It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

More proof of Islamic deference at American Universities (Muslim Privilege at Rutgers Univ.)

page: 1
18
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 29 2016 @ 07:19 PM
link   
This thread will address 2 separate incidents, they are however, very much linked in regards to yet more proof American Public University's are
A.) Pandering to Islam, giving them significant advantages, privileges and leeway and B.) Openly Hostile to Christianity, insensitive and hypocritical

On April 20th, a student at Rutgers made a facebook post with a picture that, at an absolute minimum, was utterly disrespectful: A Dartboard with a Jesus Figurine impaled with 4 darts - one in each hand, one through the feet, and one in the ribs - prominently displayed in the University's Art Library. Before the student made the facebook post, she requested that the piece be taken down as she found it extremely disrespectful - how could it not be? The Deity of the largest religion (by a slight margin) on the planet is crucified to on a dart board. Staff refused to take down or move the piece. After the post was made, several comments were made - shockingly people were supporting this as it was claimed it was "a piece of art" named "The Virtruvian Man" and that there was a right for it to be displayed - citing "free speech" as the justification.
Facebook Post

A day after the facebook post was made, University Officials moved the "Art" piece from it's prominent position on the wall near the CIRCULATION DESK to a glass shelf on the other side of the room, but at first did not remove it. Only later in the day was it removed from the Art Exhibit. But not for the reason most of us expect. Quite obviously there was quite a bit of outrage that such a disrespectful piece of art was displayed for the world to see - but University Officials removed it only grudgingly stating:


"The artwork in question was removed from the exhibit because it did not meet Rutgers University Libraries policy, which requires art exhibitions and their pieces to be based on university events, curricular offerings and topics of interest to the university community," said Jessica Pellien, director of communications at Rutgers University Libraries.


So, after an initial request, a woman who was extremely offended at something (starting to sound familiar SJW's?), the art piece was not taken down, and only after 2 days was it silently and grudgingly removed, with no mention of the severity of the offense it caused. Not only that, but an apology was not even made by the University, no calls for "dialogue", nothing. In addition, several people made strong statements that "The University doesn't have to cater to the church or anyone. It's hilarious"


Now we bring in the April 5th issue of the school newspaper "The Gleaner" - On it's cover is depicted 3 prominent figures in a bar: Buddha, Jesus Christ . . . . . . . . and Mohammed (gasp!)

2 weeks later, the Muslim Student Association of Rutgers caught sight of the Newspaper cover and wrote a letter to the editor that stated, among other things:


Religious Figures are sensitive to be used in a joking, satiric manner and would evoke unwanted reaction from devoted followers. To use these figures in such a way my imply mockery on the beliefs of those who hold these figures dearly. In addition, we do not believe that it is respectful to have depictions of noble individuals (in the form of image) in the tradition of the Abrahamic Faith.

We realize that there may be good intentions behind this but we find this image derogatory to our faith and detrimental to the diverse groups of religious faiths that attend this university. Even though freedom of speech and press is emphasized and is something all of us value as proud Americans, the University prides itself on diversity of people of different faith and backgrounds so we feel that it is necessary to respect those faiths and backgrounds by honoring their beliefs.

Our request is that the image may be removed from the paper and to put it back in circulation without the image.



Then, unlike in the incident with the Jesus "Art", THE SAME DAY, the Editor of the school newspaper published a response that stated (among other things):


I'm truly sorry that you were offended by this image. It was not in any way meant to disrespect any religion or any aspects of your religion either. In fact, the image was put in place to bring light to stereotypes and misconceptions that exist in today's society. The Gleaner would never intend to disrespect your organization. I sincerely apologize for offending you and members of your organization. I understand why you are upset. This truly disheartens me because The Gleaner's goal has always been to serve the Rutgers community rather than upset them. I am more than willing to hear you out in a meeting so that we can rectify this issue and ensure that it doesn't happen again. Once again I am truly sorry to have offended your organization in this way.

. . . . . Along with this, every remaining April 5th issue of The Gleaner that are still in boxes around campus will be destroyed.


