My 5 year old niece was told to go home and pray

[freyjasauntie]

I am really upset that my 5 year old niece was told by her school teacher to go home and pray at bedtime. Although she goes to a C of E school, this is due to logistics of living in the country, and the school are aware that she is being raised atheist, (she was enrolled as such) with a view to letting her decide her own path when she is ready to understand what that entails.

If a Muslim teacher had told her girls to go home and wear hijab, there would be uproar, but it seems to be accepted that schools can promote Christian ideology. I have no problems with my niece being taught about Jesus, about being kind to each other, about truth telling and other so called Christian Values (which can be found in almost any religion) but I strongly object to her being told to give up something for Lent (she had no idea why she should do so), and to pray at bedtime.

Religious Education should be EDUCATION, as a qualified RE teacher, I have always presented all world religious as equally valuable, but there is a real difference between education and what I believe is insidious indoctrination.

The whole "people should pay for faith schools" is ridiculous.

All those atheists would have to pay also now for their one and only local school; or do you think you should be exempt? If you cannot afford it what will you do?

Imagine the uproar having to pay the 'greedy' faith school then.

The minority are barring access to schools where admission is based on criteria such as regular worship with a letter from the vicar, rather than distance. They are privileged if the CofE school is the only one for miles around but the people running it use it to indoctrinate children rather than teaching them about religion.

I don't have a problem with faith state schools unless they exclude the majority of the population or insist on inflicting religious instruction on the children of non-religious families (or those of different religions).

And yes, regular worshippers are a minority of the population. Not sure any religious group has a majority of the population even when it comes to just sticking CofE on a form, but certainly it's fewer than half who actually go to Church regularly. Other religions are obviously even smaller.

There is no such thing as a Christian education.

You can teach people/children about Christianity or any religion and that is simply education. This is a good thing and the same as teaching them about geography and history. Or you can make them practise the religion of Christianity and that isn't education.

Making someone else's children practise your religion is abuse and anyone found doing it should be on the same register as the other people who won't leave people's kids alone.

So one one hand regular worshippers are the minority on the other hand they have the power to barr access through their regular worship?

Abuse! Well then it would be very odd indeed too willingly send your chilldren into a situation you believed they were going to be abused and shows a lack of parental responsibilty.

I have never heard such rubbish onagar! The school is quite clear-you do not have to send them. If you do send them you have been told exactly what the policy is before you start!
I really can't see the problem with opting out-which is your right. Had my parents paid for me to go to a convent school at 11yrs they would have opted me out of catholic teaching-that wasn't odd-it was the norm-lots of non catholics went and they were all withdrawn from the catholic parts.
All you have to do is say, we are not practising Christians I would like to withdraw my DC. It would hardly be odd of all these legions of parents hate it and think it 'child abuse'.
Faith schools are very popular-to the extent of parents 'finding religion' to get a place.

Exactly exotic. To make such a comparision as Onagar did is actually very distasteful IMO.

Sorry if legions of parents hate it. According to posters on here, parents loathe faith schools and yet they carry on quite happily. I think that there would be an outcry from the 'silent' majority if you took away the ethos-which is the very thing that makes them good schools!

I think the fact that many parents have little choice but to send their kids to a 'faith' school is a very good argument for not having 'faith' schools in the State system. Even if all state schools were barred from promoting a relionist agenda however, there is still the problem of state propaganda, and any syllabus has an agenda of some sort, there is no such thing as 'simply eduction'. I think the OP would be quite right to protest vigorously against the pushing of religion, but the main thing is really to help children near and dear to you to have an enquiring, analytical mind and ensure they understand their right to question information and ideas frm ANY source.

oops, 'religionist'

This is the issue.

Faith schools are often the only one around and can inflict religious instruction on children whose parents have to send them there, funded by tyhe local LEA, as they have no other choice. If the child was a buddist or hindu, or seikh and they were being made to worship christian gods, we would all think this was unreasonable. On MN the same courtesy doesnt apply to athiests.

I have no particular axe to grind with the existance of faith schools, my children attend a christian school. but they shouldnt be the ONLY choice and parents who dont agree with their ideology expected to lump it, move house, go private or home ed. Everyone up in arms at the idea of paying for faith schools seems quite happy with the idea of those who object paying for education of their children elsewhere. Surely that isnt right either

So you would be happy to pay for you kids Christian school in the future then elastamum, right?

a silly instruction to a child of 5. The teacher should grow up

Yes you can withdraw your kids, but it isnt easy on the child.

My son was distressed at being 'picked on' by the teacher for being a 'selective atheist' which was aparently 'trendy' He was 9 at the time and was publically called to account for his beliefs in front of the class. The teacher apologised, but I dont think the school really understood why it was such an issue until I suggested they substitute hindu for athiest and see how it might read in the papers

That isnt really answering the question.

Are you happy to pay for the school in the future?

I do pay for them to go to a christian school. They are privately educated. There are private christian schools or state CofE here, nothing else.

It seems quite simple to me.

1. historically faith schools exist because they were the only ones to consider the education of the masses.
2. when the state woke up to the fact that universal education was a good thing their job was made easy-they infilled in the places without schools (generally the towns that were growing rapidly). It saved them lots of money and they didn't bother building a school where one already existed.

(all state schools are broadly Christian anyway-so why would they bother).

1. Where people get a choice faith schools are very popular and oversubscribed.
2. Some people are annoyed because they don't get a choice having chosen to live in an area where you can't easily reach a school that is not a faith school.

5, this has been allowed for-the school has to be 'all inclusive' and so you can opt out of the religious teaching.

1. the church can't be just expected to hand over all assets to the state. If the state doesn't want to have faith schools they need the cash to 'buy them out'.
2. Many faith schools are very low key and you can't really tell the difference between them and a community school, which will quite possibly have close links with the vicar anyway.

a silly instruction to a child of 5. The teacher should grow up

So you think the 5yr old is 100% reliable in understanding and reporting all messages?

If so many people are unhappy the majority of the DCs would be withdrawn and the few that went would run the risk of being 'picked on'.

obviously there is an issue when the only game in town so to speak is a faith school and you don't believe. That's the issue here rather than should they ahve told her to 'go home and pray' which they may well have felt perfectly entitled to do 'under current regualtions' !

think the OP is a bit of a busybody possibly (sorry OP) but if I were the child's parents and this was really my only option, yes I would despair too.

I really think that if you looked straight into the face of a 5yr old, even right at the end of the day, and said 'listen carefully, I want you to get this right-tell mummy..............' very few would give the correct message-they would give what they understood it to be. Two very different things.

breadandbutter

YABU - if you don't espouse the religious values of the school you shouldn't send your child (or niece) there. There is no shortage of non-denominational schools for those who prefer that.

You clearly don't live in the country do you? Most rural areas you simply have no choice but CofE primary schools.

On point 6. really, why ever not? The assets (schools) were put in place to educate children. If the current situation in some places is that given the choice the parents of those children would prefer for their education to have less religious control, why shouldn't the church hand over the buildings to an institution that can fulfill that need - i.e. the LEA. Basically you are saying that because they own the land they can hold the children's education to ransom i order to secure their captive audience.

And that is ok?

So were happy to pay for a faith school- cannot be so awful then.

I love my nephews dearly, but I wouldn't be getting bothered about what they thought a teacher had said at school. Their education, religious beliefs have nothing to do with me.I think my brother and SIL would, quite rightly, get annoyed if I voiced an opinion-other than in general discussion terms.

The church may want the money for projects that are wanted.