BS: Religious intolerance - take two

Subject: BS: Religious intolerance - take two
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 08:20 AM

A play being staged in Birmingham (England) is provoking violent protest and death threats from leaders of the local Sikh community and their followers. Here's a BBC report.

The police, instead of defending the author's right to say whatever she wants, have advised her not to say anything in public. Leaders of other religions are weighing in on the side of the Sikh protesters, not because they care tuppence about the Sikh faith but because they are running scared of having their own crackpot beliefs exposed to ridicule. (Not that the play in this case is exposing any religion to ridicule.)

The British state, to its credit, has become (de facto, if not de jure) a much more secular state than most others, whether in the developing or developed worlds. Yet it needs only some religious fanatic to snap his fingers, and freedom of speech goes out of the window.

Meanwhile the Labour government is racing to extend the reach of the blasphemy law to more faiths, instead of removing that protection from the privileged faiths presently covered.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious intolerance - take two
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 10:09 AM

Disestablishmentarianism, it's all the rage you know!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Religious intolerance - take two
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 10:20 AM

As I understand it the indignation isn't about religions such, it's about tbe fact that the play involves having a Sikh priest rape a girl in a Sikh temple.

I imagine if it had been a Rabbi doing the same in a Synagogue or a Salvation Army Captain in a Citadel it would have stirred people up too.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious intolerance - take two
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 11:34 AM

Absolutely right, McG, this is nothing to do with religion. It's about hypersensitive clerics whipping up their flock in a crude attempt to bully a theatre into self-censorship. If the sexual violence had been set in a classroom, with a teacher as the protagonist and a pupil as the victim, no-one would have batted an eyelid.

I'm delighted that the Birmingham Repertory Theatre is holding its ground, where many others would have caved in, and has refused to change the location to a community centre.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious intolerance - take two
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 11:43 AM

If the sexual violence had been set in a classroom, with a teacher as the protagonist and a pupil as the victim, no-one would have batted an eyelid.

You must be joking. There'd be teachers' organisations and teachers all over the place, hitting the roof.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious intolerance - take two
From: Metchosin
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 11:54 AM

I wouldn't entirely agree, The Pride of Miss Jean Brodie was about inherent abuse of power and nary an eyebrow was raised.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious intolerance - take two
From: Metchosin
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 12:00 PM

Also the Catholic Church in Canada didn't go into a hissy fit when The Boys of Mount Cashel was aired.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious intolerance - take two
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 12:38 PM

Teachers and their leaders forcing their way into a theatre, injuring people, and issuing death threats that the police treat as credible, McG? Or behaving in any way remotely comparable? It's a ridiculous proposition. I don't think you've thought it through.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious intolerance - take two
From: GUEST,observer
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 12:55 PM

Not surprising - religious people have known for centuries that truth will destroy them.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious intolerance - take two
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 12:59 PM

"Batted an eyelid" was what you said, Peter.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious intolerance - take two
From: dianavan
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 01:14 PM

The theater could have been more sensitive to the concerns of the Community but the reaction of the community was wrong.

The govt. has no business in this situation as there are no laws being broken by the theater. If laws are going to be made that restrict artistic license, look out.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious intolerance - take two
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 01:16 PM

Sincere apologies McG. I can't argue with you challenging that ill-chosen phrase.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious intolerance - take two
From: GUEST,greg stephens.
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 01:42 PM

Whether Christians would cause the same fuss in equivalent circumstances is an interesting question. I can think of dramatic depictions of crimes in churches, and crimes committed by priests. But crimes actually committed in churches? In real life,there is a long and sordid tradition of sexual assaults by priests on youngsters in churches, but can anyone recall actual plays or films on the subject? Is that what the "Boys of Mount Cashel" is? And if so, did their production lead to violent protests by the faithful?

Subject: RE: BS: Religious intolerance - take two
From: Metchosin
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 02:24 PM

To be sure greg stephens, I can't recall if the film The Boys of Mount Cashel was about sexual acts in an abuse of trust situation, within the church itself or just in the school. It was based upon true events and it made a lot of people very uncomfortable and probably Catholics in particular, but the production lead to no violent protests by the faithful. Come to think of it, I also can't recall if sexual acts in The Name of the Rose were depicted within the church or without either.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious intolerance - take two
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 04:02 PM

Not a play, Greg, but in 1977 Mary Whitehouse brought a successful private prosecution against the editor of Gay News for publishing an item (poem, I think) in which a Roman centurion fantasised about sex with Jesus. And of course Life of Brian created something of a furore for blatently, if harmlessly, poking fun at Christianity. I doubt whether either the poem or the film would have provoked similar reactions if given their first airings now, rather than then.

But I don't see the Birmingham fuss as specifically a Sikh thing anyway. Christian and other churches have implicated themselves by supporting Sikh demands to withdraw the play. Worse than that, the three main political parties are also siding with the protesters.

Behzti (the Birmingham play) is billed as a black comedy. The theatre has been entirely upfront about the content, so anyone who doesn't like it need not go to see it. Objectors have every right to protest and to seek air-time for intelligent discussion. (Indeed they are getting such air-time and should welcome it as a rare and useful platform.) They have NO right to follow last night's violent rampage with threats that the violence will continue until the play is taken off (which seems to be their present position).

Subject: RE: BS: Religious intolerance - take two
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Dec 04 - 06:12 PM

There's a big difference being violent protest and peaceful protest. And there are situations where a particular expression of "free speech" can be reasonably criticised as inappropriate and potentially damaging. The classical example is of shouting "FIRE" in a crowded theatre.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious intolerance - take two
From: GUEST, Mikefule
Date: 20 Dec 04 - 03:41 PM

I suppose if the play were about a young girl being raped in an alley, that wouldn't be offensive? So desecrating the temple is more offensive than raping the young girl?

Unless the play actively encourages people to hate Sikhs, or portrays them collectively as bad people, what is there to be offended about?

And I dare say most Sikhs in this country have no interest in the matter, just as most Christians weren't campaigning against the equally "offensive" Monty Python, the Life of Brian a few decades ago.

I'm annoyed at the producers of the Archers introducing a storyline about a psychopathic rapist - especially at this time of year (which is stressful enough!) - so I won't listen to it again until I think the story line's over - but I uphold their right to broadcast it, even though I think it's unpleasant and in bad taste.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious intolerance - take two
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 21 Dec 04 - 05:05 AM

Well sadly the theatre has felt obliged to cave in and end the production. To continue would have meant risking the safety of theatre personnel and people going to the theatre to see other productions. (Behzti was being staged in the studio theatre, and a pantomime is in production on the main stage. Saturday's violence, in which the foyer doors were broken through and several police injured, occurred while the foyer was packed with hundreds of people, mostly youngsters, who were there for the pantomime.)

Here's the latest BBC report: Dropped play could find new venue.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious intolerance - take two
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 21 Dec 04 - 05:20 AM

Another thatre has offered to stage the play.

Subject: RE: BS: Religious intolerance - take two
From: Davetnova
Date: 21 Dec 04 - 05:33 AM

Two things not mentioned. The plays author is a Sikh woman and the play is about the abuse of women. I think there was a similar row not too long ago concerning a film about abuse of women in an Islamic setting.