You wouldn't want to do that, hence why I said segregation will happen.
Segregation won't happen - not like we're led by xtians any more - phew!
Segregation happened when christians didn't like women, black people, gay people et al. Thankfully those odious, hateful, intolerant, ******* aren't in charge anymore.
I think the increasing tendency of our education system to separate children on the basis of their parents religion is storing up problems for future social cohesion.
As an opponent of what you call 'multiculturalism' I am hopeful you have some understanding of the problems a divisive education system can cause.
No, it's just about removing Christianity's special privileges, so that it's treated the same way as any other religion.
Come on, you can see how special christianity think it is. You aren't allowed to discuss it - although we all know its frigging useless and intolerant.
Segregation won't happen - not like we're led by xtians any more - phew!
Segregation happened when christians didn't like women, black people, gay people et al. Thankfully those odious, hateful, intolerant, ******* aren't in charge anymore.
Black people and women are Christians too. Sometimes I think you make up little angry stories in your head.
This topic really deserves a FAQ to deal with the numerous fallacies that keep getting trotted out.
Nobody cares about abolishing school worship except for crazies on the internet
Obviously this is wrong. The topic has been brought up because the National Governors Association has called for compulsory worship to be abolished. This clearly indicates that this issue goes beyond a minority or fringe desire to impose their views on the majority.
The National Governors Association is calling for the legal requirment for a daily collective act of worship of a broadly Christian nature to be removed. So it becomes the school's choice if to have a collective act of worship and if trhey choose to do so how often and of what nature. As the current mandatory requirement is in practice left up to the schools interpretation and not enforced, and schools can opt out, they are calling for the law to reflect the current reality.
Only crazies on the internet want to ban schools for having collective acts of worship. Changing the current reality.
Britain is a Christian country because Christian traditions are used in government ceremonies and the Queen is the head of the Church of England
Tradition and ceremony do not define the country - its population does.
The majority of the population identifies it self as Christian.
In the 2011 Census of England and Wales
What is your religion? Christian 59.3 per cent of the population
Christmas is only about Jesus because its where the word comes from
This is true only in that the etymology of the word derives from a Christian celebration. Its actual modern-day meaning is derived from its use, where it is now clearly used in a far broader sense than it was originally intended. This sort of change is very common, from the aforementioned days-of-the-week, to more modern uses like "to google," something on the internet.
It is not ture only of the etymology it is true of the common usage and meaning of the word as reflected in the Oxford English Dicitionary definition. And in the common practice of the celebration of Christmas as a Christian festival celebrating the nativity of Christ.
Trying to remove compulsory worship is banning religion from schools or forcing atheistic beliefs on Christians
Of course this is not true. Christian children are free to pray during break times, just as any other religion would be. They're even free to stand around in the playground singing hymns if they want. Children are not being forced to hide their religious identity in school and they certainly are not being stopped from practising their religion in their own free time.
Removing compulsory worship is not the same thing as banning worship or relgious practice from school time. Schools would still be free to hold collective acts of worship and do religious preaching.
Banning collective acts of worship would be placing a restriction on the religious freedom of other people. Religious freedom includes in public life. Society has the right to practice relgiion as part of its public life
The issue is that our modern-day schools contain pupils of varying faiths.
Other faiths in general do not have a problem. They all came out in support of the Cameron when he said the UK is a Christian country. It is millitant anti-religious atheists who take issue with other people practicing religion as part of societies public life.
Unlike a church where the congregation is made up entirely of Christians or a Mosque made up entirely of Muslims, the pupils are not attending school to engage in the worship of a single religion that many of them do not follow.
If their parents do not want them to take part in collective acts of worship they can have their children not take part. And what about faith schools, some parents choose to send their children to faith schools.
Not having a religious service at a school does not impose a view on Christians.
Having a Christian service, however, does impose Christian views.
If parents do not wish their children to take part in collective acts of worship they can have their children not take part. They are not being imposed upon. Preventing other people from having a collective act of worship would be imposing on other people
Teaching about religion and spirituality is a part of education and shouldn't be banned
Of course religion is a prominent part of the history, culture and morality of most societies. It is definitely beneficial that young people learn about the history and influences of at least the largest and most influential religions. It should be treated as we would treat history or social studies as a subject and should take a dispassionate, unbiased look at these different religions and encourage the children to question and think.
