to want my child to be free of religion at school?

[cherryade8]

I've startedlooking at schools and attending open days for my dd. Even the supposedly secular schools teach about religion and seen to have display boards with posters and pupils work explaining the intricacies of each religion.

I'm not religious and don't wish dd to be exposed to more than a cursory explanation of religion at school. What people choose to teach their children outside of school is none of my business, why does the curriculum seem to want to force it on children? It seems to be the case in both state and private schools.

Aibu?

SDTG thank you for your answer, I think that is a very valid point ignorance breeds fear

ivykaty44 - maybe they don't? Not everywhere is as tolerant of difference as here.

YABU. You do not live in a vacuum, why would you want your child to grow up ignorant? By all means, pull your child out of saying prayers at the end of assembly but to deny them an education because of your anti-religious stance is silly. Learning that Jews do not eat bread for 8 days over passover because that's what Jewish people believe in will neither indoctrinate nor damage your child.

Athiests get so aggressive on these sorts of threads. Before I get accused of being a 'fairy believer', I don't know how I would label myself. I am very much on the fence but I've always been interested in learning about other religions and cultures. It helped me form my own opinions. Those of you who don't want your children to learn about religion are as bad as those who want their children to only learn religion. Give them the education and let them make up their own damn minds!

I have been against the idea of any religious worship in any school for years, obviously with exception of teaching children about how other religions work.

Apart from that, I truly believe that school is not a place for worship....parents can teach their beliefs t home and in church if they want. As a child going to a C of E primary literally brainwashed me into believing it as gospel.....I didn't make my own mind up at all until I was an adult.

Morals and good behaviour can be taught without using any form of religion. The first British schools were started with mostly money from the Church and so that is why they carried on like that to today.

With govt. funding etc, there is now no need to be linked to the church.

Why can't the head teacher say something like "a good person" rather than "a good Christian"?

YANBU.

There should be a proper secular option in the state school system. The weight given to RE in the school system is a historical anachronism, like the bishops in the House of Lords.

I can certainly see the value of studying RE from a social and ethical point of view and agree that much European art, music and literature doesn't make sense without knowledge of Christianity but can't see why it isn't incorporated into some form of general philosophical and ethical studies, at least at secondary level.

The RE GCSE course I used to teach is an uneasy mixture of Very Big Topics ('Why does God allow suffering?' 'How was the world created?') covered in a fairly superficial way, combined with "Christians believe this while Muslims believe this' stuff. I suspect a lot of students like it because if you are articulate and fond of stating your own opinion it is quite easy to get an A!

Ivykaty - please can you tell us the countries whose people are tolerant of religion? Sounds a bit of a sweeping statement.

Can't decide if yabu or not?!
I'm definately an atheist but I think I'll leave it upto my dc to decide their own opinions. Ds is in reception and after Easter he is now convinced Jesus died on a crossbow lol! I have corrected him but he still thinks he's right. When he talks to me about any religious projects they're doing etc I talk to him like its a story not real as I don't think anyone can prove at all that its real. He was all caught up about how Jesus died for 'us' and I said 'yes it's a nice story isn't it'.
I myself would far more believe in the men in black theory before anything religious! : )

shallweshop - well other countries in Europe are as tolerant as the Uk of other religions yet they do not all teach about other religions in there primary schools. Is it a sweeping statement to say the Uk is tolerant of other religions

Agree both are sweeping statements and would therefore not make them. However, I still feel that in order to understand the world around them, kids need to learn about different religions.

Actually, religion should be taught alongside mythology. Because the ancient Greek and Roman myth systems, along with the Norse and Celtic ones have just as much importance in terms of culture as the contemporary ones WRT literature, art, society etc. Not to have a basic knowledge of these is to be ignorant, too. Easy enough to start the classes with the information that different people believe different bits are true but hey kids, these are the effects these different myths have had.
Because, in a multicultural world, some of the kids in each class are going to have been taught at home that one of these sets of myths is actually true and the others aren't, and they need to be able to understand that other people are going to view the whole lot differently.

TBH I would like DS' school to get on with a bit of general religious education, so I don't have any more... incidents with him like the other week when he put his jumper on his head and capered about yelling, 'Look Mummy, I'm a Muslim.' We had a Little Talk all the way home about not taking the mickey out of what other people do and wear and think...

I think that it's impossible for RE to be taught at schools without bias. I know I had Christianity drilled into me at a supposedly moderate primary and secondary school when I was young. Conversely I know a devout Muslim RE teacher who has no time for Hinduism and Christianity, I can hardly see that he can teach 'neutrally'.

Also, I disagree with many of the principles in various religions, such as sexism in most (no female bishops, pope and cardinals men, burkas for women, anti contraception etc), plus sacrificing animals and other things I find offensive. My concern is that religion is thrust upon my child with no criticism given.

As I said in my op, I don't mind a brief overview being taught, but I object to brainwashing that all religious principles are decent and without critique. I'd say leave it out of the curriculum.

A critique of religion is part of the curriculum, OP.
I think you don't understand the realities of what you are criticising.

It needs a whole lot of people to make a stand against and I just don't think (sadly) that it will ever happen.

I think dc need to learn and explore a lot of things, what I question is if we need dc to have lessons dedicated to re at junior school and does it really really help stop discrimination? Or do people think it does and that was why I wanted to question.

yes I agree that ignorance breeds fear and that can turn to hate.

