NationStates Jolt Archive

Clicky (http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/article.html?in_article_id=17724&in_page_id=2)

A school has banned a song because it offends their poor sensibilities, just the latest in a long line events where things have been banned because they offend someones sensibilities :mad:

Clicky (http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/article.html?in_article_id=17724&in_page_id=2)

A school has banned a song because it offends their poor sensibilities, just the latest in a long line events where things have been banned because they offend someones sensibilities :mad:
Ironic, aint it.

Clicky (http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/article.html?in_article_id=17724&in_page_id=2)

A school has banned a song because it offends their poor sensibilities, just the latest in a long line events where things have been banned because they offend someones sensibilities :mad:

Hold on, isn't banning a song because it says you don't need religion politically incorrect?

Clicky (http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/article.html?in_article_id=17724&in_page_id=2)

A school has banned a song because it offends their poor sensibilities, just the latest in a long line events where things have been banned because they offend someones sensibilities :mad:

Personally I'm all for Imagine being banned*, but on the basis of its utter banality, it offends my aesthetic sensibilities, rather than my politcla/religious ones. Now, Working Class Hero ot Gimmie Some Truth are entirely different stories.


* I believe it was Amando Iannucci who talked of how insane asylums were now called mental health centres and described it as madness gone political correct.

Religion offends my sensibilities. I demand schools ban chapel services now.

Now, you also have to remember, this is a Christian school. Was it public or private?

Hmmm, ban John Lennon's music.... or 50cent's.....

Yeah, I can see the moral positives of 50c's music, and its positive effect it has on todays youth.

Religion offends my sensibilities. I demand schools ban chapel services now.

What are you, some kind of commie? Go back to Russia.


Whoops, sorry. Go back to the USA.

What are you, some kind of commie? Go back to Russia.


Whoops, sorry. Go back to the USA.

I was being sarcastic. Were you being sarcastic towards my sarcasm? Now I'm confused. Thanks very much.

What are you, some kind of commie? Go back to Russia.


Whoops, sorry. Go back to the USA.

USA= Land of The Commies?

Quick, get the nuclear bomb proof desks out, and the Red Alert Siren.

The above are products of my social studies class.

Personally I'm all for Imagine being banned*, but on the basis of its utter banality, it offends my aesthetic sensibilities, rather than my politcla/religious ones. Now, Working Class Hero ot Gimmie Some Truth are entirely different stories.

Well I can't say I disagree with you there.

* I believe it was Amando Iannucci who talked of how insane asylums were now called mental health centres and described it as madness gone political correct.

Indeed, on Charm Offensive

Sounds like it was a private Christian school. In that case they have every right to censor the song. Not if it was a public school though.

Now, you also have to remember, this is a Christian school. Was it public or private?

To the Googletron!

I can understand if people didn't want certian songs being played in schools (i.e. songs that have a great deal of swearing and more than suggestive lyrics), but some of the things they do drive me nuts. A recent proposal in Nebraska suggested that schools should change their mascots if they represent Native Americans (like the Chiefs).

I don't know about you, but that doesn't make much sense to me.

Now, you also have to remember, this is a Christian school. Was it public or private?

It seems to be a state school.

Sounds like it was a private Christian school. In that case they have every right to censor the song. Not if it was a public school though.

The right of the school is neither here nor there. Nor is anyone questioning its right to ban it.

Just pointing out is political correctness gone mad!

Sounds like it was a private Christian school. In that case they have every right to censor the song. Not if it was a public school though.


Hey, if you want to get all freaky on this issue, I say ask the kids. After all, they didn't CHOOSE to be in a private school, they didn't CHOOSE to live by religous rules, but they did CHOOSE a nice song to sing.

And hey, I'm with the rest about the banality of Imagine. . .working class hero is like it's grown up, hotter odler sister song that you just want to climb on top of and. . .oh. . .you guys are still here. . .hey. . .

A recent proposal in Nebraska suggested that schools should change their mascots if they represent Native Americans (like the Chiefs).

I don't know about you, but that doesn't make much sense to me.
My university's sports teams used to be the Indians. Now they're the Cardinal. No, not the bird. The colour. Our mascot is a tree (well, technically I guess I should say our band's mascot is a tree). Doesn't make much sense to me either.

I can understand if people didn't want certian songs being played in schools (i.e. songs that have a great deal of swearing and more than suggestive lyrics), but some of the things they do drive me nuts. A recent proposal in Nebraska suggested that schools should change their mascots if they represent Native Americans (like the Chiefs).

I don't know about you, but that doesn't make much sense to me.

