[Judge Mental]

Originally Posted by TimCypher

Well, if your view is that these schools offer nothing special, then why complain about access to them?

I wouldn't complain if a lousy restaurant was full or had a tough door policy so I couldn't get in. If it served amazing food, on the other hand...

Regards,

Cypher

It seems to me quite unjust to limit the availability of school places on the basis of the religious beliefs of a child's parents, particularly when those school places are funded by all of us. I think it's basically an issue of fairness. I also don't think it's beneficial to us as a society or children individually to segregate them according to religion. We don't allow that in respect of race, why would we allow it in respect of religion?

[TimCypher]

Originally Posted by Judge Mental

It seems to me quite unjust to limit the availability of school places on the basis of the religious beliefs of a child's parents, particularly when those school places are funded by all of us.

Then don't limit it - let the church have more involvement with the running of schools so that the demand for these places can be met.

Originally Posted by Judge Mental

I think it's basically an issue of fairness. I also don't think it's beneficial to us as a society or children individually to segregate them according to religion. We don't allow that in respect of race, why would we allow it in respect of religion?

Bird of a feather will always want to flock together - that's totally human and there's nothing wrong with it. Besides, I don't think it's anything to do with religion, more that parents do actually admire the ethos of faith schools, and see it as delivering an academic benefit for their children.

So, if that's what parents want, let 'em have it. They, and their children, are the customers of state education - if the state won't provide what they want, they'll go elsewhere, and, of course, they are now empowered to set up their own schools.

Regards,

Cypher

[Charlottesweb]

Originally Posted by TimCypher

Then don't limit it - let the church have more involvement with the running of schools so that the demand for these places can be met.

Or, they could open their own schools at their own expense and not use tax payers money to create recruitment centers for , in the case of CofE, an organisation who's weekly attendance stands at around 6% of the populace.

[TimCypher]

Originally Posted by Charlottesweb

Or, they could open their own schools at their own expense and not use tax payers money to create recruitment centers for , in the case of CofE, an organisation who's weekly attendance stands at around 6% of the populace.

The State funds education in this country, and, if faith and church-run schools are what tax-paying parents clamour for, then that's where the money should be directed.

Regards,

Cypher

[GreatGodPan]

Originally Posted by TimCypher

Then don't limit it - let the church have more involvement with the running of schools so that the demand for these places can be met.



Bird of a feather will always want to flock together - that's totally human and there's nothing wrong with it. Besides, I don't think it's anything to do with religion, more that parents do actually admire the ethos of faith schools, and see it as delivering an academic benefit for their children.

So, if that's what parents want, let 'em have it. They, and their children, are the customers of state education - if the state won't provide what they want, they'll go elsewhere, and, of course, they are now empowered to set up their own schools.

Regards,

Cypher

No, the kids alone are the customers.

If you had kids you would be happy for them to be taught at, say, a school run by Jehovah's Witnesses or other creationists just because their exam grades are better than the comp down the road?

Presumably the faith wouldn't concern you as long as the grades were delivered, so an Islamic or Jewish school would do just as well?

[Majlis]

Originally Posted by TimCypher

The State funds education in this country, and, if faith and church-run schools are what tax-paying parents clamour for, then that's where the money should be directed.

What the customer wants when it comes to State Education is never a high priority - the idea is that you take what the State deigns to provide and lump it.

[TimCypher]

Originally Posted by GreatGodPan

No, the kids alone are the customers.

If you had kids you would be happy for them to be taught at, say, a school run by Jehovah's Witnesses or other creationists just because their exam grades are better than the comp down the road?

Presumably the faith wouldn't concern you as long as the grades were delivered, so an Islamic or Jewish school would do just as well?

Would that I had children, I would pay for their private education.

Regards,

Cypher

[wappaho]

Originally Posted by Charlottesweb

Or, they could open their own schools at their own expense and not use tax payers money to create recruitment centers for , in the case of CofE, an organisation who's weekly attendance stands at around 6% of the populace.

