“Agua Dulce resident Chris Burgard, a parent with school-aged children, made a heart-felt speech in which he said it was unreasonable, and a direct violation of every American’s First Amendment rights, to be prohibited from drawing images of Moses, Jesus, Abraham, Muhammad or other patriarchs as a result of one parent’s complaints. ‘If our kids wanted to draw a Christmas card with a Nativity scene on it, they would be breaking the rules,’ he said.” Indeed. The prohibition on drawing Muhammad was a capitulation to Sharia and a surrender of American values. So here is a small bit of good news amid the avalanche of bad news.
An update on this story. “California School Allows Students to Draw Muhammad,” by Adelle Nazarian, Breitbart, November 13, 2015 (thanks to Bill):
ACTON — Members of the Acton-Agua Dulce school board voted unanimously (5-0) Thursday evening to allow students to choose to draw Muhammad–or not–in one of America’s smaller school districts.
The mother of a 7th grade student at High Desert School in Acton had complained when her 12-year-old son brought home a worksheet from his history class two weeks ago titled “Vocabulary Pictures: The Rise of Islam.” The worksheet listed words such as Quran, Mecca, Bedouins and Muhammad, and asked for students to draw images related to the words.
She then complained that the assignment, which turns out to be part of the approved curriculum, was inappropriate and suggested it taught children “how to insult a religious group.” The Los Angeles Daily News reported that district superintendent Dr. Brent Woodard told staff permanently to prohibit the drawing of all religious figures in order to prevent the offending of all religious groups.
During Thursday night’s town hall meeting, Woodard disputed the Daily News story.
“There was never an intention to ban the drawing of all religious figures,” he explained, noting that he had called for a suspension of drawing the figures until he had discussed the issue with the school district’s board members. “We believe very strongly in the Fist [sic] Amendment… No child would be required to draw religious figures if they object to that kind of the assignment.”
Woodard told Breitbart News that “we will no longer require students to participate in something that they find offensive.” But he would not ban students from drawing Muhammad and other religious figures just because others were offended. He noted that to ban something would be in direct violation of the First Amendment. “That’s not the case here.”
Matt Ridenour, who serves on the school board, said he wanted to make sure the press corrected the record, noting that the school was proud of a curriculum that seeks to educate its children about the diversity that exists in the United States, which is composed of people hailing from various religious and ethnic backgrounds.
“This issue grew from a very innocent practice on the part of a district and a teacher following state-mandated 7th grade curriculum instructions,” Mark Distaso said. He said the assignment came out of a book that was adopted by the school district called Midieval and Modern Times, and noted that the assignment stemmed from a standard teaching mechanism, which has found that students learn better by drawing pictures associated with words.
Distaso reiterated that Superintendent Woodard merely gave temporary directions to have students refrain from drawing religious figures until he could address the board and come back with a salient resolution.
Agua Dulce resident Chris Burgard, a parent with school-aged children, made a heart-felt speech in which he said it was unreasonable, and a direct violation of every American’s First Amendment rights, to be prohibited from drawing images of Moses, Jesus, Abraham, Muhammad or other patriarchs as a result of one parent’s complaints.
“If our kids wanted to draw a Christmas card with a Nativity scene on it, they would be breaking the rules,” he said….
Don McKellar says
Could you imagine how magnificent/horrific it would be to have a “Draw Muhammad” day at the school district? What is important is that human rights won over sharia law in this little example. Obama has certainly stricken the school district from his photo op list.
Champ says
I have mixed thoughts about involving children in allowing students to “Draw Mohammad” …
Yes, it’s absolutely a clear victory for our right to free speech …BUT, we also know that mohammedans murder innocent victims, including children, and schools have already been mentioned as potential targets. My fear is that this school *may* become a chief target, now. I hope not.
Given the evil nature of islam & company and what’s happened in the past with “Drawing Mohammad” terrorist attacks, then “Drawing Mohammad” ought to be left to the adults to battle, and that children need to be protected from any potential harm.
Sarita says
The very fact that you’re having to think that way is a good illustration of how we all are in danger. And yet Obama wants to fill the U.S. with more Muslims.
TheBuffster says
Amen.
Champ says
Preposterous. You are making much, too much, of what I’ve stated here …
As I stated, I am all for free speech and protecting our first amendment right–always have been–but I am against putting children on the frontline of this fight with islam and company and “Draw Mohammad”, which has become a dangerous battleground. This is a fight that adults should engage in, not children.
I simply want to protect our children and let the adults “Draw Mohammad”, plain and simple. You would have a point if I was completely against “Drawing Mohammad”, but I’m not.
