The Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) released a ruling last week banning a teacher for life because of statements he made in class about [REDACTED] religion.
Mr Alex Lloyd will have opportunity to appeal this ruling no earlier than October 2029.
Mr Lloyd was employed as a Teacher of Science and Head of Sixth Form at The Bishop of Winchester Academy in Bournemouth. The school is a Church of England academy with over 1,000 pupils. Mr Lloyd was found guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute for his comments about [REDACTED] religion and culture.
To be clear, this redaction appears throughout the 27-page document, appearing to conceal key information on what actually happened that led to this ban.
Mr Lloyd was found to have taught a lesson on honour killings in which he said it occurred mostly in the culture of some of the pupils in the class – this was in an attempt to get the pupils (who had arrived late) to take the lesson seriously. Separately, he told a pupil that if she was living in Iran she would get killed or stoned for what she was wearing. On another occasion, he referred to [REDACTED] as a “religion of peace” in a sarcastic tone.
Mr Lloyd admitted making these comments and admitted that these comments demonstrated a lack of tolerance and respect for the rights and beliefs of the pupils in his class and to others in general, contrary to fundamental British values.
Although it noted evidence of Mr Lloyd’s good character, the ruling said he showed no remorse or regret for his conduct when challenged by the school. On the contrary, “Mr Lloyd sought to justify the comments he made to pupils during the lesson by saying they were factual when questioned during the school’s investigation.”
The TRA ruling quotes a pupil saying that Mr Lloyd was “mocking [REDACTED] saying it was a peaceful religion, but saying that they have honour based killings.” He is reported to have said in a “sarcastic way that [REDACTED] is a religion of peace”.
What could the [REDACTED] religion possibly be? One wonders. The mind boggles. If this is a religion of peace, then why are they so afraid to name it? Why the need to redact any reference to the name of the religion?
It seems that [REDACTED] religion is so sensitive that no teacher can possibly be allowed to mock it. Does that apply to any other religions? Is this effectively a blasphemy code for teachers? If you are found to have mocked [REDACTED] religion you could not only lose your job, but be barred from the profession.
This reminds me of the teacher in Batley Grammar School who taught a lesson on free speech in 2021 in which he showed pupils a cartoon of Muhammad. We all learned the lesson that we do not have free speech when it comes to Islam. That teacher remains in hiding to this day because of serious threats to his life from adherents of the so-called ‘religion of peace’.
Perhaps [REDACTED] religion is that same religion?
I’m going to go out on a limb here and suggest that the [REDACTED] religion is Islam. Actually, this is not going out on a limb at all. It is perfectly obvious to anyone with a couple of brain cells.
Which begs the question – why has the TRA redacted all reference to Islam or Muslims? What do they think they are hiding? Do they really believe that the British public won’t draw the obvious conclusion? If they really think that then they really ought to do a better job regulating teaching in this country.
One would have to be very badly educated not to see the blindingly obvious here.
We all know it is Islam that Mr Lloyd was talking about. We therefore need to ask the question whether Islam really is a religion of peace?
I wrote an article some years back on precisely this question. My article still ranks third in a Google search for that question and has been read by many thousands of people. I conclude that while most Muslims are truly peaceable and peace-loving people, a religion is judged by its teachings and the example of its founder. By that standard, Islam is not a religion of peace.
One can see, then, why Mr Lloyd sought to justify his comments. It is also true to say that Islam has honour killings. All four schools of Islamic law mandate the death penalty for apostacy – this is honour killing. Again, Mr Lloyd was right to seek to justify his comments.
No attempt is made by the TRA to assess the truthfulness of Mr Lloyd’s comments. He is found to be disrespectful of Islam and thus in breach of fundamental British Values.
British Values, however, do not mandate respect for other religions. They mandate: “mutual respect and tolerance of those with different faiths and beliefs.” That is respect and tolerance of the people, not respect and tolerance for their beliefs.
This is a subtle, but important difference. Perhaps it is too subtle for the TRA? I can respect an atheist whilst not respecting her belief that there is no God.
