I get the feeling that the people who want to get rid of faith schools are also the same people who got rid of grammars which had a disastrous effect on school standards and has seen Britain drop lower and lower in the world education league tables.
I get the feeling that the people who want to get rid of faith schools are also the same people who got rid of grammars which had a disastrous effect on school standards and has seen Britain drop lower and lower in the world education league tables.
So may I ask what do you think about those people who simply want state faith schools to abide by the same rules that apply to non-faith schools?
It would be nice if equality meant equally good schools for everyone but it actually means equally poor schools for everyone except a very small elite, that's how socialism/ Marxism works, ask most of Eastern Europe.
They should ban the Bible and only let the Childrens Bible be printed. Don't recall reading anything about killing gays or cracking babies heads open in the one I had as a kid.
It would be nice if equality meant equally good schools for everyone but it actually means equally poor schools for everyone except a very small elite, that's how socialism/ Marxism works, ask most of Eastern Europe.
So you recognise that you do not value equality in the context of allocating children school places. Furthermore in the context of this thread it would seem you support discrimination based on the particular faith of the parents?
So if the faith school was markedly more effective should not gaining those benefits be made available without discriminating against any particular groups?
You are arguing that faith schools are better; fine but why should they alone be allowed to exercise discriminatory selection policies?
They take, as a priority, 'looked after' children that other school avoid if possible. Those girls are first in line to get a place. You would take that away from them when they have probably already had rotten lives? They don't have to take them. Their first admission criteria could be children from the area.
What should happen is instead of people saying that faith schools do well because of the admission criteria they should look and see why they actually do well and apply that to all schools. Some children are getting a terrible education. That is the crime. Not the existence of faith schools.
They take, as a priority, 'looked after' children that other school avoid if possible. Those girls are first in line to get a place. You would take that away from them when they have probably already had rotten lives? They don't have to take them. Their first admission criteria could be children from the area.
What should happen is instead of people saying that faith schools do well because of the admission criteria they should look and see why they actually do well and apply that to all schools. Some children are getting a terrible education. That is the crime. Not the existence of faith schools.
That is fine. So you agree faith schools should not discriminate on the basis of religion I presume?
Edit BTW you originall said
"My daughter goes to a faith school which selects based first on whether the child is in foster care a 'looked after child' and is Catholic"
Interesting that have now ommited to mention the 'Catholic' requirement for priority. Are not all children in care in equal need?
Absolutely. The point is however that they all State faith schools are allowed to discriminate on the grounds of religion whether they are in a position to exercise that discrimination or not.
I have yet to see a moral or religious defence of that privilege.
So you recognise that you do not value equality in the context of allocating children school places. Furthermore in the context of this thread it would seem you support discrimination based on the particular faith of the parents?
Please correct me if I wrong; no problem.
It should be up to schools which pupils they take, the less interference from government, the better.
However, thats the easy bit. Question is, what do you do about it?
How would the state disentangle the the historic property/money issues involved without it looking like a Marxist-style "grab?" My generation will remember endless parish fundraising for their parish school, and many of the buildings and the land belong to organisations within the church. That would keep a large team of lawyers in pink champagne for generations.
And how to ensure that the newly nationalised schools keep their good results/ethos etc.
I think faith school's should select on the basis of the faith they follow. I presume you disagree. Fair enough.
At last. Of course I disagree that State funded services of any kind should discriminate against those of particular religions and of none. In any other context I suspect you would as well. i.e selective Hospitals; selective Policing. Selective rubbish collection? It is all the same State services should be provided without reference to belief.
Faith Schools and the religions that defend them place themselves in an increasingly indefensible position as the only state funded institutions that continue to advocate discrimination.
I also profoundly disagree with an educational system that tends to encourage the separate education of those from different faiths.
If anyone can offer an argument based on religious morality in defense of these privileges I look forward to hearing it. I note you only offered an opinion not an ethical defense of that position. Still credit to you for at least openly declaring your view; thank you.
However, thats the easy bit. Question is, what do you do about it?
How would the state disentangle the the historic property/money issues involved without it looking like a Marxist-style "grab?" My generation will remember endless parish fundraising for their parish school, and many of the buildings and the land belong to organisations within the church. That would keep a large team of lawyers in pink champagne for generations.
And how to ensure that the newly nationalised schools keep their good results/ethos etc.