And do you have children? Are they in school? If so, are you willing to have your child’s school be on the frontline against islam and evil perps that would do they harm?
To determine that my concerns for children is *dangerous* is preposterous and quite a leap, and you’re twisting what I wrote.
BTW, I despise everything obama stands for and I DO NOT support letting in more muslims, courtesy Syrian refugees.
Of course you are entitled to your own opinion, and so am I, but you are NOT entitled to grossly twist what I stated.
Donovan Nuera says
I don’t think the kids at Beslan were drawing muhammad when they were slaughtered. Every day should be Draw muhammad Day. Everyone should draw him. And that poor cartoonist lady in Seattle should be able to come out of hiding (no thanks to the FBI not protecting a US citizen from a fatwa made by the late Awlaki from Yemen).
Keith says
I understand what you are saying but the problem with your proposition, as far as I see it, is that the children then learn that they are not allowed to draw mohammed, they ask why and are given the answer that it is offensive to muslims, they then grow up believing that it is wrong to say or do anything that someone else, especially muslims, may find offensive. They then impose that on the next generation land before you know it you are living under the sharia.
Further it is impossible to say anything that someone somewhere can not take to be offensive to them if they so choose.
fudge says
Excuse me but 10 years ago 2 palistinian muslim children told me they wanted all Americans dead, all children and adults, so what ever you do you are in the wrong to them.
Dan says
Champ,
I agree with you, about not putting children in harms way.
We don’t let children do a lot of things until they are old enough to be able to handle the situation when there is a wreck.
Anybody can handle something going right.
The problem with this situation, is the only wrecks that come from drawing Mohammad are some of the most violent of assault by the craziest of psychos, and the majority of adults can’t even deal with that.
It’s certainly not a something any parent would expose their children to.
But the children MUST be told why.
“We can’t allow you to draw Mohammad right now because followers of this religion largely have no respect for others. It is exactly what it’s like to live without American freedoms, and the reason our country has become so great is because those of us who can protect you will not put up with that kind garbage, and will do everything necessary to make sure you, as an adult, will have the same freedoms we all do.”
Dr. Divinity says
champ….Therein lies the reason the world is in the middle of chaos today…..our children aren’t being taught the values of our forefathers. Schools are bending to the will of a few. liberal teachers,who were taught by liberal professors, have filled our children’s heads with garbage instead of the values that our forefathers intended.
Our children need to be taught our history…. just ask most children some American history facts and it can be seen what is missing….
bullfrogger says
“Protecting children ” are the words that created our whole soccer mom mentality in the first place .If liberals were really concerned with protecting their children , they would have stood up to this menace a long time ago instead defending and enabling them to become the threat they are today . When I was a kid , our parents were fighting a cold war with the soviets and no attempt was made to shield us from reality . We were taught how to take cover under a desk in case of a nuclear attack . No counselors came to school to explain and not much else was said at all . But we all knew knew that we were up against an enemy that could kill us all if we didn’t defeat it . Kid ,like adults , can handle the truth and don’t need to be constantly insulated or lied to . Doing the right thing is crucial and piling constraints on our ability to do so is no help .
kay says
Never bow to fear, intimidation and tyranny.
Mike says
I completely back our First Amendment Rights, but this is going to bring an attack by Islamic goons and I can’t stand the thought of innocent kids getting slaughtered by these pieces of sh*t. I would say, make it legal but don’t do it out of safety because there is no way to prevent an attack from Islamic extremists.
Keith says
I wonder what the children in the Beslan school were doing that muslims found so offensive. Apart from not being muslims of course?
Carolyne says
I don’t recall anywhere in the Constitution where it says that the First Amendment does not apply to children. Freedom to draw or not to draw, to speak or not to speak, is a privilege given to all Americans by our Founding Fathers. And once we somehow decide that there is an age limit to this privilege, in fear of Islam, we are lost.
Do not give these barbarians what they want, which is complete control over our actions and thoughts. Just don’t do it.
Dr. Divinity says
If the Muslims were To attack schools it would bring down such ire in the American people that their schools of terror, their mosques, woul come under attack by the government,which should be happening anyway,that would bring Islam to a standstill in America..mosques are breeding places of terrorism. That has been proven….
Neil Jennison says
You Americans do not know how lucky you are to have your Constitution.
That said, I hope thousands of Americans assert their constitutional rights …..I hope they flood the media with images of Mohammed.
Freedom must be defended against those who detest it. I hope the images are offensive to Muslims………we should draw images of Mohammed that Muslims find offensive until they stop threatening our freedoms.
Then, there would be be no reason to draw such images.