(I had to manually type these responses out, forgive any errors)

So, not only did Rutgers respond immediately to a case of someone taking offense in the case with a cartoon of Mohammed, they practically grovelled at the MSA's feet begging for forgiveness.

I think most see where I am going with this train: The extreme double standard that completely panders to Islam when Muslims take offense while only grudgingly taking action when a Christian is deeply offended. Not only that, but a picture of Mohammed in a Bar is WORLDS less offensive than pinning Jesus to a #ing dartboard, yet the University, in the same day practically grovelled to the Muslim students and went above and beyond in trying to "make it right" - meanwhile they quietly remove the Jesus dartboard, 2 days after someone takes offense and don't even make a statement when it was insanely clear that Christian students were offended. Even the most Progressive among you on ATS must be able to see that there is a glaring double standard. Under normal circumstances, I wouldn't care that Jesus was pinned to a dartboard (in fact, in a morbid way, to me it is pretty freaking funny) - but in today's college campus climate, it seriously infuriates me that this stuff is allowed. College students are literally creating "No White people" zones on our Public University's because of imaginary "micro-aggression's" - but pinning the deity of the worlds largest religion to a dart board? That's A-OK!

What my main point is, people cannot have these double standards and expect to be taken seriously. More than that, University's NEED to not enable these hypocrisy's to happen. Certain groups of students CANNOT be allowed to deny groups of people access to portions of a Public University based on the color of their skin based on a plucked out of thin air, imaginary concept (wasn't integration like 50 years ago?) - and then not give the same level of courtesy when someone is offended by something that doesn't necessarily offend you.
Jesus Dartboard Story
Mohammed Newspaper Cover

Discuss. As always, keep it Civil




posted on Apr, 29 2016 @ 07:51 PM
link   
a reply to: chuck258

I hate all religions equally but yes this is very unfair behaviour.Could also be that people are afraid of offending Muslims,because sometimes folks who do offend Muslims end up having a Really bad day.While Christians will merely sulk and complain.
edit on 29-4-2016 by Raxoxane because: Spelling



posted on Apr, 29 2016 @ 08:12 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Apr, 29 2016 @ 08:15 PM
link   
The person who thought of that is funny as hell, jebus on a dart board.



posted on Apr, 29 2016 @ 08:23 PM
link   
a reply to: GlutenFree

Are you Palestinian?



posted on Apr, 29 2016 @ 08:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
The person who thought of that is funny as hell, jebus on a dart board.


I find humor in it as well in a very morbid way.

Unfortunately, that is not what this is all about - it's about treating Muslim complaints seriously while not giving any credence to Christian complaints. If they are going to kiss their Muslim Student Association's Ass about a drawing of their beloved pedophile prophet, they should at least be issuing an apology to the Christian community for putting their deity on a dart board.

In a perfect world, both would be allowed.



posted on Apr, 29 2016 @ 08:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills

No not at all a forced Christian ( came back to the whole religion years later in peace with it all ) I don't know how the community got so massive it was a sudden sprout and the Christian community (the two schools) look abandoned

Palestinian stories just tragic comedy




edit on 29-4-2016 by GlutenFree because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2016 @ 08:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: chuck258

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
The person who thought of that is funny as hell, jebus on a dart board.


I find humor in it as well in a very morbid way.

Unfortunately, that is not what this is all about - it's about treating Muslim complaints seriously while not giving any credence to Christian complaints. If they are going to kiss their Muslim Student Association's Ass about a drawing of their beloved pedophile prophet, they should at least be issuing an apology to the Christian community for putting their deity on a dart board.

In a perfect world, both would be allowed.


Lol pedophile prophet, offended much, its jesus on a dart board, thats comedy right there, if it offends you, go blow yourself up like an angry muslim, i couldn't care less, both are ridiculise.



posted on Apr, 29 2016 @ 08:37 PM
link   
a reply to: chuck258

I don't know how people can even call that art! It's something that a warped minded kid in a high school would do.
There's absolutely no comparison. The dart board depiction was much more offensive than the depiction of Muhammad in a bar!

