To refuse the offer of a bible from local church for dd to commemorate starting school?

[Norfolkbumpkin]

I have just received a round robin email from the school where dd has just started in reception. It says that as per the last few years the local church will be giving each child a bible to commemorate starting school, and to advise the office if for any reason you do not wish for your child to have one. I have replied saying no thanks as feel rather uncomfortable with this, but is this normal practice? I know that the school follows the standard guidelines for R.E. etc, but I am aware that the deputy head (who teaches one of the reception classes) is very active in the local church. She runs bible lessons after school one afternoon a week, and the church have an active presence at the school by doing the gardening in the flower beds and odd maintenance jobs. Am I reading too much into the bible thing or is it a tad pushy?

It's not so much about wanting to forbid DC reading the bible or whichever book of special fairytales they might fancy reading. Christian myths and superstitions are just as culturally relevant to the UK as Greek and Roman and Norse and Celtic ones, all of which have had direct and lasting influence on the way we live now. It's about peddlers of one specific brand of crap taking it upon themselves to peddle their crap and their imaginary friend to five year olds in such a way as to make it seem extra important and significant, and official. A more suitable present for DC starting school would probably be a dictionary or a book of poetry, but there is no particular reason why any person or organisation should fund such a gift.

I think the OP#'s annoyance might actually be similar to mine when a rubbish pop group played at DS school and he came home with stickers and stuff - I thought it inappropriate that a record company should basically use a school for free advertising - to 5 and 6 year olds, it seems as though this particular pop group was endorsed by the school and officially Good. (It was The Wanted, FFS.)

Hahs Bile. Freudian slip there

We all got given a gideon's bible in school. Not a church school.

Erm...actually you didn't. You said: "Religion is based on theology which is human interpretation of written and oral ideas." Which is completely wrong, so I don't blame you for trying to pretend you didn't really say it.

Yeah, yeah, yeah - I'm a zealot . I always know when I've won the argument, because out come the ad hominems. You have that in common with many Christians, at least.

My "problem" (if I even have one) is with people who claim to follow a book and then ignore most of it.

I'm sure you are a very nice person, Clem - but I have found your arguments this evening to be the daftest I have encountered in a long time.

(Christians who don't believe God created the universe ?)

I am probably misunderstanding the humanist camapign - because if I'm not labelling anyones kids, and you're not labelling anyone's kids, then who is this aimed at? Erm....people who are?

I will address the rest of your post tomorrow, Designer. I totally agree that it's too late for theology.

You are tiresome now. I can't really be bothered to explain the bleeding obvious and if it pleases you to point score then so be it.
I am unclear however because you started off finding the Bible problematic and now you find Christians who do not interpret the Bible problematic. Which one is it? And if it is the latter, why would you bothered by people who believe there is a higher entity and that the spirit of that entity is love, and whose belief in that entity is also compatible with a belief in the Big Bang theory?
I don't share that belief (because I don't believe in the entity) but I am ENTIRELY puzzled as to why that belief would bother you?

Should read "do not interpret the Bible literally."

I would refuse it. I think it's wrong to try and set the tone like that. It's a waste of money so they must have certain motives to go there. It is trying to set Christianity as the default religion.

I am not deliberately "point scoring" - but I agree I am scoring the points .

I am unclear however because you started off finding the Bible problematic and now you find Christians who do not interpret the Bible problematic. Which one is it? Both, perhaps?

I am not bothered by the "belief". But beliefs inform actions - and therein lies the problem. Actions like handing out copies of a Holy Book without invitation to children; trying to teach them nonsense in a science class (and yes, that's happening); preventing equality within society; demanding special privileges & the right to break the law because of those beliefs. To name but a few.

And that's just in this country. Head abroad (say Uganda, Nigeria etc) and let's see just how "loving" Christianity actually is, shall we?

So what is your problem with people who interpret and practice Christianity in none of those ways?

Actually, don't bother. I have managed to break of my own rule of "don't argue with a bigot" so I will take my oh-so infuriating liberal-minded tolerance off to bed.

So what is your problem with people who interpret and practice Christianity in none of those ways? None. But this thread is not about such people - it's about those who "hand out copies of a Holy Book to children without invitation" so my view on this matter would therefore be relevant here.

I am not a bigot. But if insulting me before running away makes you feel a bit better about the monumental mess you've made with this discussion, feel free.

I'd be embarrassed too .

OK. I have work to do but...

FWIW I don't think anyone on here is a bigot, actually...

Anyway.