But do we really have to start teaching at 5 and not leave this till the dc are 11 and at secondary school? I am not convinced though could well swayed that there may be a reason

my dd has really enjoyed some of her RE lessons at secondary school but as with any lesson as soon as she got a teacher she wasn't keen on the lessons got boring, though the teacher thinks dd contributes very well and enjoys having her in class (or so she says) dd has to do Re for gcse in her school it is not a choice she can make to drop the subject

dd did a lot of learning about Islam but not in RE and I am sure it was in History?

Some of the posts contain sweeping statements about what is mandatory, what schools provide, what parents provide etc - I can only give my account of my family and the two schools we have been involved with so -

My DS primary was a very mixed and tolerant school until a new head took over. Up to that point the teachers covered many different religions and the associated ceremonies/festivals - something I and the families (at least the ones that expressed an opinion directly to me) loved about the school.

It indeed encouraged inclusivity and tolerance

The new head brought with him a huge focus on religion and not all religious, not even just Christianity, but a very narrow part of Christianity (he is from a very narrow, what I would term batshit sect) this included telling teachers to let unqualified church members in to take RE which became very much more instruction rather than studies or education including telling the children that those unbaptised would 'go to hell'

As my son was nearing leaving we expressed our disappointment as did many other families - going to LEA and even to ministerial level - but he stayed on for the last year while others moved school as I had sufficient time and resources to offer additional teaching at home.

Move to grammar. I asked to see their proposed curriculum for RE and despite being told he couldn't opt out unless Muslim or A.N.Other religion (misinformation easily debunked) I did pull him out of RE and substituted my own curriculum that covered many more religions and world views than their proposed one - lots of work but I believed it important enough to me and to his education to do so. (Btw he would have been stuck at back of classroom otherwise although a child of another religion was allowed to go to the library tsk!)

NI has particular issues concerning religion so I wouldn't have him devoid of learning and yes, perhaps I was better placed than many to give him such an in-depth and wide-ranging alternative curriculum (including exams), but I do not think it can be said of all schools that the RE lessons are unbiased. His deputy HT at grammar is also from a narrow 'sect' and used to be head of RE.

As stated upthread, asking questions about what will be taught, how and by whom wrt religion is a fair enough suggestion especially if you have the inkling that he may be being taught in a narrower way, more heavily weighted to one religion or strand. Then you can make up your mind as to pull the child out of collective worship or RE classes or both

I would suggest it is very much in your child's best interest to have some form of substitute teaching in RE though or you may leave them unprepared when faced with religion at a later date (fore warned is fore armed and all that)

I will never agree to stand against educating children about religion. We are not tolerant enough of religions in this country, let's not breed more ignorance.

crashdoll your post made me think of FGM where I think in the Uk we have been far to tolerant and turned a blind eye as it is illegal and yet no prosecutions have ever taken place in this country and nothing is done to prevent this happening.

So I don't think I agree with your statement that we are not tolerant enough in this country - I think we are very tolerant in this country and at time we must not be tolerant if what is happening is wrong and makes people suffer

crashdoll' it's not about stopping educating. Children about religion, it's about teaching them that its all true and brainwashing them into a certain religion.

I totally agree that children should have RE and learn the views of other religions but not have daily worship in school and any one faith celebrated in a school.

YANBU. Other European countries manage perfectly well without it. If you really want to teach it, the basics could easily be covered in six weeks in history classes rather than being a whole subject in its own right, freeing up time for more useful stuff. Like MFL, as someone upthread suggested.

Mine were/are being told constantly about God and Jesus and an awful lot of bible stories, as though they were fact.

It is a church-funded school though - just, the other schools are a bit shite. I now HE my younger one. I didn't like him being told about nails through hands, that kind of thing, it's all rather alarming - but that wasn't the main reason I took him out.

Just, I'm glad he's not being taught that any more. just my mother to contend with now (who won't say the words sex, or God, out loud, or watch anything where people say the word God.

king that is how religious education should be taught but as you can see from my post that is not always the case

It is very much dependent on the teacher and the culture within the school. When RE was being taught neutrally and inclusive of many forms I was more than happy for my DS to be in that class/school. It is only when it is high jacked by an over zealously religious teacher that it moves into more dodgy ground.

In our primary indoctrination is precisely the word used by parents to object to the massive change in teaching methods and content of RE lessons.

In my DS grammar the actual teachers in the classroom were not neutral but did encourage debate so I don't equate that as indoctrination but combined with the curriculum for the the RE classes it does have a clear basis not just to Christianity but to to one strand of Christianity and that to me is not acceptable.

I do think N.Ireland is a particular case though, with it being viewed for so long as unimaginable to educate protestant and catholic children together. It will take re a while to catch up (so to speak) with rest of UK.
Ime primary schools are bigger on teaching it as if everyone is Christian than secondary schools, but this may well be to do with fact that secondary re teachers are specialists.

"It's been shown that the brain invents religion at an early age"

Err... Mine didn't. And neither did the brains of all those atheists you see around you, who have never believed in any of those stories.

Would you say that atheists' brains are not normal? Do we need to be... adjusted?

"Explaining death to a toddler without a heaven is a hard job, and leaves very little comfort for the child"

Not in my experience. Children are smart and they are resilient. There is no need to lie to them invent fairy stories. You just need to explain things with age-appropriate terms and be open to all questions.

I have a question: At which age does RE start in the UK?