I just pray, as a British citizen, that you in the USA elect a President in 2016 with a spine, rather than the jellyfish appeaser you have elected twice. For fuck’s sake, Bill Clinton was useless but he looks like Washington next to Hussein Obama.
Neil Jennison says
Just read through my post……I wasn’t being offensive to the USA in any way. God forbid.
No, I know full well we haven’t had a leader with a spine in the UK since Margaret Thatcher. (If only Reagan was President today and Thatcher our PM).
At least you had Bush afterwards.
miriamrove says
You were not offensive at all. What you posted is correct. Ben Carson for President. I read an article the other day that Chinese leadership and the Russians are so worried that either Carson or Trump get elected. Carson as you may know is very soft spoken and Trump is out spoken. A few month ago when all these started, I had my doubts about Carson as he may be too soft. I was wrong. I then saw an interview with him and a reporter asked “what would you do in Syria”? Carson said ” I will create a no fly zone”. The reporter then asked him “what if the Russians send their fighter jets?” Ad carson calmly responded: You shoot them down! M
gravenimage says
Thank you, Neil. I didn’t find your post offensive at all–far from it. We Americans *do* tend to take the First Amendment for granted–and we never should. Thanks for the reminder.
I’d like to see a First Amendment–or its counterpart–in every country in the West.
TheBuffster says
All my friends here in Australia have First Amendment envy.
When I first came here and found out that they didn’t have anything like the bill of rights in their constitution, I was surprised. But I was tickled and amused to find that my friends sometimes referred to the Bill of Rights of the USA as if it were law here, too.
VRWC member77 says
@Neil
offended?? You couldn’t be more are SPOT ON CORRECT. Many thanks for that! I don’t think anyone could have envisioned 30 years ago that the Maggie-Gipper dynamic would degenerate 30 years later into what we see now as the limp wristed seditiously corrupt mush pot of the obama-cameron slime disease.
Keith says
I just hope Corbyn doesn’t get elected in 5 years time. That would be the end of our great country
Sari says
No offense taken whatsoever!!! I appreciate your post! You’re right. We’ve got ourselves someone who is unbelievably dangerous. This is one of the most dangerous times in our country, and this man is playing footsies with Muslims and high fiving them.
Mo says
Wow, in California, of all places!
What’s sad is that something so basic feels like a huge victory. That’s how insane or PC world has become.
gabi says
” Moses, Jesus, Abraham, Muhammad or other patriarchs” – sorry, did I missed something?? Where, in the Holy Bible, the Old or New Testament, it is written that Muhammad was a patriarch? Quote the page/verse, please!
I’m Eastern European and I tell you, brothers, that too many human laws & amendments & interpretations & regulations means leaving God’s laws! God is simple and clear, man isn’t when he bypasses his God! Did you forget your true way? I’m reading your comments (some splendid!) and I see the truth in that saying: America’s highest curse are lawyers! (no offense!)
HOLLY says
THANK YOU FOR SHARING THIS WONDERFUL MESSAGE SPOKEN BY THE PARENT WHO STOOD BEFORE THE TOWN COUNCIL! HE HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD. CRYSTAL CLEAR MESSAGE.
gravenimage says
Free speech victory: California school board allows students to draw Muhammad
…………………………
This *is* a victory–basically. I’m very glad to see it, especially since the ban both enforced Shari’ah norms *and* prevented kids from drawing Jesus and the heroes of the Bible.
But like Champ, I do worry about the kids–this is something that only adults who realize the danger–and fully grasp what it is we are fighting for–should undertake.
And one more salient point–remember that this drawing of Muhammed is *not* in the context of drawing him critically–it is in the context of a sickening whitewash of Islam and the “Prophet” that children are being taught. So we are going to see a flood of drawings from kids mistakenly *lauding* the sanguinary “Prophet”.
Still–you get your victories where you can in these mad days. By current standards, this definitely qualifies.
Champ says
Graven wrote:
But like Champ, I do worry about the kids–this is something that only adults who realize the danger–and fully grasp what it is we are fighting for–should undertake.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I concur, Graven.
somehistory says
The freedom to draw or not to draw…if the child doesn’t wish to draw a picture of filth, then the child is free not to draw. If the child, for safety’s sake, doesn’t draw, that is a good thing too as schools are no-gun zones and shootings and stabbings a-plenty have taken place in schools.
It is good that the right to free speech is recognized. Those people of that area may need it more than in the past as more moslims may come and challenge their right to say and draw as they please.
If the parents are afraid for their children to draw the false prophet, the parents can still assert their right by continuing to say aloud that they have the right to decide whether or not to draw.
abad says
Good news for a change.
Really, I doubt Jesus Himself would be offended is anyone drew a picture of Him (and many pictures and paintings do exist even if not accurate depictions of him).
