Minnesota Art Professor Fired For Showing Depiction Of Prophet Muhammad

Officials at Hamline, a small, private university in St. Paul, Minn., with about 1,800 undergraduates, had tried to douse what they feared would become a runaway fire. Instead they ended up with what they had tried to avoid: a national controversy, which pitted advocates of academic liberty and free speech against Muslims who believe that showing the image of Prophet Muhammad is always sacrilegious.
After Dr. López Prater showed the image, a senior in the class complained to the administration. Other Muslim students, not in the course, supported the student, saying the class was an attack on their religion. They demanded that officials take action. -NY Times

Click to expand...

VySky said:

Why do we give more consideration to the Muslim faith regarding respect for Muhammad more than we do Jesus?

Even Hillary Clinton took issue with a movie that was made of the Muslim God Muhammad. We all remember those Benghazi details.

So were they right to fire the professor?

——-

A Minnesota adjunct professor was fired for showing a 14th-century panting of the Prophet Muhammad, despite taking extensive precautions before doing so.

Hamline University.
The now-former professor at Hamline University, Erika López Prater, warned students in the syllabus that images of holy figures, including the Prophet Muhammad and the Buddha, would be shown during the course. She asked students to contact her with any concerns, and said nobody did.

n class, she told students right before the unveiling that the painting would be displayed in case anyone wanted to step out.

Then, after showing the image, she was fired, the NY Times reports.


School officials told López Prater that her 'services would not be needed' next semester, and told students and faculty in an email that the incident was clearly Islamophobic.

ZeroHedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

Click to expand...

VySky said:

Why do we give more consideration to the Muslim faith regarding respect for Muhammad more than we do Jesus?

Click to expand...

Cameron said:

What do you mean? In Florida public school teachers can be fired for even acknowledging that LGBT people exist. Religious fundamentalists are all the same.

Accepting the OP at face value (always dangerous), seems to me the teacher took reasonable precautions and I don't think she deserved to be fired.

Click to expand...

VySky said:

Citation for the bolded in your comment?

Click to expand...

A Florida middle school teacher is claiming that she was fired in March for discussing sexuality with her students.

Casey Scott, a first-year art teacher, told NBC affiliate WBBH-TV on Tuesday that the events that led to her termination started when students began asking questions about her sexuality. Scott, who is married to a man, said she told her students that she is pansexual, meaning that she’s attracted to all genders.

She said LGBTQ students then began asking if they could create art expressing their own sexualities and identities, and that she hung it on her classroom door. Scott said she was told by school officials in Lee County — which is roughly 40 miles north of Naples — to remove the artwork. She said she was then sent home and fired over the phone.

Click to expand...

Cameron said:

Florida's governor signs controversial law opponents dubbed 'Don't Say Gay'

The law says public school teachers may not instruct on sexual orientation or gender identity in grades kindergarten through third grade.

www.npr.org

Florida Teachers Could Lose Their Licenses Under New Rule Tied to 'Don't Say Gay' Law

A proposed rule could strip teachers' licenses if they teach about gender identity or sexuality to K-3 students.

www.edweek.org

Florida teacher allegedly fired after discussing sexuality with students

Casey Scott, a middle school art teacher, was allegedly fired from her job several days before what critics have called the "Don't Say Gay" bill was signed into law.

www.nbcnews.com

I'm absolutely positive you've heard of it. But go ahead, try to explain why it is different.

Click to expand...

VySky said:

Then what you said isn't true. That they can be fired for even acknowledging that LGBT people exist. Did you attach the wrong links?

Click to expand...

BirdinHand said:

Adjunct professors aren’t even “part time”. They are hired on a semester by semester or year to year basis to teach specific courses.
They aren’t on a tenure track, don’t receive benefits, etc.

She should have discussed showing the painting with the department head to assure the university wouldn’t have an issue with it - and gotten that in writing if she wanted to assure a return to campus. She could have directed students to where they could find the painting, without showing it in a lecture hall.

Plenty of ways she could have handled the situation and didn’t.