As i have said many times it is not complicated. Simply and justly require that all schools abide by the same set of rules.
They should ban the Bible and only let the Childrens Bible be printed. Don't recall reading anything about killing gays or cracking babies heads open in the one I had as a kid.
No, they should scrap the children's Bibles and go for the real deal, not lie about what the contents of the Bible are really like.
Like with the whole Noah deal where God supposedly is the one who saves people, he's actually the one slaughtering nearly every single living organism on the planet. There's no greater period of evil in history, factual or fictional. Other than Hell, though that's usually focused on as future.
Personally I never really read the Bible as a Christian, just some random verses before my confirmation (and at that point I was considering myself an agnostic). So I don't really have experience as a theist reading the Bible, but looking at it now I have to say it's difficult to see how anyone who seriously, critically reads the Bible, can get any sort of kind, loving or just deity out of it.
As i have said many times it is not complicated. Simply and justly require that all schools abide by the same set of rules.
Fair enough, but I still hear the distant sound of lawyers smacking their lips.
What about single sex schools? Or special needs? Shouild schools be able to select on those basis?
I spent most of my childhood in Catholic schools and I can assure you I was not taught about hell as an abstract concept. The people who threaten hell fire seem to mean it literally.
do you believe in the idea of hell, and the reasons a Catholic might suggest you will end up there? if not, then their particular brand of religious allegory has no meaning to you. would you be offended if i claim, as a devout Jedi, that i believe your actions will lead you to the dark side, and you will spend the next 1000 years in the belly of a sarlacc? no, you think it is ridiculous, and rightly so. sarlaccs don't exist, neither does the dark side.
I do not want to abolish faith schools. I simply ask that they are subject to the same laws concerning discrimination and equality that all other schools have to conform to. i.e. Have to take all comers.
If faith schools are inherently more effective then they will clearly still excel. There should therefore be no problem in removing the special privleges to discriminate that State faith schools currently enjoy.
that would then cause chaos. i don't particularly have a problem with faith based schools but if you do what you advocate, you have maybe half the kids there who aren't going to partake in the faith based stuff, an inherent part of the school identity, and thus taking up spaces for kids who would take part, wouldn't you?
do you believe in the idea of hell, and the reasons a Catholic might suggest you will end up there? if not, then their particular brand of religious allegory has no meaning to you. would you be offended if i claim, as a devout Jedi, that i believe your actions will lead you to the dark side, and you will spend the next 1000 years in the belly of a sarlacc? no, you think it is ridiculous, and rightly so. sarlaccs don't exist, neither does the dark side.
The really disgusting thing is that they raise children to believe in it. Although I do find it very reasonable to be offended by someone suggesting that someone else deserves eternal torture for being who they are, regardless of the superstitions involved.
The really disgusting thing is that they raise children to believe in it. Although I do find it very reasonable to be offended by someone suggesting that someone else deserves eternal torture for being who they are, regardless of the superstitions involved.
but going back to my (admittedly irritating, apologies) Jedi analogy, if i was to wish pain and suffering on somebody because I believed their behaviour was too sith-like, then those reasons are equally as irrelevant to anybody who happens to think my whole belief system is a crock.
you shouldn't care what my belief system says about you or what is going to happen to you because the whole thing (to you) is an utter nonsense anyway.
So you recognise that you do not value equality in the context of allocating children school places. Furthermore in the context of this thread it would seem you support discrimination based on the particular faith of the parents?
Please correct me if I wrong; no problem.
Do you think there will ever be a day where there aren't demands imposed against religious people? I mean like special meat, or religious schools, assemblies or holidays.
Don't you think there's a risk of homogenisation such that if we theorised that religious people gave into all these demands, they would be identical to the people demanding the changes?
Comments
So may I ask what do you think about those people who simply want state faith schools to abide by the same rules that apply to non-faith schools?
So you recognise that you do not value equality in the context of allocating children school places. Furthermore in the context of this thread it would seem you support discrimination based on the particular faith of the parents?
Please correct me if I wrong; no problem.
They take, as a priority, 'looked after' children that other school avoid if possible. Those girls are first in line to get a place. You would take that away from them when they have probably already had rotten lives? They don't have to take them. Their first admission criteria could be children from the area.