Singing hymns and praying to the Christian god is not education, though and has no part in a claim of teaching about religion. There is no need for children to engage in worship at school, because that is not what school is for. Trying to confuse worship with religious education is disingenuous.
Religion is like sport or art or creative writing, the person needs to do more than read about it they need to engage in the activity. Restricting other people from engaging in religious worship, is like restricting them from playing football or painting because you don't like football or painting, and then claiming you are not impinging on them as they can still read about.
Segregation won't happen - not like we're led by xtians any more - phew!
Segregation happened when christians didn't like women, black people, gay people et al. Thankfully those odious, hateful, intolerant, ******* aren't in charge anymore.
But there black and female Christians all over the world so what segregation are you talking about?
Only crazies on the internet want to ban schools for having collective acts of worship. Changing the current reality.
Only the crazies wanted it introduced to begin with - its ok, you will be sectioned soon!
The majority of the population identifies it self as Christian.
In the 2011 Census of England and Wales
What is your religion? Christian 59.3 per cent of the population
Depends how you read it. Are these truths, or conveniences of censuses?!
And parents can choose to have their children not take part in collective acts of worship.
It should be opt in, not opt out. But its ok, collective worship will be seen for the mental illness it is and no one will be expected to participate.
It is not ture only of the etymology it is true of the common usage and meaning of the word as reflected in the Oxford English Dicitionary definition. And in the common practice of the celebration of Christmas as a Christian festival celebrating the nativity of Christ.
Lol. How times change. It is a cultural event and will continue to be. Christianity will die - woohoo!
Removing compulsory worship is not the same thing as banning worship or relgious practice from school time. Schools would still be free to hold collective acts of worship and do religious preaching.
I think not!
Banning collective acts of worship would be placing a restriction on the religious freedom of other people. Religious freedom includes in public life. Society has the right to practice relgiion as part of its public life
The they can do it in their own time!
Other faiths in general do not have a problem. They all came out in support of the Cameron when he said the UK is a Christian country. It is millitant anti-religious atheists who take issue with other people practicing religion as part of societies public life.
Lets not confuse faiths and religions. The other cults are happy for the PM to promote religion, the majority of the population, aren't! Lets remember atheists aren't militant - we aren't the ones aiming to bomb others, or restrict others freedoms (you are tainting others with the virtues of the religiuous - not cool!)
If their parents do not want them to take part in collective acts of worship they can have their children not take part. And what about faith schools, some parents choose to send their children to faith schools.
If parents do not wish their children to take part in collective acts of worship they can have their children not take part. They are not being imposed upon. Preventing other people from having a collective act of worship would be imposing on other people
Umm no. Collective worship is the issue, not those who wish are not gullible to it!
Religion is like sport or art or creative writing, the person needs to do more than read about it they need to engage in the activity. Restricting other people from engaging in religious worship, is like restricting them from playing football or painting because you don't like football or painting, and then claiming you are not impinging on them as they can still read about.
No religion is like an illness - keep it to yourself.
Thanks for your opinion. I am not the weirdo advocating segregation! Lol
Its my prediction and its already happening. Its the only way people seem happy, to stick within there own groups. Its a nice idea to have one big happy clappy diverse utopia but reality and history predicts only civil unrest will ensue.
Its my prediction and its already happening. Its the only way people seem happy, to stick within there own groups. Its a nice idea to have one big happy clappy diverse utopia but reality and history predicts only civil unrest will ensue.
Thats what religion does to you! (Utopia won't happen with xtians in the world!)
Racism, bigotry, homophobia, the Spanish Inquisition, burning atheists, heretics and others at the stake, the subjugation of women.
Those were the days eh?.
Get a grip. We are talking about the everyday people in this country. Not leaders doing those Un-Christian things you mentioned 1000 years ago.
You do sound a little ungrateful. Even if you dont believe in God, you must understand this country is built and structured on Christianity. Even if you're not a Christian yourself, the parents / grand parents / great grandparents probably were. Its your heritage and history and what made this country so great. Its the traditions. The architecture, art, literature and much more.
During WW2 the VAST majority of people were Christian and they fought and defended the freedom of the land from a group of people who actually wanted Christianity wiped out. Over 1000 Churches were destroyed in the blitz. The arms of Christianity have been the sanctuary and and safety for many in the UK.
