Comments on: A Teddy Bear Named Mohammad

By: Natalie Hartman Whitnack

Natalie Hartman Whitnack — Wed, 26 Dec 2007 10:56:06 +0000

Teddy bears are symbolic of compassion, caring, comfort and love. If only these teddy bear tenents were the lesson we could all learn from the unfortunate classroom naming experience. I would hope that respect and forgiveness for one another would best represent the true spirit of one’s faith and devotion to their higher power. May the teddy bear begins it’s journey as the ambassador of peace and goodwill.

By: Karthik Thirumalai

Karthik Thirumalai — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 17:23:02 +0000

I don’t agree with the basic premise of the arguments laid to defend the Sudanese regime and it’s abhorent behaviour (atleast it seems like you are supporting it).

While it might have not been sensible on her part to let the teddy bears be named ‘Mohamad’, it’s it outrageous to jail her for a stupid mistake at best. They could have asked her to apologize for the whole mistake and deported her, that should have been the end of that.

Should this be the fate of someone who is trying to help children ( doesn’t matter how she got there or for what reason) and improve their lives? Absolutely NOT.

These bunch of radicals are giving a bad name for the entire religion of Islam. This seems to be the mantra of the day from the west to east. We have the Christian/Jewish radicals in the US formeting trouble in their own way, they are pointing towards this (Islamic radicals) behaviour at home (US) as to why they need harsh policies to bring ‘change’ to the Middle-East and other countries. If we don’t condemn this behaviour whenever and wherever we see it (all religions and countries included), this world is in for a lot a trouble.

By: desigirl

desigirl — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 20:02:54 +0000

All’s fair in love and war – oh wait, that’s the way Iraq and Afghanistan went, isn’t it. All’s fair full stop.

By: Asokan Pichai

Asokan Pichai — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 16:46:23 +0000

You have highlighted one thing that the West is perennially guilty of. Looking at the world with a set of blinkers, worn with smug self-importance of their culture. For a moment imagine that the designer of the potty had been imprisoned or punished in India. What would be the West’s reaction?

Now imagine that a teacher from another African nation had been the one who was punished in Sudan. What would have been the West’s reaction?

By: desigirl

desigirl — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 16:37:45 +0000

ahh MM, glad to see someone going down the same route as me. *whew*

Whilst I agree she didnt do much but let the kiddies do what they wanted, had she known what the name meant, she would have been more sensitive and might have suggested a compromise. It isn’t the name that’s the crux tho’…

By: the mad momma

the mad momma — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 13:43:03 +0000

this sort of thing always amazes me. I dont see Jesus on a potty lid. bloody morons. there is no excuse for that. on the other hand, seven year olds naming a teddy bear – they meant no disrespect. in fact a teddy bear is beloved and precious to kids so if anything they just christened it out of love.

the teacher might have realised its inappropriate but not imagined it would get out of class.

is it a crime. i doubt it. a bunch of little kids playing with a toy in a classroom. a beloved toy. naming it.

either way – i guess i can see where the sudanese are coming from… yet, if she were in Sudan, well its the Sudanese kids who named it after their God. She just stood by.

that said, i agree with the general tone. ppl are getting more politically correct. but sensitive? i dont think so.

By: Aniche

Aniche — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 15:21:59 +0000

damn, sacred seats! now that’s true devotion! just when u thought god didnt listen to u before!

By: Amrita

Amrita — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 06:08:55 +0000

7 years? Okay, I did NOT know that. Britain always manages to surprise me. And Sudan does have oil – it’s just not selling any to the West. Smart them

Dotmom – I think that’s the sort of mitigating factor that would work in a more reasonable society but Sudan doesn’t strike me as especially reasonable. And if someone is going there, they ought to understand that IMO.

By: desigirl

desigirl — Sat, 01 Dec 2007 09:57:33 +0000

Dotmom,
I’d disagree with you there. Just because they didn’t ‘bash any religion’, hurting the sensibilities of people of other faith is alright, is it? How would you define ‘religion bashing’ anyway? Where does the respect for the diversity lie? When you know enough about a religion and its icons to define a deity as “Ganesha the Hindu elephant god, removes all obstacles, destroys evil and provides you with protection on your journey”, I don’t think you can claim ignorance about a religion and its beliefs and hence claim it as a defense.

Anyway, lack of knowledge of a law doesnt constitute as proper defense, does it?

By: desigirl

desigirl — Sat, 01 Dec 2007 07:49:30 +0000

Ams
the point is, had this happened in Britain – a foreign national had done something to offend the Brits’ moral sensibilities, the said offender wud have been thrown into the slammer for a good seven year period.

Oh who gives a shit to what a country does to itself as long as it a. doesn’t hurt any Brit in the teensiest way b. doesnt have oil?