King Abdullah Embraces Inter-Faith Project

[A_Wanderer]

RIYADH (AFP) - Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah on Monday proposed inter-faith talks between Muslims, Christians and Jews in a first for the ultra-conservative Muslim kingdom, the official SPA news agency reported.

"I ask representatives of all the monotheistic religions to meet with their brothers in faith," the king told delegates to a seminar on "Dialogue Among Civilisations between Japan and the Islamic World."

SPA reported that top Saudi clerics had given the green light for the idea, and that Muslim leaders from other countries would now be consulted.

"If God wills it, we will then meet with our brothers from other religions, including those of the Torah and the Gospel... to come up with ways to safeguard humanity," the king said.

The news agency said he also intended to address the United Nations on the subject.

"We have lost sincerity, morals, fidelity and attachment to our religions and to humanity," the king said, deploring "the disintegration of the family and the rise of atheism in the world -- a frightening phenomenon that all religions must confront and vanquish."

The monarch did not say where he hoped the proposed dialogue would take place.

He said he had discussed the project, which he has been mulling over for two years, with Pope Benedict XVI during his landmark visit to the Vatican last November.

Saudi Arabia and the Vatican do not have diplomatic relations.

link

Maybe focus on the family can get a new sponsor

[melon]

Oh God...I can only imagine that all three religions will just find a way to unite in their common hatred and bigotry, rather than anything positive or constructive.

If they could ever find a way to overcome that hatred and bigotry, I think that would go a long way of "preventing atheism," no?

[A_Wanderer]

Be very thankful that they don't get along, I would hate to see a world where some of the shared elements of the faithful get unleashed on the rest of society

I suspect that there would be more things like this (although probably not the the USA given the high standards of sex education)

A council has withdrawn books for an anti-homophobia programme at two primary schools following an outcry from predominantly Muslim parents.

Bristol City Council said it temporarily removed books and teaching materials at Easton Primary School and Bannerman Road Community School.

This was so they can "meet their legal responsibilities and operate safely".

Members of Bristol Muslim Cultural Society said parents were outraged by the lack of consultation.

The materials are mostly storybooks aimed at five to 10-year-olds.

Farooq Siddique, community development officer for Bristol Muslim Cultural Society and a governor at Bannerman Road, said many schoolchildren, 70% of whom are Muslim, were too young to define heterosexuality and homosexuality.

'Not a priority'

He said: "The agenda was to reduce homophobic bullying, and all the parents said they were not against that side of it, but families were saying to us 'Our child is coming home and talking about same-sex relationships, when we haven't even talked about heterosexual relationships with them yet.'

"In Islam homosexual relationships are not acceptable, as they are not in Christianity and many other religions, but the main issue is that they didn't bother to consult with parents. There was no option to withdraw the child."

He added: "Homosexuality is not a priority to parents, but academic achievement is. This just makes parents think 'What the heck is my child being taught at school?'."

A spokeswoman for the council said: "All Bristol schools have a legal duty to report and deal with homophobic harassment as part of the curriculum since April 2007.

"As part of this, schools can choose to seek specialist advice and training on topics such as homophobia.

"We are now liaising with community forums in the city, local clerics, teachers' unions, the Institute of Community Cohesion and the Equality and Human Rights Commission to ensure that the topic can be addressed in an inclusive manner in the curriculum."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/7324985.stm

[yolland]

One thing fundamentalists have in common is that they don't trust anyone but Me'n'Mine to regulate public morality, so I don't see this 'cooperation' King Abdullah seems to be envisioning happening.

[financeguy]

A council has withdrawn books for an anti-homophobia programme at two primary schools following an outcry from predominantly Muslim parents.

Bristol City Council said it temporarily removed books and teaching materials at Easton Primary School and Bannerman Road Community School.

This was so they can "meet their legal responsibilities and operate safely".

Members of Bristol Muslim Cultural Society said parents were outraged by the lack of consultation.

The materials are mostly storybooks aimed at five to 10-year-olds.

Farooq Siddique, community development officer for Bristol Muslim Cultural Society and a governor at Bannerman Road, said many schoolchildren, 70% of whom are Muslim, were too young to define heterosexuality and homosexuality.

Putting sex education in story books for five to 10 year olds sounds like another Nu-Labour victory over commonsense, one doesn't need to be a Muslim to have reservations about the difference between homosexuality and heterosexuality being taught to five year olds.

To me, it just shows that the twentieth century Western obsession with sexuality has unfortunately survived intact to the twenty-first century.

[anitram]

Originally posted by financeguy

one doesn't need to be a Muslim to have reservations about the difference between homosexuality and heterosexuality being taught to five year olds.

Why can't this be taught in an age-appropriate manner?

[Irvine511]

Originally posted by anitram


Why can't this be taught in an age-appropriate manner?

because the only thing that makes someone gay is buttsex. that's all there is to it. it's the be-all, end-all of sexual orientation. you can't talk about gays without having to deal with buttsex.

buttsex.

[diamond]

Why the negativity ppl?

This is a step in the right direction.

dbs

[financeguy]

Originally posted by Irvine511
because the only thing that makes someone gay is buttsex. that's all there is to it. it's the be-all, end-all of sexual orientation. you can't talk about gays without having to deal with buttsex.

buttsex.