You are judging CofE based on the demands of other religions. A huge percentage of people want to put themselves as CofE on the Census but the state is trying to stop that practice. The strength of CofE is its universality and informality. Now we have an influx of authoritarian religions we are being told CofE doesn't exist, it does but it does not have an authoritarian approach to worship, it's there for people when they need formal prayer and worship.

[TimCypher]

Originally Posted by Majlis

What the customer wants when it comes to State Education is never a high priority - the idea is that you take what the State deigns to provide and lump it.

And that will never end well...

You cannot forcibly extract taxation from folk under the guise of 'this will pay for your child's education', then be contemptuous towards same folk when they wish to select the education they feel is best for their own offspring.

*That* is what is not fair, and parents will do everything in their power to subvert and get around such a system when their child's future is at stake.

Very powerful, very natural emotions and bonds are at play here - these aren't merely ciphers on an MS Excel allocations spreadsheet, and it would be wise not to treat them as such,.

Regards,

Cypher

[Charlottesweb]

Originally Posted by wappaho

You are judging CofE based on the demands of other religions. A huge percentage of people want to put themselves as CofE on the Census but the state is trying to stop that practice. The strength of CofE is its universality and informality. Now we have an influx of authoritarian religions we are being told CofE doesn't exist, it does but it does not have an authoritarian approach to worship, it's there for people when they need formal prayer and worship.

I'm not.

I'm judging the CofE on the people that actually go to the church and participate.

And its 6% of the population.

Thats the CofE's own attendance numbers.

[Charlottesweb]

Originally Posted by TimCypher

The State funds education in this country, and, if faith and church-run schools are what tax-paying parents clamour for, then that's where the money should be directed.

Regards,

Cypher

Nope.

Sorry, its a profit making business, one of the countries largest landowners, who make money from people becoming members of the club.

Like any other business, if they want more customers, they can recruit them themselves.

It is not the tax payers job to fund a recruitment agency for ANY religion.

[TimCypher]

Originally Posted by Charlottesweb

Nope.

Sorry, its a profit making business, one of the countries largest landowners, who make money from people becoming members of the club.

Like any other business, if they want more customers, they can recruit them themselves.

It is not the tax payers job to fund a recruitment agency for ANY religion.

What you call them is irrelevant - I back their involvement in schooling because they're providing an educational service that parents clearly want and value.

If parents decide, tomorrow, that church schools are not what they want, then such schools lose my support.

Regards,

Cypher

[Judge Mental]

Originally Posted by TimCypher

What you call them is irrelevant - I back their involvement in schooling because they're providing an educational service that parents clearly want and value.

If parents decide, tomorrow, that church schools are not what they want, then such schools lose my support.

Regards,

Cypher

On this basis then you would presumably back parents who want a locally accountable school supported by the local authority? Pity the government is only prepared to back parental choice when it's a choice they support.

[TimCypher]

Originally Posted by Judge Mental

On this basis then you would presumably back parents who want a locally accountable school supported by the local authority? Pity the government is only prepared to back parental choice when it's a choice they support.

That's correct, yes.

Regards,

Cypher

[Judge Mental]

Originally Posted by TimCypher

That's correct, yes.

Regards,

Cypher

Whilst I don't agree with faith schools in principle I would have far less issue with a policy which allows the local community ie parents and prospective parents to have their say about the sort of school they want than the current situation where any group can propose a school and regardless of the level of local opposition to it or support for another type of school the DfE can approve it. If a school is going to serve a particular geographical area I think it's important to ensure that those with no religious beliefs have the choice of a non religious school for their child.

One of my concerns about the growing number of faith schools is that whilst it may increase choice for those of that faith it may serve to reduce choice for those of other or no faiths.

[wappaho]

Originally Posted by Charlottesweb

I'm not.

I'm judging the CofE on the people that actually go to the church and participate.

And its 6% of the population.

Thats the CofE's own attendance numbers.

You're measuring demand for a CofE institutional framework by attendance at ritual worship. Not going to church should not be taken to mean not wanting CofE schools. The CofE itself does not make that demand. CofE expressly provides a backdrop, a support and guidance system, for anyone.