People think the grass is always greener on the other side as we see from certain people displaying hysterical delight Christianity is declining in the UK. What we have now is a generation of ungrateful whiny little weasels who sit on there PC to complain about Christianity just for the sake of it.
Christianity may be on the decline for now but so is the country in general, no coincidence there.
Christians have historically been amongst the greatest inventors and scientists.
Including the ones imprisoned by religious leaders for reporting their findings? I don't think it's like they had a choice, because everyone was Christian. Cheers for the gratuitous abuse of non-Christians though.
Lol. How times change. It is a cultural event and will continue to be. Christianity will die - woohoo!.
Chritianity has been round for a couple of thousand years, and there are a couple of billion Christians on the planet, of the worlds religions it has the largest number. It does not look like it is dying out.
School time is their time as much as anyone elses. If society wants it to be part of the school experience and the school wants to have collective acts of worship and the parents want their children to attend. Who are you to decide what they can do.
Lets not confuse faiths and religions. The other cults are happy for the PM to promote religion, the majority of the population, aren't!
Cameron described the UK as a Christian country, that is not promoting Christianity that is stating a fact. And the people who objected were anti-religious atheists, not the majority of the population. There was no mass protest.
Lets remember atheists aren't militant - we aren't the ones aiming to bomb others, or restrict others freedoms (you are tainting others with the virtues of the religiuous - not cool!)
If I had meant terrorists I would have used the word terrorists.
The CofE by the way is not in to bombing others, and athiests as well as those with faith have committed acts of terrorism in the name of faith or ideologies.
Umm no. Collective worship is the issue, not those who wish are not gullible to it!.
I do not comprehend you sentence. Beyond you see no problem with restricting the freedoms of people you disagree with. Like stopping other people participating in collective acts of worship at school.
No religion is like an illness - keep it to yourself.
Unfortunately for you society has learnt the lessons of history. And religious freedom is a basic human right protected by national and international law. That includes freedom to practice in public not just private.
Including the ones imprisoned by religious leaders for reporting their findings? I don't think it's like they had a choice, because everyone was Christian. Cheers for the gratuitous abuse of non-Christians though.
Kings and queens in power? That wasn't very Christian to lock people us up was it. Didn't stop us Christians being amongst the greatest inventors, a trend that still continues today.
The National Governors Association is calling for the legal requirment for a daily collective act of worship of a broadly Christian nature to be removed. So it becomes the school's choice if to have a collective act of worship and if trhey choose to do so how often and of what nature. As the current mandatory requirement is in practice left up to the schools interpretation and not enforced, and schools can opt out, they are calling for the law to reflect the current reality.
Hence why I said they were calling for compulsory worship to be abolished - which means the same thing.
Only crazies on the internet want to ban schools for having collective acts of worship. Changing the current reality.
At no point did I say that.
The majority of the population identifies it self as Christian.
In the 2011 Census of England and Wales
What is your religion? Christian 59.3 per cent of the population
Aside from other statistics that suggest that number is not actually indicative of practising Christians, I would like to add that 59.3% of the population being Christian supports my position that this is not a Christian country. That means there's around 25 million people who don't identify as Christian. That's a lot of people, most of which are natural-born Brits.
And parents can choose to have their children not take part in collective acts of worship.
Which isn't even a point of contention.
It is not ture only of the etymology it is true of the common usage and meaning of the word as reflected in the Oxford English Dicitionary definition. And in the common practice of the celebration of Christmas as a Christian festival celebrating the nativity of Christ.
Sorry, but you can't just repeat that ad-nausiam and expect it to make it more real. Christmas is clearly celebrated as a secular festival all over the world, with half its trappings never having originated from the Christian celebration. Christmas trees have nothing to do with the birth of Jesus, for instance.
The fact of the matter is that people celebrate the holiday of Christmas without celebrating (or even acknowledging) the birth of Jesus. That's just the way it is in reality. People do this. Its not a point of contention. So regardless of the root of the celebration, it is no longer only about that.
Removing compulsory worship is not the same thing as banning worship or relgious practice from school time. Schools would still be free to hold collective acts of worship and do religious preaching.
