Foehammer’s Anvil

Teddy bear woes? Thoughts from Economist.com with a couple of my own interjected for better measure:

FOR anyone who is labouring to improve Christian-Muslim relations, or stop civilisations clashing, it is a painful setback: a well-intentioned Western woman who has volunteered her services as a teacher in a land stricken by conflict and poverty, only to find herself denounced by a local colleague and incarcerated in horrible conditions.

Gillian Gibbons, a 54-year-old teacher from Liverpool, was sentenced on Thursday November 29th to 15 days in prison for “insulting religion”, after allowing her pupils at a school in Khartoum, Sudan’s capital, to name a teddy bear Muhammad. She had invited a seven-year-old girl to bring in her teddy and then encouraged the class to vote on a name for the toy.

When the story broke in the British press this week, it was widely reported that she might face up to 40 lashes, or six months in jail, if she were found guilty on all three of the charges laid against her. British diplomats are now trying to secure Ms Gibbons’ early release. The incident happened in September and caused no protest among parents at the time. At one point the affair seemed to be spinning out of control as groups of angry men gathered outside the police station where she was held.

For Muslims in Britain and other democracies, the story was a deeply depressing one: so many of its features, including the fact that it happened in the run-up to Christmas, seemed almost calculated to resonate with British tabloid readers, who may not know much about Sudan or Islam (or any other faith) but have strong feelings about teddies, tiny tots and motherly teachers.

In more elevated western circles, it is becoming commoner to hear the view that Islam itself (rather than any extremist interpretations of the faith) is posing a challenge to western values that must be resisted. And if that view becomes more respectable, so too does a defensive Muslim reaction, which is often tinged with geopolitical grievance.

And are we to allow fear of this “defensive reaction” to the fact that persons like myself, shouting from the rooftops, are now being take more and more seriously — are we to allow this fear to control us? I think not.

It’s time to stand up and point the finger at Islam, ladies and gentlemen. The new Nazis have arrived on the scene and they mean to destroy the future for your children. Wake up! Freedom came at a high cost and we had better be prepared to continue to pay the ‘toll’ every so often, or we will no longer possess such freedom.

To observers who know Sudan, the whole affair seems to have become entangled with the broader stand-off between the government in Khartoum and the Western countries, including Britain, that have pushed for the United Nations to intervene in the appalling humanitarian crisis in Darfur. All diplomatic exchanges between the Sudanese government and Western ones, whether they concern refugees or teddy bears, take place against that background.

But some articulate western Muslims have been emphasising that they share the general horror over the affair, and their dismay over the Sudanese authorities’ reaction. Many stressed that the treatment of Ms Gibbons was at odds with a Koranic injunction to treat visitors hospitably. “Sudan’s official response to this incident is the exact opposite of the model that Muslims are supposed to emulate,” said Firas Ahmed, deputy editor of Islamica, a glossy magazine. Musharraf Hussain, a well-known imam from the English Midlands, said Ms Gibbons had set out to help Sudanese children with “great enthusiasm and sincerity” and it was embarrassing for British Muslims to see her being punished for making an unintentional cultural mistake.

Excuse me please, but can someone think about this and then ask themselves: “When was the last time a ‘cultural mistake’ in a non-Muslim nation cost someone their freedom and almost their lives?”

Please comment if you can think of any answers to that question. Thank you. Please continue reading.

Perhaps the hardest question that Muslims in the West face from sceptical fellow-citizens is whether they are prepared in any circumstances to defend the harsh penalties, such as lashing and stoning, which the sacred texts of Islam prescribe, in particular for sexual offences, or blaspheming against the faith.

Here’s a harder question: “Are we as Westerners prepared to own the reality that most Muslims will support and defend instances of Sharia/Islamic Law over our own democratic laws?”

This is simply a matter of time and Muslim population explosion mixed with their seizing of more and more economic power worldwide. Do you really think that the Islamic terror isn’t for a purpose other than just sowing the seeds of Chaos?

Tariq Ramadan, an influential Muslim philosopher, has called for an indefinite moratorium on capital and corporal punishment, using elaborate theological arguments to support his view that these penalties have resulted in horribly cruel treatment for vulnerable people, including women and the poor. Scholars in the Muslim heartland do not go far enough when they say the necessary conditions for the application of these traditional punishments are “almost never” fulfilled, Mr Ramadan has argued. Some westerners (including France’s President Nicolas Sarkozy, in the days when he was interior minister) taunted Mr Ramadan over the use of the word moratorium: did that mean stoning might resume in the future? But to traditional scholars, Mr Ramadan is clearly going too far. The gap he is trying to straddle is already a wide one, and the story of Ms Gibbons suggests that it risks growing even wider.

Outlaw Islam. That would be a start on the right road for a change.

 Print This Post