I see point in this. It would be the same thing as the states using gratuitous, stereotypical images of Iraqis holding guns with exaggerated turbans being used to represent sports teams only americans played on, or products only america can produce and sell.

Would you have a problem with this, if this happened in Iraq today after the Americans invaded and killed so many thousands?

It seems to be a state school.

linky (http://www.stleonards.devon.sch.uk/)

The right of the school is neither here nor there. Nor is anyone questioning its right to ban it.

Just pointing out is political correctness gone mad!

Like I said, I'm pretty sure that this qualifies as politicall incorrect. So therefore, not PC gone mad.

My university's sports teams used to be the Indians. Now they're the Cardinal. No, not the bird. The colour. Our mascot is a tree (well, technically I guess I should say our band's mascot is a tree). Doesn't make much sense to me either.
I especially find it amusing when representatives of local Native American tribes are consulted about said school mascots and the vast majority say they think it's a positive symbol and would like to keep it... yet the school changes anyway.

I especially find it amusing when representatives of local Native American tribes are consulted about said school mascots and the vast majority say they think it's a positive symbol and would like to keep it... yet the school changes anyway.


where did you learn that natives approved of this? are there any/links examples?

Like I said, I'm pretty sure that this qualifies as politicall incorrect. So therefore, not PC gone mad.

How does it qualified as political incorrectness?

Political correctness always seems to be defined as something being banned because it offends someones sensibilities

How does it qualified as political incorrectness?

Political correctness always seems to be defined as something being banned because it offends someones sensibilities

This doesn't seemed to be banned because it's offending anyone's sensibilities, even if we accept that as the definition. This is a case of the song, well, actually banned isn't even the right word. As far as I can tell, initial paragraph of the artile aside, they just chose not to have the students sing it at the end of the year. There's no mention, for example, of students not being able to listen to it, (what's their stance on MP3 players etc? Anyone know?) hum it, etc.

Since it's a Christian school, a song that says religion is not necessary, is kind of shooting themselves in the foot, no? So it's being banned because it's 'atheist' which qualifies as political incorrectness.

Who's sensibilities, exactly, were being offended?

Seeing as this is a Christian school, a song which

This doesn't seemed to be banned because it's offending anyone's sensibilities,

But John Lennon's Imagine has been banned by a Christian school after teachers ruled that its lyrics were anti-religious.

You don't think teachers at a Christian school have their sensibilities offended by things they deem anti-religious?

'It has an appealing sentiment of love but its vision is of a world in which people do not need religion.

The song expresses longing for a different world and for eternal happiness but it says you can have this without religion.' - Rev Steve Goodbody

You think a reverend saying the theme of the song undermines the message of his religion (and by extention, the school) isn't having his sensibilities offended?

This is a case of the song, well, actually banned isn't even the right word. As far as I can tell, initial paragraph of the artile aside, they just chose not to have the students sing it at the end of the year.

That is still banning it though.

There's no mention, for example, of students not being able to listen to it, (what's their stance on MP3 players etc? Anyone know?) hum it, etc.

Considering it is a primary school I don't think they expect many of the children to have MP3 players.

Since it's a Christian school, a song that says religion is not necessary, is kind of shooting themselves in the foot, no? So it's being banned because it's 'atheist' which qualifies as political incorrectness.

Sorry. I don't follow your leap of reason there. That because it is an "atheist" song makes the whole thing politically incorrect.

Seems to me what you really have here is a failure in the management of the school. These kids were rehearsing the song for weeks, according to the article linked in the original post. I have to ask, didn't anyone in the school's administration wonder why they were gathering to sing this song day after day? Didn't the ones in charge of putting together the end-of-term show have to say what they were doing to someone else?

Sorry, I'm at work and that makes me grumpy sometimes, but this is typical management behavior, setting vague or no rules at all and then getting their knickers in a twist at the last minute. And where was St. Leonard? It's his school, should he have been taking a hand to see that no atheistic songs by low-class louts from Liverpool (for heaven's sake) were being sung?

Just pointing out is political correctness gone mad!

It's not political correctness, sane or otherwise.

I was being sarcastic. Were you being sarcastic towards my sarcasm? Now I'm confused. Thanks very much.


Ohhh multilayerd sarcasam, now that I love! Bhwhahahahah or do I!?;)

Sounds like it was a private Christian school. In that case they have every right to censor the song. Not if it was a public school though.
Things are different in Britain. There are a lot of christian state schools in this country. It's also still the law that all school assemblies have to have a christian ethos.

It's not political correctness, sane or otherwise.

No, of course it's not. I'm rather sad you had to point that out

But John Lennon's Imagine has been banned by a Christian school after teachers ruled that its lyrics were anti-religious.