[Sandytop]

If a religious school means anything it should teach religion. Not to teach it is an abandonment of their own moral code. Some religions take the pragmatic view that they are teaching children who are too young to decide, so they will provide them with information and a framework but not get heavy about declarations of belief and religious practice. Others take a harder line.

Teaching of science is not a problem for those religions that don't see a conflict, or the ones that let people decide for themselves, but is a real issue for the hardliners. Tolerance of other faiths is also a real problem, doubly so when a religion is largely practiced by one ethnic group because it's a small leap from religious intolerance to racial hatred.

The other big problem is the pretty much every religion has multiple groups, call them sects or doctrines. No Christian school is going to represent CoE, Catholics, Greek Orthodox, Methodists and the Wee Frees. No Muslim school is going to have a management committee and teachers from Sunni, Shia and Awalite branches. Far from representing an entire ethnic group in an area, a religious school can deepen community divisions.

Unfortunately the alternative is total State control of children's minds, and that's Stalinist. Think about some of the loopier MPs, PMs and council leaders over the past 40 years and ask yourself if you would really want to hand them total control over education?

[GreatGodPan]

Originally Posted by Sandytop

If a religious school means anything it should teach religion. Not to teach it is an abandonment of their own moral code. Some religions take the pragmatic view that they are teaching children who are too young to decide, so they will provide them with information and a framework but not get heavy about declarations of belief and religious practice. Others take a harder line.

Teaching of science is not a problem for those religions that don't see a conflict, or the ones that let people decide for themselves, but is a real issue for the hardliners. Tolerance of other faiths is also a real problem, doubly so when a religion is largely practiced by one ethnic group because it's a small leap from religious intolerance to racial hatred.

The other big problem is the pretty much every religion has multiple groups, call them sects or doctrines. No Christian school is going to represent CoE, Catholics, Greek Orthodox, Methodists and the Wee Frees. No Muslim school is going to have a management committee and teachers from Sunni, Shia and Awalite branches. Far from representing an entire ethnic group in an area, a religious school can deepen community divisions.

Unfortunately the alternative is total State control of children's minds, and that's Stalinist. Think about some of the loopier MPs, PMs and council leaders over the past 40 years and ask yourself if you would really want to hand them total control over education?

How can not teaching a religious dogma in the form of worship result in controlling children's minds? Surely the reverse is true.

Educationalists and the government would not suddenly stop the worship of Christ and substitute it with the worship of David Cameron .

[MartinP]

If I may jump in and point out how you have missed the point (perhaps deliberately)

Originally Posted by GreatGodPan

How can not teaching a religious dogma in the form of worship result in controlling children's minds? Surely the reverse is true.

Because it may be replaced by other non-religious dogma if it's too closely sanctioned by the State.

Do you accept that the State can have too much control over the education of children or not?

Originally Posted by GreatGodPan

Educationalists and the government would not suddenly stop the worship of Christ and substitute it with the worship of David Cameron .

It's not going to be a centre-right government who would put this in place.... it's much more likely to be your socialist dream government putting in place citizenship training to re-program the population into woriship of the State and the greater good.

[GreatGodPan]

Originally Posted by MartinP

If I may jump in and point out how you have missed the point (perhaps deliberately)



Because it may be replaced by other non-religious dogma if it's too closely sanctioned by the State.

Do you accept that the State can have too much control over the education of children or not?


It's not going to be a centre-right government who would put this in place.... it's much more likely to be your socialist dream government putting in place citizenship training to re-program the population into woriship of the State and the greater good.

1. I don't know what you mean by "sanctioned". As I have said before, no dogma should be taught in schools as worship. Other countries have a secular education system and don't substitute one form of conditioning with another.

Do you believe French schoolchildren are brainwashed by the state?

2.No, my main fears today are religions and private firms/individuals having too much influence over education. I believe in the elected representatives in parliament ultimately having the final say with the direction national education should take, with the fine detail being worked out by experts.

[MartinP]

Originally Posted by GreatGodPan

1. I don't know what you mean by "sanctioned". As I have said before, no dogma should be taught in schools as worship. Other countries have a secular education system and don't substitute one form of conditioning with another.

