We should be moving towards a secular country.

Since the topic's about moving to a secular society and the subject's turned to money, we could also look at the Places of Worship Fund, whereby they've received £346 million since 2010 in "grants towards the VAT incurred on eligible costs, such as works to the roofs, masonry and monuments"

I'd ask why, considering the wealth a lot of these organisations already hold, but suspect the answer will boil down to lobbying ability

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/nearly-5000-churches-across-the-united-kingdom-benefit-from-42-million-conservation-fund#:~:text=Since%202010%2C%20the%20Places%20of,monuments%20integral%20to%20the%20buildings.

Compulsory secular paradise

🫡

I was born in a country like this.

It was called USSR.

Compulsory secular paradise for all.

Didn’t stop our government from supporting Chomeini in Iran while drowning and beating priests to death at home.

Nobody's advocating some sort of "coup"

I'm not sure about that- OP's views seem fairly extreme! I'd be happy with a system more like in the US and Australia where religious schools are private, but much more affordable than secular private schools, say £5000 per year. I'd be very happy to pay for my child to have a private religious education.

Never going to happen

1. Removal of any religious leaders from the House of Lords. Believing in an invisible man is no qualification for having influence on the laws of our country. You would have to change how the House of Lords works completely (not necessarily a bad thing) but I believe the people looking into our laws should represent a cross section of us, so as the majority of people do have a faith, you need to include some people of religion
2. Removal of charity status for all religions. Other entertainment venues don't get charity status, why should they? If they have a good business model for their club then the membership should be enough. Calling places of worship entertainment venues is extremely rude. Most places of worship do a lot of charitable works, they are not cinemas and nightclubs!
3. Removal of Faith schools. We don't let children drink or smoke or drive cars until they are mature enough to make that choice for themselves so why is it ok to allow them to be indoctrinated into these cults from such a young age? Where on earth do you plan to find the money to buy all of the church owned school buildings?! Only a tiny part of faith schools is focussed specifically on religion, they still have to follow the general curriculum. If you want children to make informed decisions about their religion, they need to know, experience and understand it
4. Ban children from organised worship - See point 3. What are the majority of people who attend a place of worship supposed to do with their children during that time?! I do see the value of 'takes a village to raise a child' and my children loved having a 'second family' to be a part of. Taking part in services was a huge confidence booster too. Also see point above about informed decisions
5. Ban religious symbols and dress from our streets. We don't allow nudists to wander around our city centres expressing their beliefs because it can cause offence so why do religions get to do it? What people do in their own home is up to them but publicly displaying your gang colours is divisive to a wider society. That's like taking away freedom of speech, ridiculously controlling. Someone wearing a cross, hijab, turban etc. should not cause anyone offence

In general YABU
You have chosen only to look at the negative connotations and none of the positive (although maybe you were playing devils advocate on purpose!)

'I can't think of any religion that believes in an invisible man. You don't sound very well educated on the subject.'

.....Seriously?

I mean, they're the Church's schools. The Cof E owns the land, in the case of aided schools. Are you envisaging seizing them in the style of some kind of communist coup? You could argue that the government needs to stop funding them, which is a valid argument, but they'll need to buy their own land and build new schools

I just knew someone would be along with this one, Whatifthehokeycokey, and suggested an answer a couple of posts ago

Nobody's advocating some sort of "coup" - a settlement would be more appropriate - but as explained it may well be a case of be careful what you wish for

Would you protect children from late market capitalism as well? For example, ban cartoon characters on T-shirts? So they don't have to go around and see peppa pig or spiderman for example, and then badger their parents to spend money on the products? What about football shirts? Would you ban people from wearing football shirts since they're divisive and spread hatred between different teams? Children are very susceptible to that kind of influence.

Believing in an invisible man is no qualification for having influence on the laws of our country.

I can't think of any religion that believes in an invisible man. You don't sound very well educated on the subject.