The bibles were 'offered' with an option to refuse, not 'handed out without invitation'.

Christianity is, like it or not the state religion. If I was raising my family in an islamic state, I would fully expect them to receive a copy of the Koran at some point in their school career. In most Islamic states there would not, however, be the option to politely refuse.

So yes, in law, Christianity does have 'special status'. That's the country we live in. Lump it or campaign for change, but don't be 'shocked and surprised' it's hardly news. [Interestingly I suspect as many Christians as non-christians would welcome a greater separation between church and state. I'm on the fence on that one, actually.]

The good news is that what also enshrined by law is 'freedom of worship'. This goes hand in hand with a Christian state, and the Christian faith, because of the emphasis on free will. Faith in God is a relationship based on love. It's not love if you force someone, against their will. It has to be their free choice, you can;t compel someone to have faith, to love God. Free will. It also causes all sorts of mess, confusion and doubt and leaves the way open for humans to make a huge hash of things. But it's central, unavoidable and instrinsic to what I, as a Christian believe.

And lastly, I think of Christianity as a bit like white chocolate magnums. The first time I had a white chocolate magnum, it was head-explodingly good. Simply the best thing I'd ever had in my mouth, EVER. So, naturally I'm going to go to my friends and say "Oh my goodness, have you TRIED a white chocolate Magnum!? You REALLY should.". I'm not going to think, "This is AMAZING. I mustn't tell anyone I know about this, I must keep it a secret. No-one must know how much I like White Chocolate Magnums, or how good they are." Now, anyone I tell about white chocolate magnums, is fully within their rights to say "I don't like white chocolate" or "Ice-cream hurts my teeth." or "I'm on a diet" or whatever. I would have to accept that they are not going to share my love for white chocolate magnums, but I would also feel like they were missing out.

So I may feel you're misguided in your rejection of Christianity. But I would defend to my dying breath your right to reject it. Because if you didn;t have that, then it wouldn't be a religion of love and free-will. It wouldn;t be the God that I know, and who invites us to love him, but never, ever, compels us to.

You have the option to refuse. Always. But I, as a Christian, will keep making the offer. Always.

db
xx

Designerbaby

Yes it is a Christian state (historically, nominally, for what its worth etc...)

But in this case it wasn't the state handing out bibles to all children to commemorate starting school (which would be a whole nother kettle of fish)

It was one Deputy Head thinking it would be a good idea to allow an organisation to which she is affiliated to distribute its literature/free gift as part of a school ceremony.

They had the sense to think 'you know what, some people might not appreciate this: lets send a letter home to find out', but they didn't have the sense to think 'perhaps it is just not a good idea to commemorate an important shared experience in the school's life with an item that is not inclusive'.

I think in this case the school should have refused the church's offer.

"It was one Deputy Head thinking it would be a good idea to allow an organisation to which she is affiliated to distribute its literature/free gift as part of a school ceremony."

It was the local CofE church, FFS, not the Klu Klux Klan. The OP lives in rural Norfolk, (where I, too was brought up) and where, legally and culturally, the local church is at the heart of the community.

This is honestly RIDICULOUS.

If my children were brought up in a certain part of North London which is predominantly Jewish (and they very nearly were, except the houses were too expensive) and the local Rabbi/synagogue offered them a copy of the Torah to mark the start of school, I would honestly, honestly think that was a nice gesture. I would accept, and have a discussion with my DC about who it was from and what it was. I would explain that Mummy and Daddy have different beliefs, but that many of their classmates go to Synagogue instead of Church.

I honestly don't know why this is perceived as so sinister and scary. It enriches our children, and makes them more aware of the beliefs of others. I'm all for open discussion of beliefs and welcome anything that prompts that.

Including this, slightly weird, thread.

db
xx

I don't think I read anything that implies the OP thought that it was 'sinister and scary'. Having politely declined, she was just wondering if this sort of gift was normal - in the light of the deputy possibly having a bit of an agenda.

'Am I reading too much into the bible thing or is it a tad pushy?' - well, some think the former, some think the latter. Its funny how threads can mutate from 'a tad pushy' to 'sinister and scary'

It's a kind gift, and one you can say no to if you don't want it.

The school is very lucky to have volunteers from outside the school to help keep the school environment looking good.

The vast majority of people I encounter who volunteer through their church do so to be helpful to those in need of help and sometimes unable to help themselves rather than because of any hidden agenda of indoctrination.