Do you believe French schoolchildren are brainwashed by the state?

You know exactly what I mean. A prime example is China - a country that went down the route of banning religion in the way you’d like to and while Mao was to the right of you on the political spectrum it gives an indication of what happens when the State does get too involved in conditioning the population.

Originally Posted by GreatGodPan

2.No, my main fears today are religions and private firms/individuals having too much influence over education. I believe in the elected representatives in parliament ultimately having the final say with the direction national education should take, with the fine detail being worked out by experts.

Religions have had influence over education for a couple of hundred years in the UK. Why so fearful? What has happened that has been so awful?

Who are these "experts"?

These ones?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clevela..._abuse_scandal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_R..._abuse_scandal

The ones who run State care homes for children?

[GreatGodPan]

Originally Posted by MartinP

You know exactly what I mean. A prime example is China - a country that went down the route of banning religion in the way you’d like to and while Mao was to the right of you on the political spectrum it gives an indication of what happens when the State does get too involved in conditioning the population.



Religions have had influence over education for a couple of hundred years in the UK. Why so fearful? What has happened that has been so awful?

Who are these "experts"?

These ones?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clevela..._abuse_scandal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_R..._abuse_scandal

The ones who run State care homes for children?

What a ridiculous post.

Come back when you want to discuss secular education in a modern society in a mature fashion, rather than indulging in off-the -wall hyperbole about China and......child care homes?

I mean, what have child care homes got do with it?

[MartinP]

As usual you cannot argue your point through a logical discussion around previous examples of how this has been implemented and the possible outcomes.

You think the State knows best, you think "experts" know best and yet as soon as you are challenged you run away with your tail between your legs.

Very poor effort, GGP. I had expected better.

[GreatGodPan]

Originally Posted by MartinP

As usual you cannot argue your point through a logical discussion around previous examples of how this has been implemented and the possible outcomes.

You think the State knows best, you think "experts" know best and yet as soon as you are challenged you run away with your tail between your legs.

Very poor effort, GGP. I had expected better.

That was no "challenge" - it was ludicrous exaggeration and deflection.

There is absolutely no difference between your position and that taken by the North Korean authorities in conditioning young children into worshipping a leader. Both want to "get 'em young and get 'em for life" in a belief system.

I believe in the right of individuals to choose if they want to participate in worship or not - whether the object of that worship be Christ, Jehovah/Allah/God the father, Vishnu, Kim Jong-un, satan etc etc - you are defending the continuation of the practice of that conditioning .

Do you really imagine if schools in the UK today dropped religious worship (of whatever kind) from the curriculum our teachers would turn into inept monsters?

That earlier post of yours was one of the most risible attempts at debate on this subject on this thread - and that is saying something.

[MartinP]

Originally Posted by GreatGodPan

That was no "challenge" - it was ludicrous exaggeration and deflection.

You should reflect on some of your own posts before throwing around such words...

Originally Posted by GreatGodPan

There is absolutely no difference between your position and that taken by the North Korean authorities in conditioning young children into worshipping a leader. Both want to "get 'em young and get 'em for life" in a belief system.

There is a world of difference between parents bringing up their children in the best way they see fit, by teaching them right from wrong and instilling a moral code that includes references to religion and that of a State brainwashing a population for its own selfish means. It's astounding that you can't see the difference, yet reassuring you've not had the responsibility of bringing up a child.

Originally Posted by GreatGodPan

I believe in the right of individuals to choose if they want to participate in worship or not - whether the object of that worship be Christ, Jehovah/Allah/God the father, Vishnu, Kim Jong-un, satan etc etc - you are defending the continuation of the practice of that conditioning .

So you'd ban political ads and broadcasts from being shown to children? Ban them from attending political events and speeches?

Originally Posted by GreatGodPan

Do you really imagine if schools in the UK today dropped religious worship (of whatever kind) from the curriculum our teachers would turn into inept monsters?

Huh?

Originally Posted by GreatGodPan

That earlier post of yours was one of the most risible attempts at debate on this subject on this thread - and that is saying something.

It’s obviously left you utterly flummoxed, so I can understand the frustration