdom in Spain was created eleven years after the Berber invasion. So, Christians " got there " first, but Muslim made the first kingdom out of their religion.

However, you have one freakin' messed up view of objectivity if you look back through history and only identify Muslims as hostile invaders. Hostile invasion was the way EVERYBODY did things back in those days. The Muslims were not unique in this, they were just succesful. You would rewrite all of history to say that Muslims are so much worse than everyone else because of a few wackos we have to deal with today, when in fact they acted the same way that every other non-Muslim did. What the hell do you think the Roman Empire, the originator of the Roman Catholic Church, was famous for?

[Remiel]

Now that I think of it, remember the Divine Right of Kings? Basically, the difference between the Christians and the Muslims was one step vs. two step thinking. For the Muslims, it was " It's God's will be spread the faith any way possible, " and for the Christians, it was " It's my will that I expand my territory, and it's God's will that I am king, so it must be OK. "

[Jerry Galinda]

"However, you have one freakin' messed up view of objectivity if you look back through history and only identify Muslims as hostile invaders. Hostile invasion was the way EVERYBODY did things back in those days. The Muslims were not unique in this, they were just succesful. "

"The Muslims were not unique in this"- is it my opinion that Muslims were unique ??????????

Alleging that poor muslims are victims of agression - is a lie !

"Hostile invasion was the way EVERYBODY did things back in those days" - true !

What for to rubbishing about Europeans as a invaders !

For ages Europe was a victim of agression - Balkan, Spain and so on.

By the way - from what I remember - Christianity Gothic Kingdom in Spain exist for 300 years - before invasion of muslims in Spain.

[ScottSA]

Can you, like, stop double posting already?

Oh... and since we are talking about geography here, it is completely possible that Muslims may have come to Spain before Christians, *despite* Christianity predated Islam by several hundred years.

It may be possible, but it's not true.

[Wilber]

Can you, like, stop double posting already?

Oh... and since we are talking about geography here, it is completely possible that Muslims may have come to Spain before Christians, *despite* Christianity predated Islam by several hundred years.

It is completely not possible. There is some thought that there was a Christian presence in Spain as early as 44 AD. Constantine made Christianity the state religion of the Roman Empire early in the 4th century. Muhammad wasn't born until late in the 6th century. No doubt there were many different religions in Spain before the Muslims arrived but Christians were there centuries before the Muslim religion even existed.

[M.Dancer]

Constantine made Christianity the state religion of the Roman Empire early in the 4th century

That means nothing.

[Wilber]

Constantine made Christianity the state religion of the Roman Empire early in the 4th century

That means nothing.

Spain was part of the Empire at the time. That doesn't mean a majority of those living in Spain were Christian at that time but it does mean there was a state religion and that religion was Christianity.

[Remiel]

What for to rubbishing about Europeans as a invaders !

Even at my worst I am more intelligible than that. Maybe you'd like to reword that?