You don't think teachers at a Christian school have their sensibilities offended by things they deem anti-religious?

'It has an appealing sentiment of love but its vision is of a world in which people do not need religion.

The song expresses longing for a different world and for eternal happiness but it says you can have this without religion.' - Rev Steve Goodbody

You think a reverend saying the theme of the song undermines the message of his religion (and by extention, the school) isn't having his sensibilities offended?


Not anymore than Kennedy refusing to sing a pro-communist song would be having his sensibilities offended.


That is still banning it though.

Well, if (hypothetically speaking) I chose not to have Purple People Eater sung at my school's (if I had a school of my own) spring concert, would that be banning Purple People Eater?

Considering it is a primary school I don't think they expect many of the children to have MP3 players.

You'd be surprised.

Sorry. I don't follow your leap of reason there. That because it is an "atheist" song makes the whole thing politically incorrect.

It's quite simple. They're 'banning' it because it's an atheist song. By extent, they're banning it because of it's religion. Therefore, politically incorrect.

It's also still the law that all school assemblies have to have a christian ethos.

Although it should be noted that many schools completely ignore this law. It's one of those infractions which the authorities tend to turn a blind eye to.

They made a decision that something did not jive with the position deemed to be "acceptable" at the school and therefore banned it. It might be politically incorrect in society as a whole, but within the school, it is undoubtedly politically correct.

Political correctness, and proof that not all PC comes from the left.

No, of course it's not. I'm rather sad you had to point that out

You've completely lost me.

You've completely lost me.

They're arguing both sides apparentally. I don't get it either. Have a cookie?

They're arguing both sides apparentally. I don't get it either. Have a cookie?

Wouldn't say no.

They're arguing both sides apparentally. I don't get it either. Have a cookie?
Cookies?!?!?

Offense should never be sufficient grounds to prohibit anything.

Cookies for all, while we try and figure out what AC is up to.

Hmmm, ban John Lennon's music.... or 50cent's.....

Yeah, I can see the moral positives of 50c's music, and its positive effect it has on todays youth.
Yes but rappers always thank god for helping them make music about slapping bitc hes

Considering the song is about a particular conception of anarchy, perhaps Anarchic Conceptions has a more personal reason for this thread.

Although it should be noted that many schools completely ignore this law. It's one of those infractions which the authorities tend to turn a blind eye to.
That's true, but it's still very significant that such a law is even on the statute books. It would be unthinkable in America, you'd have the ACLU throwing their toys around in the pram.

Regarding the song, I can't stand it anyway. It's a load of idealistic marxist crap.

While it is the best song written by any of the Beatles, I can certainly see why a religious school wouldn't want to perform a song that insults religion. I also agree with the poster who said that they should have decided to not let them perform it when they first wanted to, and not after weeks of rehearsals.

While it is the best song written by any of the Beatles, I can certainly see why a religious school wouldn't want to perform a song that insults religion. I also agree with the poster who said that they should have decided to not let them perform it when they first wanted to, and not after weeks of rehearsals.

The best song of the Beatles - that's like the best soccer performance by Alaska.

*dislikes the sound of the Beatles, and paints them black*

The best song of the Beatles - that's like the best soccer performance by Alaska.

*dislikes the sound of the Beatles, and paints them black*I can agree - Stones > Beatles

While it is the best song written by any of the Beatles, I can certainly see why a religious school wouldn't want to perform a song that insults religion. I also agree with the poster who said that they should have decided to not let them perform it when they first wanted to, and not after weeks of rehearsals.

I like 'Imagine'. But the best song of any of the beatles? That's a stretch.

I can name five songs by the Beatles or former Beatles that I like better:

Live and Let Die
I Saw Her Standing There
Let It Be
Come Together
Daytripper(Day Tripper?)

I can agree - Stones > Beatles

I knew SOMEONE would spot my decided preference for the Rolling Stones!

:cool:

Live and let die was cool, though. Bond.. James Bond.

Lennon may be a hypocritcal kitsch-monger IMO, but banning Imagine is just silly. Do they think children are going to listen to it and feel a sudden urge to burn down churches?:rolleyes:

:headbang:
(Man I'm going to be using this Smily for a long time I think)

Lennon may be a hypocritcal kitsch-monger IMO, but banning Imagine is just silly. Do they think children are going to listen to it and feel a sudden urge to burn down churches?:rolleyes:

Of course, then they'll all turn Gay.

Considering the song is about a particular conception of anarchy, perhaps Anarchic Conceptions has a more personal reason for this thread.

Oh god no. I'm with BWO et al on it being an utterly banal and trite song.