If the law in Sudan meant that the teacher got in trouble, why didn't the children get in trouble too? The teacher only let the children name the teddy bear Muhammad, whereas it was the children that actually chose the name.
2007-12-03 12:29:57 · 14 answers · asked by presidentrichardnixon 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I believe that she was teaching a class of 7 yr. olds
who I am sure dont understand what is going on and will surely miss their teacher
2007-12-03 12:39:27 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The law was ruse. They just used the law to use another excuse to get a foreigner out of their lands. From a majority of people I have met from Africa, Muslim law and teachings are autocratic and totalitarian. The children probably didn't get in trouble because (and this is just an opinion on my part) they were portrayed as "being led astray" by a infidel.
Religion in politics, in education, and in life in general sometimes blurr the lines of common sense and tolerance.
People usually go along with because they feel comfortable with it or it makes feel safe. As long as that persists (and I just don't Islam, I'm also referring to some other religions as well) they'll continue to keep doing the same things.
2007-12-03 12:43:45 · answer #2 · answered by sigmarigel@verizon.net 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because it had nothing to do with the Teddy Bear.
The whole purpose of these charges was to send a message to the British government to 'butt out' of the Islamic genocide of the African farmers in Darfur.
The Arab rulers of the Sudan didn't care about the Teddy - they were just using he rto try to "warn-off" the British Govt, because it's been pressing for UN peacekeepers in Darfur.
Richard
2007-12-03 12:33:11 · answer #3 · answered by rickinnocal 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well, I'm not so sure this international incident was really about naming a teddy Mohammed. I argue it was more of an excuse to make an example out of a foreigner, a Christian, and a supporter of the US (by virtue of being English).
2007-12-03 12:39:01 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because they are Muslims too. And their parents will never put them at risk. This is just a very stupid political game.
I think all ex-pat teachers working in Sudan should leave the country. They are at risk. If I were working there I would leave immediately.
My heart goes to her.
2007-12-03 12:34:48 · answer #5 · answered by Helper 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
They just want to target a non-Muslim. Kids are Muslim, so they are out of their target scope.
Unreasonable? Add Barbaric, primitive and stupid to the list.
2007-12-03 12:37:04 · answer #6 · answered by Sol4rd3nZy 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because there little Hajis and she was a white women . You know white people are the devil to those people .
2007-12-03 12:48:45 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably because they were minors entrusted to the care of an adult.
2007-12-03 12:32:49 · answer #8 · answered by Mai Celia 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
She's a white, female, non-Muslim.
In other words, an easy target.
2007-12-03 12:32:43 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
well it was one child actually...and how do you know that his family hasn't had everything taken away from them, and they haven't been beaten and torturted for teaching their 5 year old blasphemy???
2007-12-03 12:33:54 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