<Struggling to see how this rant relates to what I posted >

[Irvine511]

Originally posted by financeguy


<Struggling to see how this rant relates to what I posted >

want to know how to give out age appropriate information about hetero- and homosexuality?

it was explained to me by a 4 year old.

"did you know that, sometimes, a woman can love a woman?"

and that's all that needs to be said about it. look at all the children's literature about the subject. it's simply about the fact that, yes, people of the same sex can love each other, just like their parents love each other.

it's homophobic heteros who freak out thinking that a discussion of the existence of gay people will involve anatomy lessons and sexual positions and the importance of breathing through your mouth in order to relax the sphincter muscles.

[financeguy]

So if you don't approve of sex education for 4 year olds, you're a homophobe. I think I've heard it all now.

[Irvine511]

Originally posted by financeguy
So if you don't approve of sex education for 4 year olds, you're a homophobe. I think I've heard it all now.

go back and read.

saying, "two men can love each other," has NOTHING to do with sex. 3 year olds know that men and women love each other and sometimes get married.

you've precisely proved my point. see? buttsex.

[anitram]

Originally posted by financeguy
So if you don't approve of sex education for 4 year olds, you're a homophobe. I think I've heard it all now.

I'm actually genuinely wondering why you would be opposed to it being explained to children who are 5 in an age-appropriate manner? Because presumably as time passes there will be more and more children in these classes who do have 2 women or 2 men raising them or a single lesbian or gay man who is dating. That should not be a foreign concept to the other kids in the class, as far as I can see it.

[yolland]

I suspect what these parents (and others like them elsewhere) are really objecting to is not so much the thought that their 5-year-olds are being taught about "sex"--a quick glance at the materials would presumably show otherwise--but rather that they're being taught to see gay relationships as OK. While I'm not sympathetic to that predicament, I do think it's a thornier topic for schools to present to such parents as a 'win-win' than, say, contraceptive/STD education--because there you can correctly point out that after all most married couples have use for such information too, and therefore there's no essential contradiction in saying, "Fine, I'll teach my kids that sex is for marriage, and that they should consider the info they're learning in school in light of that." But from such parents' standpoint there isn't really an analogous distinction to be drawn with homosexuality, plus it's harder to draw those kinds of distinctions with a 5-year-old anyway.

[Irvine511]

Originally posted by yolland
I suspect what these parents (and others like them elsewhere) are really objecting to is not so much the thought that their 5-year-olds are being taught about "sex"--a quick glance at the materials would presumably show otherwise--but rather that they're being taught to see gay relationships as OK.

but this isn't the argument that these parents are making. they're saying, and financeguy seems to agree, that the materials, whenever it relates to homosexuality, are inherently sexual. and they aren't inherently sexual. i don't see why a discussion about the existence of gay families has be any more sexual than, say, "Three is a Magic Number" from Schoolhouse Rocks:

[q]Every triangle has three corners,
Every triangle has three sides,
No more, no less.
You don't have to guess.
When it's three you can see
It's a magic number.

A man and a woman had a little baby,
Yes, they did.
They had three in the family,
And that's a magic number. [/q]


done. no penises. to condoms. no astroglide.





the heart of this is the following:

[q]'Our child is coming home and talking about same-sex relationships, when we haven't even talked about heterosexual relationships with them yet.'
[/q]

i think it's a straw man. and i don't see how the teaching that, yes, there are gay people who exist, is somehow condoning gay relationships.

i mean, they're going to learn that Israel exists, and that would (i imagine) go against whatever these people think the Koran is teaching them.

[yolland]

Maybe. But my own impression from talking to (frankly homophobic) parents I know who make these kinds of arguments is that, when they complain about schools 'prematurely sexualizing' their children's social awareness or whatever, that that's really--if perhaps not entirely consciously--a proxy (straw man?) for 'I don't want them getting the idea at an impressionable age that gay relationships are OK, and when they show them happy books about so-and-so's two mommies/daddies, that's exactly the impression they'll get, and I can't really explain to them at this age that the teacher just wants to make sure students grow up to treat gay people fairly regardless of what they personally think about them.' Maybe consciously their first association is 'sex,' because what they themselves find unacceptable about homosexuality has to do with sex, not love. But in practice that becomes an objection to presenting it positively, even if only in terms of love, to children.

Like I said, I'm not at all sympathetic to their situation, but I can understand why schools have an uphill climb dealing with them.

[Irvine511]

^ what about objections to interracial relationships?

should schools be sensitive to religious parents who might wish not to have to explain that, sometimes, black men fall in love with white women?

[yolland]

Nope. But at least in this country, public schools are to a considerable degree locally controlled and can't always move forward on addressing actively controversial social issues through curriculum as fast as they--and some parents--might like. (Ever been to a school board meeting?) I really don't know what the situation is like in Britain.

[VintagePunk]

What a wasted opportunity to teach young, unbiased children acceptance of others.

Had they been exposed to this innocuous material, they would probably show a greater level of tolerance toward their gay peers in high school, or feel better about themselves should they discover that (gasp) they are gay.

[Irvine511]

Originally posted by VintagePunk
What a wasted opportunity to teach young, unbiased children acceptance of others.

it seems that Jesus and Mohommad agree that some of us are more acceptable than others.