I have news for Muslims in the U.S., this isn't Saudi Arabia! Nothing is off limits when it comes to satire in the United States. It's a basic right protected under our constitution!

If you don't think we have "peaceful" Islamists among us who wouldn't engage in radical and terroristic attacks, this one line is telling...


Religious Figures are sensitive to be used in a joking, satiric manner and would evoke unwanted reaction from devoted followers.


What unwanted reaction? A mass shooting? Is this a disguised threat to the newspaper? If a cartoon depicting Muhammad in a bar is going to cause outrage and possible physical and deadly attacks, than maybe Islam isn't a peaceful religion after all? If Islamists find it offensive, maybe they should move to Saudi Arabia where they have Sharia Law. There they execute anyone who insults Muhammad.

edit on 29-4-2016 by WeRpeons because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2016 @ 09:08 PM
link   
a reply to: GlutenFree

Huh? So what Jew army is holding you down? Where are you from?



posted on Apr, 29 2016 @ 09:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills

lol sorry not holding me down

honestly just forget my post no matter what you reply here is irrelevant sorry to pull you or Jews into this. it's no different for Christians in French town protecting a school with scary army people that block you everywhere you step (the kids are spoiled not because of they religion but I think it makes them feel like they are superior to other schools not that it is that way because they are in danger so they are acting out)

Sorry 4 messy post I am in hurry


edit on 29-4-2016 by GlutenFree because: (no reason given)


Nothing to be confused about.. And that's where I was just going lol
edit on 29-4-2016 by GlutenFree because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2016 @ 09:26 PM
link   
a reply to: GlutenFree

Yeah I'm still confused.




posted on Apr, 29 2016 @ 09:35 PM
link   
a reply to: GlutenFree

So basically you used "Jew" as a slur, not as an actuality... Even swills is shaking his head...



posted on Apr, 29 2016 @ 09:42 PM
link   
a reply to: TechniXcality

My post means this : the only way to shut people up is to agree with them

Can you and me change any of those facts ? We can bitch all we want

So I will always agree with u my fierce lover hater fighter but you never hear it that way no matter what

But like you said we don't have to agree


Swirl not a tornado I really have to run sorry


edit on 29-4-2016 by GlutenFree because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2016 @ 09:44 PM
link   
a reply to: GlutenFree

Yes about that...

I have no idea what you are talking about.. But have fun with the "Jew army" holding you down..



posted on Apr, 29 2016 @ 09:45 PM
link   
a reply to: TechniXcality

Holding the trafic down or up

I am Palestinian my English an ain't great

Instead of a lollipop lady you have 3 army guys with guns it makes me feel uncomfortable so what


You're hot they're not enjoy


edit on 29-4-2016 by GlutenFree because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2016 @ 11:03 PM
link   
a reply to: chuck258

Every Christian student, paying parent, and alumnus should be getting together for a huge lawsuit over this. Unless that happens, nothing will change. Playing nice, and taking whatever is dished out, isn't cutting it.



posted on Apr, 29 2016 @ 11:56 PM
link   
Well for one Muhammad isn't supposed to be depicted and secondly alcohol is off limits to Muslims and depicting him in a bar could be an implication that he is drinking.

Not saying there is no double standard here because there definitely is, but to say the Muhammad thing isn't offensive is not true. Both cases should have been treated equally but unfortunately they were not, it does seem as though the Muslims were getting some sort of preferential treatment which isn't fair at all.



posted on Apr, 29 2016 @ 11:58 PM
link   
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

What case would they have exactly? Both were eventually removed even if one was removed faster than the other.

What happened here was wrong but I don't see how a lawsuit could be made out of it.



posted on Apr, 30 2016 @ 12:06 AM
link   
a reply to: TechniXcality

Even I'm shaking my head? Mmmk.

Is he using Jew as a slur? I mean he could be but what sense would that make since the only Jewish Army is in Israel. Perhaps he's a racist and a dumb one at that? I still can't make heads or tails of what he's trying to get across.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<<   2 >>

log in

join