>

Ironic though as a ex-muslim, I feel like Muhammad is already idolized to an absurd degree that basically is equivalent of worshiping. You don't need pictures for that. Just a bunch of false stories of him being a great human when in reality he was a warlord who had a sex addiction issue.
According to the lawsuit, López Prater’s course syllabus included a note that students would view images of religious figures, including the Prophet Muhammad. The syllabus also included an offer to work with students uncomfortable with viewing those images. She also warned the class immediately before showing the depiction of the Prophet Muhammad.

Seems like the student who made a fuss about it did it intentionally to get her in trouble. An institution of higher education firing a professor over a single complaint is ridiculous. This lawsuit seems like a no-brainer. >

Right? It appears the student was offended even at the thought of anyone seeing an image of Mohammed and chose to stay to get the professor in trouble. >

Even though the image thing is only relatively recent. >

Which ironically is the sort of thing you should expect to learn in an Art History class. Things like how religions aren't monoliths, and beliefs can and do change over time. >

I have a degree in art history and took a class on Islamic art. We absolutely looked at early depictions of Muhammad and how those changed over time. >

No I need the credit >

For the beheading!? >

For the French Revolution history course, yes. >

What a bizarre failure of a school.
The liability must be enormous. They went on record stating the professor's actions were  "undeniably Islamophobic" in trying to educate art history students about art history.
Indeed historic Islamic art by Islamic artists can be challenging but that's why it's important to understand it. It's not 'phobic to believe it's worthy of study. Theres so much value to learning of the fluidity of belief and how art is a window on the world over time. 
Now they'll finally understand backtracking by saying they've made a "misstep" is not enough when you've tried to suppress academic freedom within an academic institution 
Does anyone enrolled there think they're getting a decent education? 
They even failed the student, they naively thought they were protecting, since they're not preparing them for the real world where there isn't some overarching hand that can move the chess pieces of life around to ensure you always win. >

The job of educational institutions is to prepare the child for the road, not the road for the child. >

Did you get this from The Coddling of the American Mind by chance? >

Sure did! Great book. >

"...the university chose to impose the student’s religious view that no one should ever view images of the prophet on all other students and employees."
This is exactly the issue.  How can one student's viewpoint be imposed on absolutely everyone. >

Legally it shouldn't. This was a historical piece being talked about in an art history class and the professor went above and beyond in my opinion to make sure students were notified ahead of time in case it made them uncomfortable.   
The Muslim society complained and she was fired. We are supposed to have freedom of religion so people can safely practice their religion free from persecution. You are free to practice but you can not force others to abide by the rules of religion.
This is so beyond ridiculous its like a random student complaining that a professor should be fired for eating a ham sandwich which is against kosher rules of the Jewish religion. It sounds ridiculous but that is exactly what happened here.
EDIT: Thanks kind stranger for the award >


banning depictions of the prophet is very recent, as in 2005

No, banning depictions is not very recent.  It's a long standing accepted teaching of Islam.   There is very very very very very very little art depicting Mohammod or any of the prophets found throughout history because its almost universally seen as idolatry by muslims.   
The Koran doesn't explicitly ban all images of people, but it definitely calls out idolatry and that's been interpreted by the muslim population, scholars, and leaders throughout its history to mean no images at all, particularly of the prophets and Mohammod.