A local Baptist church runs a youth club two of my DCs attend, with no requirement or suggestion they might attend any services, no guilt trips if they don't go to their services (and they don't). For 50p each a week, they get to hang out with their friends in a space large enough to accommodate them with some excellent youth workers and volunteers from the church.

Hi, Designer I'm going to address the points you made last night, because I promised I would - then let's agree to differ, OK?

(And thank you. I may be a right pain in the arse "militant" atheist - whatever that is - but I'm not a bigot).

I had to look up "Sheol" because I've never heard of it - but I see it's another name for Hades, which I am aware of. Sheol/Hades is not "Hell". It was a place that the dead went to - not as a punishment, not as an alternative to Heaven. All dead people went there - good, bad & indifferent. The concept of "Hell" - a place of torment waiting for bad guys (who didn't love God enough usually) originated with gentle Jesus, I'm afraid.

The "New Convenant" did not do away with the OT Laws - you are confusing the two issues. Jesus was a Jew, had great respect for the laws laid out by the Hebrew Bible and made it clear on more than one occasion that he hadn't come to abolish the laws, but to fulfil them: "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill." I am aware that later on Paul claims that Jesus abolished the need to live by those laws, but whose word would you rather take - Paul (who never even met the guy) or Jesus's. No, I have not taken the verse out of context.

And, frankly, if the OT Laws have no more relevance, then why do Christians revere the !0 Commandments? What do you think they are?

"I think the beliefs themselves are stupid and bigoted, yes. And so do most Christians, that's why they disown them." None of the ones I know. And I'd be willing to bet I know more than you do... I'd be willing to bet far more that you don't. Christian cherry-picking of what they do want to abide by and what they don't is so extremely well known that I can't even be bothered to argue this with you. If you lived your life as a good Christian woman, following the Bible as you should, your life would be total shit - that's why almost nobody does.

But here's the thing, Designer - Christian state or not (and that's only true in theory, we are overwhelmingly secular here, as we should be), rather a lot of us do not accept that your God exists, that Jesus (if he'd lived at all, which is doubtful) was more more divine than Frank Bruno & we'd prefer that you do not keep trying to thrust your beliefs into our lives. Because, frankly, we're just not interested. That the local church thought that giving a copy of their own Holy Book (of bronze age fairytales) would be a good thing to do strongly suggests that they not only consider it "special", but think the rest of us should too. And that's presumptous.

And on that note - I am fucking off. :)

*No more divine than Frank Bruno, not more more. Sorry.

yanbu. I would refuse it too.
they get them when they are young and can't resist.
A dictionary or a story book would be a better gift and really the school shouldn't allow the religious to try and sneak things like bibles into homes which is basically what they are doing through your children.
Sounds to me like the headmistress is totally out of order.

Dueling - they're not trying to sneak bibles into people's homes. Parents were able to say they wouldn't like to accept the gift.

Dictionaries are more appropriately given as gifts to Year 6 children when they're a little more useful.

"Get them while they're young" "sneaking" the Bible into people's homes?!

PS Crikey, I have been around these parts a fair few years and thankfully it is not often someone debates in your style (mean-spirited, unnecessarily aggressive) thank goodness, but for the record, a bigot, from the French root, is
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices.

Grown ups don't generally debate by accusing one another of "running away" or playing "I've got more points than you." Most people are able to express a difference of opinion without being that obnoxious.

OP I think this is all about you making a little stand, bucking the trend rather than it this having any substance. It's much more about drawing attention to yourself ( and defining yourself as 'different'0 than you actually making any sense whatsoever. It's a book love, that is all.

This is your first child isn't it? YABU

"Dictionaries are more appropriately given as gifts to Year 6 children when they're a little more useful."

How is a bible in any way useful for a small child?
It IS an attempt to get religion into the hands of small impressionable children.

I am not in any way intollerant of grown ups deciding to believe in god/gods (though I think they must be a bit stupid as it makes no rational sense) because they have made up their own minds, I am intollerant of this shoving and pushing of religion into schools and the minds of young children.
Pisses me off greatly that my son will get all this garbage phased into his life by school/parents/society when he was born totally free of religion and any of the stuff associated with it.
I will be keeping him away and out of it for as long as I possibly can and I really do resent the fact that at some point I will have to do the whole 'well this is what some people pelieve' speech. Why can't he just continue to grow up without having to listen to these fairy tales and told they are true.

brandysoakedbitch patronising much?

I totally understand the OP's reasons - I would do the same - and it's nothing to do with being PFB or attention seeking, how ridiculous.