Banning collective acts of worship would be placing a restriction on the religious freedom of other people. Religious freedom includes in public life. Society has the right to practice relgiion as part of its public life
That was kinda the point. You are understanding that the line in bold in my post is a fallacy that I am then debunking. ie. the whole "they're trying to ban people from practising their faith in school," is a strawman. People who bring that up are creating a false target to attack.
Other faiths in general do not have a problem. They all came out in support of the Cameron when he said the UK is a Christian country. It is millitant anti-religious atheists who take issue with other people practicing religion as part of societies public life.
See, like this. This is a strawman. You can't actually argue the fact that a modern British school contains pupils from varying faiths, so instead bring up how some religious leaders have agreed with a statement by David Cameron.
Irrelevant to the point made. The school remains an institution made up of members of varying faiths and beliefs. That is not a point that can be argued, so instead it is sidestepped around.
If their parents do not want them to take part in collective acts of worship they can have their children not take part. And what about faith schools, some parents choose to send their children to faith schools.
But the point is that the school has no need to be engaging in daily acts of Christian worship in the first place. It is not a church. That is why this rule is seemingly being ignored by so many schools according to the article. It would seem that, broadly speaking, even the schools do not want to be doing this.
So the school is not 100% Christian and the school doesn't feel a need to engage in daily worship. It seems rather ludicrous that the law should be saying "well you've got to do it and you can opt out if you wish." Damned stupid, really. What happens when the teachers aren't Christian? Do they get to opt out of holding these services?
The whole idea of saying "you have to hold a daily worship session, but you can opt out," is just daft and outdated.
As for faith schools, that's a completely separate topic. But to make things easier, they could always only admit students of their particular faith and openly state in their literature that they will be having faith services as a part of their curriculum.
If parents do not wish their children to take part in collective acts of worship they can have their children not take part. They are not being imposed upon. Preventing other people from having a collective act of worship would be imposing on other people
Still with the strawman that this very point you are arguing was trying to debunk. This is NOT about preventing worship, it is about stopping it from being compulsory.
Religion is like sport or art or creative writing, the person needs to do more than read about it they need to engage in the activity. Restricting other people from engaging in religious worship, is like restricting them from playing football or painting because you don't like football or painting, and then claiming you are not impinging on them as they can still read about.
Sorry, calling bullshit on this one. I've studied loads of religions and not had to engage in active worship of that religion in order to become educated about it.
The fallacy I am addressing is when people try and defend worship as education about religion. IT IS NOT. They are intentionally trying to mix up Religious Education with kids sitting in a hall singing hymns and praying. Religious worship can, in no way, be compared to the arts or sport.
In fact, to make such a claim suggests you are, in fact, in favour of forced religious worship. You make statements that children shouldn't be "restricted" from playing football or painting just because they don't like it. You are now claiming that Christian worship actually constitutes education and therefore, just like other subjects, shouldn't be something you can opt out-of. You are actually advocating forced Christian worship on all students by making this claim.
I don't think you thought that one through before deciding to contest it.
Kings and queens in power? That wasn't very Christian to lock people us up was it. Didn't stop us Christians being amongst the greatest inventors, a trend that still continues today.
Not kings and queens, the Pope placing Galileo under house arrest for daring to suggest the earth revolves around the sun. You don't get much more Christian than him.
Besides, not everyone has to be Christian nowadays. There aren't any conquistadores going around performing mass conversions for example. Which is why the trend of inventors and scientists being Christians is a declining one. Today we're more likely to encounter them enabling people who reject the scientific principle as with the YEC scientist sites.
Comments
Segregation won't happen - not like we're led by xtians any more - phew!
Segregation happened when christians didn't like women, black people, gay people et al. Thankfully those odious, hateful, intolerant, ******* aren't in charge anymore.
I think the increasing tendency of our education system to separate children on the basis of their parents religion is storing up problems for future social cohesion.
As an opponent of what you call 'multiculturalism' I am hopeful you have some understanding of the problems a divisive education system can cause.
Come on, you can see how special christianity think it is. You aren't allowed to discuss it - although we all know its frigging useless and intolerant.
Black people and women are Christians too. Sometimes I think you make up little angry stories in your head.
Only crazies on the internet want to ban schools for having collective acts of worship. Changing the current reality.
The majority of the population identifies it self as Christian.
In the 2011 Census of England and Wales
What is your religion? Christian 59.3 per cent of the population
And parents can choose to have their children not take part in collective acts of worship.