But.
Islam forbids the making of images of Muhammad or Allah.
Because
you know, to do so is a bigger offense than sin is to Muhammad or Allah.
Belgo says
Because image of allah would look like the devil and mohammed like his most ugly messenger. Note: as I do not write devil with majucule, for allah and mohammed its the same!
Nope says
“Midieval and Modern Times”
I see spelling isn’t a priority, then.
Angemon says
Which is certainly is.
TheBuffster says
This is off the topic of the article, but this seemed to be the best thread for it, given the “Freedom of Expression” theme.
There is now an online petition to the Parliament of Australia “That ISLAMOPHOBIA be defined as ‘An irrational fear of openly & honestly discussing Islam’ ”
Or, rather, re-defined.
Of course, a parliament can’t actually rule on how a word will be defined, except, I suppose, in the way they officially use the word. The petitioner knows the requesting this of Parliament is absurd, but it’s not merely a tongue-in-cheek joke. The points he makes to back up the petition are not jokes. The aim is to get those points out there and get them some attention and, perhaps, to get some people to start asking “When you say I’m an Islamophobe, which definition do you mean? That I’m irrationally afraid of Islam (oh, please! As if that fear could be irrational!) or that I’m irrationally afraid of openly and honestly discussing Islam, as you seem to be?”
http://TinyURL.com/islamophobiadefinition
Not I said the sparrow says
Won’t happen in this case.
Usage trumps all.
If the word had been modelled on something like ‘agerophobia” it could mean that you were a bit nervous about things Islamic. Quite undestandable, you have my sympathy.
But the driven usage of word suggests that it’s modelled on something like” homophobia”. So you will be known to have a false, bigoted, and quite possibly illegal attitude towards Islam and muslims.
You’ll just have to live it.
Could be worse. Isn’t this the German version? : diesenschweinhundislamofobiagegenvolkverboten.
Ja, Dem Deutschen Volke !
LSWCHP says
I don’t like islam, but I’m not afraid of it. Cautious and wary and alert, but not afraid. And as others have stated, fear of islam certainly wouldn’t be irrational anyway. More like common sense.
I think the term “Islamoaverse” is much better, as it clearly states my feelings about the ideology. I suspect a lot of people feel as I do.
mortimer says
Secular schools have no way to decide what ‘blasphemy’ is.
U.S. law values and permits the right to blaspheme because there is no established ‘American religion’. What is ‘sacred’ to one person may be highly ‘blasphemous’ to another. Without an officially defined state religion, it is not the responsibility of the judges to intervene.
-Justice Clark in 1952 wrote: “…it is enough to point out that the state has no
legitimate interest in protecting any or all religions from views distasteful
to them. … It is not the business of government in our nation to suppress real
or imagined attacks upon a particular religious doctrine.”
-Justice Frankfurter noted that beliefs “…dear to one may seem the rankest ‘sacrilege’ to another,” and added concerning “sacrilegious” speech: “…history does not encourage reliance on the wisdom and moderation of the censor.”
Since 2014, India’s Supreme Court has supported free speech as a ‘precious right’.
“We cannot curtail fundamental rights of people. It is a precious right guaranteed by Constitution,” a bench headed by Justice RM Lodha said, adding “we are a mature democracy and it is for the public to decide. We are 1280 million people and there would be 1280 million views. One is free not to accept the view of others”. Also the court said that it is a matter of perception, and a statement objectionable to a person might be normal to another person.
mortimer says
If I were a kid again and forced to do that assignment, I’d draw a picture of Mohammed and his 9-year-old bride.
Belgo says
Mohammed the pedofile his bride Aisha was 6 years old when he married her and he “consumed” = raped her at the age of 9. Is it that what we need to respect and cannot drawn? Since orrigens the most important weapon of the islam barbarians was and is FEAR.
Only PROUD and standing for what our grandparents and ohers fight and even died for we must honor by our deeds.
Sam says
To me it is so sad that kids drawing something is a public debate in America, the land of the free.
Islam must be crushed NOW for good.
Hope says
Wow, what a nice way for the people of France to have to live! And soon, we can all live this way here in the US, too! What a treat for all of us to be so open and multicultural and tolerant. This is just what we need, right Obama?
davious says
This man is a hero. He gave his point of view while speaking with respect. The most important thing we have is the First amendment. When you bow out of fear, or out of “respect for other cultures”, or to protect your kids from possibly crazy people – you are an enemy of the most important tenet the West has. Without the right (and encouragement) to criticize bad ideas, we will deserve to have a mediocre future.
terry bare says
This little school district has more balls than the entire rest of the U.S.
sari says
Absolutely!