Removal of Faith schools.

I mean, they're the Church's schools. The Cof E owns the land, in the case of aided schools. Are you envisaging seizing them in the style of some kind of communist coup? You could argue that the government needs to stop funding them, which is a valid argument, but they'll need to buy their own land and build new schools.

Ban religious symbols and dress from our streets. We don't allow nudists to wander around our city centres expressing their beliefs because it can cause offence so why do religions get to do it?

This is just borderline fascist! I mean, I don't wear any kind of religious symbols so have no skin in the game here, but you think women who would rather go out with a head covering should be forced not to so that you are offended? And that them choosing to wear a headscarf or whatever equates to a grown man walking around with his penis out? You're insane.

We must be inclusive. Mulicultural, multireligious. I am Christian and decent Jews , Muslims, Siehks etc all get along. It's often such people who claim that Star Wars or Wicca is a religion who are misguided and also Aetheists too. An Agnostic is open to "Yes or no": an Aetheist has a closed mind. Those of established old religions can put forward an intellingent presentation of their beliefs calmly. Some peple can't and they easily become angry. Marxist are the worst. Stalin,Pol Pot, Mao in China - literally tens of millions of people were murdered and made to suffer in the name of Marxist Lenninism. Also , WW1 and WW2 many died and it had nothing to do with religion. Hitler (and other's ) murder of the Jews and nothing to do with religion. Marxist will say, "Well it wasn't proper Marxism. " I say "Well a Racialist or Anti Semite willl say ' Racial Nationalism is OK if it is done properly." I thing not and there is no such thing as good Marxism either,

I do have a faith but I agree about separating state and religion and that there should be provision of education with no morning service etc. The rest of your post I find illiberal and a bit insulting. Having a spiritual faith does not equate to belief in an invisible man, that’s an oversimplification. Banning children from attending religious services and not allowing schools to teach religion at all removes individual parental choices. Learning about different religions and cultures is interesting and also helps some people reflect .

I agree with separating church and state, most especially in education - state funded religious schools are just plain wrong

So do I, @Mischance, but sooner or later someone will point out that the churches originally owned the buildings and that they'd have to be bought back if the link was to severed

Except it doesn't work, not least because of all the ££££ the state's provided in maintenance over the years, to say nothing of the "advertising" aspect the churches have enjoyed

Value the buildings, adjust for all the above, and it would probably be found that churches actually owed the state a large wodge of money - which they could well afford to pay

What has happened to get your nickers in a twist?

and to point 5 nudists do go out in public. It is not uncommon where I live to see someone naked.

I way replying to a specific comment by another poster.

OP is the kind of dogmatist that makes me ashamed to call myself an atheist 😅

1-3 I absolutley agree with.

4 I'm not fussed unless the child has expressed a clear indication that they don't want to go- they can always come back to it when they are older & better informed if they choose- I will never attend another church service (outside of funerals or weddings) as long as I live, thanks to being forced to endure them at school.

5, sorry, but that's the atheist equivalent of a religious zealot's mindset- you can't & shouldn't be able to dictate to people about their personal faiths & right to practise them as they see fit (provided they aren't extremist views).

I say that as someone who has no interest in religion.

Most Christians in the UK aren't catholic so you can't expect them to answer your question.

You sound really ignorant and with all due respect, a bit thick.

And some like OP indoctrinate that all regions are evil and wrong. Both approaches are wrong and dangerous

I agree with you on all points other than 4 and 5.

I wasn't going to ask that - your job title suggests it's fairly broad and comprehensive.

That's great.
Sadly some parents do indoctrinate in one faith and promote the idea that all other faiths are wrong.

And, before you ask, I don’t work in a faith school and yes, our RE curriculum includes non-religious worldviews.

@KeinLiebeslied54321 well, my job is head of RE and philosophy in a large school so actually, yes, I think I am.

Are you educating them, to the best of your ability, about ALL faiths?