What should happen is instead of people saying that faith schools do well because of the admission criteria they should look and see why they actually do well and apply that to all schools. Some children are getting a terrible education. That is the crime. Not the existence of faith schools.
That is fine. So you agree faith schools should not discriminate on the basis of religion I presume?
Edit BTW you originall said
"My daughter goes to a faith school which selects based first on whether the child is in foster care a 'looked after child' and is Catholic"
Interesting that have now ommited to mention the 'Catholic' requirement for priority. Are not all children in care in equal need?
There is none.
I think faith school's should select on the basis of the faith they follow. I presume you disagree. Fair enough.
Thank you alan.
It should be up to schools which pupils they take, the less interference from government, the better.
However, thats the easy bit. Question is, what do you do about it?
How would the state disentangle the the historic property/money issues involved without it looking like a Marxist-style "grab?" My generation will remember endless parish fundraising for their parish school, and many of the buildings and the land belong to organisations within the church. That would keep a large team of lawyers in pink champagne for generations.
And how to ensure that the newly nationalised schools keep their good results/ethos etc.
At last. Of course I disagree that State funded services of any kind should discriminate against those of particular religions and of none. In any other context I suspect you would as well. i.e selective Hospitals; selective Policing. Selective rubbish collection? It is all the same State services should be provided without reference to belief.
Faith Schools and the religions that defend them place themselves in an increasingly indefensible position as the only state funded institutions that continue to advocate discrimination.
I also profoundly disagree with an educational system that tends to encourage the separate education of those from different faiths.
If anyone can offer an argument based on religious morality in defense of these privileges I look forward to hearing it. I note you only offered an opinion not an ethical defense of that position. Still credit to you for at least openly declaring your view; thank you.
As i have said many times it is not complicated. Simply and justly require that all schools abide by the same set of rules.
No, they should scrap the children's Bibles and go for the real deal, not lie about what the contents of the Bible are really like.
Like with the whole Noah deal where God supposedly is the one who saves people, he's actually the one slaughtering nearly every single living organism on the planet. There's no greater period of evil in history, factual or fictional. Other than Hell, though that's usually focused on as future.
Personally I never really read the Bible as a Christian, just some random verses before my confirmation (and at that point I was considering myself an agnostic). So I don't really have experience as a theist reading the Bible, but looking at it now I have to say it's difficult to see how anyone who seriously, critically reads the Bible, can get any sort of kind, loving or just deity out of it.
Fair enough, but I still hear the distant sound of lawyers smacking their lips.
What about single sex schools? Or special needs? Shouild schools be able to select on those basis?
Of course what you should do is recycle it. But as long as it's not an act of censorship, as long as it's your property, do whatever you like with it.
I like to keep mine around to be able to double check what I can much more quickly search for and locate in the online Bibles.
Destroying books you disagree with. isn't that just a little bit, well, Islamic?
do you believe in the idea of hell, and the reasons a Catholic might suggest you will end up there? if not, then their particular brand of religious allegory has no meaning to you. would you be offended if i claim, as a devout Jedi, that i believe your actions will lead you to the dark side, and you will spend the next 1000 years in the belly of a sarlacc? no, you think it is ridiculous, and rightly so. sarlaccs don't exist, neither does the dark side.
One single book is nothing more than paper and ink, and whatever other materials are in there.
And recycling isn't about destroying, but putting the materials to further use.
that would then cause chaos. i don't particularly have a problem with faith based schools but if you do what you advocate, you have maybe half the kids there who aren't going to partake in the faith based stuff, an inherent part of the school identity, and thus taking up spaces for kids who would take part, wouldn't you?
The really disgusting thing is that they raise children to believe in it. Although I do find it very reasonable to be offended by someone suggesting that someone else deserves eternal torture for being who they are, regardless of the superstitions involved.
but going back to my (admittedly irritating, apologies) Jedi analogy, if i was to wish pain and suffering on somebody because I believed their behaviour was too sith-like, then those reasons are equally as irrelevant to anybody who happens to think my whole belief system is a crock.
you shouldn't care what my belief system says about you or what is going to happen to you because the whole thing (to you) is an utter nonsense anyway.
Do you think there will ever be a day where there aren't demands imposed against religious people? I mean like special meat, or religious schools, assemblies or holidays.
Don't you think there's a risk of homogenisation such that if we theorised that religious people gave into all these demands, they would be identical to the people demanding the changes?