It is not ture only of the etymology it is true of the common usage and meaning of the word as reflected in the Oxford English Dicitionary definition. And in the common practice of the celebration of Christmas as a Christian festival celebrating the nativity of Christ.
Removing compulsory worship is not the same thing as banning worship or relgious practice from school time. Schools would still be free to hold collective acts of worship and do religious preaching.
Banning collective acts of worship would be placing a restriction on the religious freedom of other people. Religious freedom includes in public life. Society has the right to practice relgiion as part of its public life
Other faiths in general do not have a problem. They all came out in support of the Cameron when he said the UK is a Christian country. It is millitant anti-religious atheists who take issue with other people practicing religion as part of societies public life. If their parents do not want them to take part in collective acts of worship they can have their children not take part. And what about faith schools, some parents choose to send their children to faith schools.
If parents do not wish their children to take part in collective acts of worship they can have their children not take part. They are not being imposed upon. Preventing other people from having a collective act of worship would be imposing on other people
Religion is like sport or art or creative writing, the person needs to do more than read about it they need to engage in the activity. Restricting other people from engaging in religious worship, is like restricting them from playing football or painting because you don't like football or painting, and then claiming you are not impinging on them as they can still read about.
Oh no, I am not xtian - they are the ones making up fallacious angry stories in their head, but thanks for replying! Lol
What?
You're really weird.
But there black and female Christians all over the world so what segregation are you talking about?
Depends how you read it. Are these truths, or conveniences of censuses?!
It should be opt in, not opt out. But its ok, collective worship will be seen for the mental illness it is and no one will be expected to participate.
Lol. How times change. It is a cultural event and will continue to be. Christianity will die - woohoo!
I think not!
The they can do it in their own time!
Lets not confuse faiths and religions. The other cults are happy for the PM to promote religion, the majority of the population, aren't! Lets remember atheists aren't militant - we aren't the ones aiming to bomb others, or restrict others freedoms (you are tainting others with the virtues of the religiuous - not cool!)
If their parents do not want them to take part in collective acts of worship they can have their children not take part. And what about faith schools, some parents choose to send their children to faith schools.
Umm no. Collective worship is the issue, not those who wish are not gullible to it!
No religion is like an illness - keep it to yourself.
I am talking about the segregation that happened before civil law kicked in. Its ok. Religious law has been outlawed - thank f**k!
Its my prediction and its already happening. Its the only way people seem happy, to stick within there own groups. Its a nice idea to have one big happy clappy diverse utopia but reality and history predicts only civil unrest will ensue.
Thats what religion does to you! (Utopia won't happen with xtians in the world!)
Well this country was doing great until the increase of Atheism and Islam. Its all downhill from here.
Hahaha. When did that happen then? When the first atheist PM came into power, or when your little religious grey cells woke up? Please tell.....
Probably from the Tony Blair generation onwards this country has been getting shitter every year.
Ah the good old days.
Racism, bigotry, homophobia, the Spanish Inquisition, burning atheists, heretics and others at the stake, the subjugation of women.
Those were the days eh?.
holding back scientific advances.
Get a grip. We are talking about the everyday people in this country. Not leaders doing those Un-Christian things you mentioned 1000 years ago.
You do sound a little ungrateful. Even if you dont believe in God, you must understand this country is built and structured on Christianity. Even if you're not a Christian yourself, the parents / grand parents / great grandparents probably were. Its your heritage and history and what made this country so great. Its the traditions. The architecture, art, literature and much more.
During WW2 the VAST majority of people were Christian and they fought and defended the freedom of the land from a group of people who actually wanted Christianity wiped out. Over 1000 Churches were destroyed in the blitz. The arms of Christianity have been the sanctuary and and safety for many in the UK.
People think the grass is always greener on the other side as we see from certain people displaying hysterical delight Christianity is declining in the UK. What we have now is a generation of ungrateful whiny little weasels who sit on there PC to complain about Christianity just for the sake of it.
Christianity may be on the decline for now but so is the country in general, no coincidence there.
Christians have historically been amongst the greatest inventors and scientists.
It is currently the social norm and tradition.
Chritianity has been round for a couple of thousand years, and there are a couple of billion Christians on the planet, of the worlds religions it has the largest number. It does not look like it is dying out.