Similarly, I can respect a Muslim whilst not respecting her belief that Muhammad is a prophet or that Jesus didn’t die on a cross. Perhaps this is too hard for the TRA to grasp?
Teachers are already afraid to criticise Islam. Everyone knows what happened to the Batley Grammar School teacher. No one wants to have to go into hiding. If that wasn’t enough, we now know you can be banned from teaching for mocking Islamic beliefs.
This TRA ruling is truly sinister. They agree that Mr Lloyd had good character and had not been subject to any pervious disciplinary proceedings or warnings. They still think it is necessary to bar him from teaching for a minimum of four years because offending Muslims is so serious. It is so serious that they insist on redacting all reference to Islam.
I am not going to defend everything that Mr Lloyd said. It may well be that some of his comments went beyond what is acceptable professional conduct in a classroom. My question is whether the punishment here is fitting and why the TRA is so keen to protect Islam from criticism?
Teachers will occasionally mock the beliefs of Christians or atheists without any consequences. But Islam is protected. Islam is to be respected. Islam is a special case. Even in a Christian school you can get into serious trouble for mocking Islamic beliefs.
Teenagers are smarter than the authorities think, though. They can see through this. They have access to the internet to check what their teachers are saying. They can read this article. The TRA deserves to be mocked for its redaction of the religion in this ruling.
Teachers should be allowed to criticise the absurdities of Islamic teaching no matter who the pupils are.
Join our email list to receive the latest updates for prayer and action.
Find out more about the legal support we’re giving Christians.
Help us put the hope of Jesus at the heart of society.
Join us on:
Join us on:
© 2025 CCFON Ltd. All Rights Reserved.
‘Christian Concern’ is a trading name of CCFON Ltd. CCFON Ltd is registered in England and Wales (Company Number 6628490).
Registered office: 70 Wimpole Street, London W1G 8AX.
© 2025 CCFON Ltd. All Rights Reserved.
‘Christian Concern’ is a trading name of CCFON Ltd. CCFON Ltd is registered in England and Wales (Company Number 6628490).
Registered office: 70 Wimpole Street, London W1G 8AX.
Our website uses cookies, usage analysis and other similar tools
We use these tools because they help us to run our website, provide you with content (including video and audio clips), understand how people use our website, make improvements to our services, and promote our work more effectively. This means that we and selected third-party services may store cookies and other similar information on your device, and may analyse your use of our website. Some of these tools are necessary for our website to function as intended but others are optional, and you can choose whether or not to allow them.
Find out more and review your options
Our website uses cookies, usage analysis and other technologies. We use these tools because they help us to run our website, provide you with content (including video and audio clips), understand how people use our website, make improvements to our services, and promote our work more effectively. This means that we and selected third-party services may store cookies and other similar information on your device, and may analyse how you use our website. Some of these tools are necessary for our website to function as intended but others are optional, and you can choose whether or not to allow them. You can find out more here.
Certain cookies and other technologies are used on our website to provide core functionality. You can read more about this here. You may be able to use your browser settings to block these tools but if you do, our website may not function as intended.
To enrich your experience of this website, we embed carefully selected content from other platforms. For example, we embed video clips from our YouTube channel, and audio clips from our SoundCloud channel. These third-party platforms may store and use cookies (or similar technology) on your device, and may analyse your use of this site or the embedded content. We do not directly control what technologies they use. You can find out more here. If embedded content is disabled it may affect your experience of this website.
This website uses tools from selected third-party providers (Google and Facebook) to help us understand how people arrive at and use our website, and to measure and improve the effectiveness of some of our promotional activity. These tools may store and use cookies (and similar information) on your device, and analyse your use of this website, and other sites and platforms. These tools help us to improve our services, reach people who may be interested in our work and make better use of our resources but information may be shared with these third-party providers and may be used for their own purposes. You can find out more here.
You can find out more about this website’s use of cookies, usage analysis and similar technologies here.