The university has decided they won’t be bringing her back again, as is well within their right to do.

Click to expand...

j brown's body said:

A firing seems wildly disproportionate to the offense. She gave students plenty of opportunity to opt out of the lesson. Not all Muslims feel this way. It is fine for the school to object because some students object, but at the very most, the professor should have been simply asked to not do it anymore.

Click to expand...

Cameron said:

What I said was accurate, but let's stick to differences that matter. Your argument is that there is a huge difference between being fired for showing a painting of Muhammed, and showing an artwork created by an LGBT person?

Click to expand...

VySky said:

The issue is not the employment agreement of the professor. It was listed in the syllabus and I'm not certain but isn't the syllabus approved by the Dept. Head that you think was uniformed? She gave everyone the right to opt out in multiple ways.

Click to expand...

VySky said:

What you said is a lie. Why though we question?

Click to expand...

Cameron said:

I did't lie. You are avoiding the question, because you know there is no legitimate response, and are not fooling anyone.

Click to expand...

VySky said:

Again, show us a citation to back your claim that teachers in Florida can be fired for "even acknowledging that LGBT people exist".

So far, you haven't made the trip.

I can wait.

Click to expand...

BirdinHand said:

The path of least resistance for the university is to simply not renew her contract. That’s what they did

Adjuncts in academia are like temporary employees in corporate America - easier to just not bring that particular person back then invest energy, time and resources in trying to address the situation and come to a resolution that makes everyone happy.

Click to expand...

BirdinHand said:

nct professors aren’t even “part time”. They are hired on a semester by semester or year to year basis to teach specific courses.
They aren’t on a tenure track, don’t receive benefits, etc.

She should have discussed showing the painting with the department head to assure the university wouldn’t have an issue with it - and gotten that in writing if she wanted to assure a return to campus. She could have directed students to where they could find the painting, without showing it in a lecture hall.

Plenty of ways she could have handled the situation and didn’t.

The university has decided they won’t be bringing her back again, as is well within their right to do.

Click to expand...

Cameron said:

You want to debate the language of the don't say gay bill, instead of defending your claim that we give better treatment to Muslims than Christians, which you cannot. Again, what is different about firing a teacher for showing a painting of muhammed, and firing a teacher for showing artwork drawn by an LGBT person?

Click to expand...

VySky said:

I'm not sure I like that process. Someone comes out happy no doubt. But like you said, not everyone.

Click to expand...

Cameron said:

You want to debate the language of the don't say gay bill, instead of defending your claim that we give better treatment to Muslims than Christians, which you cannot. Again, what is different about firing a teacher for showing a painting of muhammed, and firing a teacher for showing artwork drawn by an LGBT person?

Click to expand...

Loulit01 said:

Islamic art is non-representational as a whole. A portrait of Muhammed is disrespectful not only of the religion, but of their artistic tradition since the 7th century. I'm against firing college professors for this but I'm also against looking for trouble and moaning when you find it.

This is Islamic art:

View attachment 67431216

Hagia Sophia Interior, Mosaics & Paintings - Lesson | Study.com

Discover the interior of the Hagia Sophia and its mosaics. Understand why Hagia Sophia's art has been hidden. See images of the Deesis Mosaic and...

study.com

Islamic art is a part of Islamic culture and encompasses the visual arts produced since the 7th century CE by people who lived within territories inhabited or ruled by Muslim populations.[1] Referring to characteristic traditions across a wide range of lands, periods, and genres, Islamic art is a concept used first by Western art historians since the late 19th century.[2] Public Islamic art is traditionally non-representational, except for the widespread use of plant forms, usually in varieties of the spiralling arabesque. These are often combined with Islamic calligraphy, geometric patterns in styles that are typically found in a wide variety of media, from small objects in ceramic or metalwork to large decorative schemes in tiling on the outside and inside of large buildings, including mosques. Other forms of Islamic art include Islamic miniature painting, artefacts like Islamic glass or pottery, and textile arts, such as carpets and embroidery.

Click to expand...