I take it you would ban religious practice from schools.
School time is their time as much as anyone elses. If society wants it to be part of the school experience and the school wants to have collective acts of worship and the parents want their children to attend. Who are you to decide what they can do.
Cameron described the UK as a Christian country, that is not promoting Christianity that is stating a fact. And the people who objected were anti-religious atheists, not the majority of the population. There was no mass protest.
If I had meant terrorists I would have used the word terrorists.
The CofE by the way is not in to bombing others, and athiests as well as those with faith have committed acts of terrorism in the name of faith or ideologies.
I do not comprehend you sentence. Beyond you see no problem with restricting the freedoms of people you disagree with. Like stopping other people participating in collective acts of worship at school.
Unfortunately for you society has learnt the lessons of history. And religious freedom is a basic human right protected by national and international law. That includes freedom to practice in public not just private.
Kings and queens in power? That wasn't very Christian to lock people us up was it. Didn't stop us Christians being amongst the greatest inventors, a trend that still continues today.
Hence why I said they were calling for compulsory worship to be abolished - which means the same thing.
At no point did I say that.
Aside from other statistics that suggest that number is not actually indicative of practising Christians, I would like to add that 59.3% of the population being Christian supports my position that this is not a Christian country. That means there's around 25 million people who don't identify as Christian. That's a lot of people, most of which are natural-born Brits.
Which isn't even a point of contention.
Sorry, but you can't just repeat that ad-nausiam and expect it to make it more real. Christmas is clearly celebrated as a secular festival all over the world, with half its trappings never having originated from the Christian celebration. Christmas trees have nothing to do with the birth of Jesus, for instance.
The fact of the matter is that people celebrate the holiday of Christmas without celebrating (or even acknowledging) the birth of Jesus. That's just the way it is in reality. People do this. Its not a point of contention. So regardless of the root of the celebration, it is no longer only about that.
That was kinda the point. You are understanding that the line in bold in my post is a fallacy that I am then debunking. ie. the whole "they're trying to ban people from practising their faith in school," is a strawman. People who bring that up are creating a false target to attack.
See, like this. This is a strawman. You can't actually argue the fact that a modern British school contains pupils from varying faiths, so instead bring up how some religious leaders have agreed with a statement by David Cameron.
Irrelevant to the point made. The school remains an institution made up of members of varying faiths and beliefs. That is not a point that can be argued, so instead it is sidestepped around.
But the point is that the school has no need to be engaging in daily acts of Christian worship in the first place. It is not a church. That is why this rule is seemingly being ignored by so many schools according to the article. It would seem that, broadly speaking, even the schools do not want to be doing this.
So the school is not 100% Christian and the school doesn't feel a need to engage in daily worship. It seems rather ludicrous that the law should be saying "well you've got to do it and you can opt out if you wish." Damned stupid, really. What happens when the teachers aren't Christian? Do they get to opt out of holding these services?
The whole idea of saying "you have to hold a daily worship session, but you can opt out," is just daft and outdated.
As for faith schools, that's a completely separate topic. But to make things easier, they could always only admit students of their particular faith and openly state in their literature that they will be having faith services as a part of their curriculum.
Still with the strawman that this very point you are arguing was trying to debunk. This is NOT about preventing worship, it is about stopping it from being compulsory.
Sorry, calling bullshit on this one. I've studied loads of religions and not had to engage in active worship of that religion in order to become educated about it.
The fallacy I am addressing is when people try and defend worship as education about religion. IT IS NOT. They are intentionally trying to mix up Religious Education with kids sitting in a hall singing hymns and praying. Religious worship can, in no way, be compared to the arts or sport.
In fact, to make such a claim suggests you are, in fact, in favour of forced religious worship. You make statements that children shouldn't be "restricted" from playing football or painting just because they don't like it. You are now claiming that Christian worship actually constitutes education and therefore, just like other subjects, shouldn't be something you can opt out-of. You are actually advocating forced Christian worship on all students by making this claim.
I don't think you thought that one through before deciding to contest it.
Besides, not everyone has to be Christian nowadays. There aren't any conquistadores going around performing mass conversions for example. Which is why the trend of inventors and scientists being Christians is a declining one. Today we're more likely to encounter them enabling people who reject the scientific principle as with the YEC scientist sites.