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?

"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."

That comparison was OTT and verging on a bit gross.

Hi Cote - there are several parts of the EYFS (early years foundation stage) curriculum that cover aspects of RE. This is used and required from at least 3 and possibly from birth in all nurseries and pre-schools and also in reception classes. It also covers care from birth by child-minders and nurseries. But I'd say from about 2 or 3 early years providers would need to show that they were exploring aspects of community, such as the celebration of festivals, particularly those relevant to any of the children's home lives, and also, under personal and social education, aspects of morality, such as being kind to others, and telling the truth. Some of the main stories from the faith communities would probably start coming in more from reception onwards, and though interesting can be quite a challenge for both children and staff I think
Plenty of things to start thinking about here with 2 and 3 year olds I think.

Cote in Scotland the curriculum begins at 3, so all areas start to be covered then. In re terms that would be a bit about values and sharing, for example, with maybe making decorations for Chinese new year. (From my experience of dc at nursery)

Thanks, Juggling. I was trying to figure out why people are comparing RE to History etc.

When religion is taught at the age of 3, I agree with those who say that it is indoctrination. There is no way for a 3 year old to understand the difference between religion and everything else he is learning from adults that he doesn't question.

RE should be left to an age when children can reason, debate, and decide for themselves what sounds plausible and what doesn't, imho.

crashdoll - it wasn't a comparison - your post made me think do we tolerate and sometime I think we tolerate to much and that is detrimental to some people. As for it being gross yes it is to my mind awful and far worse than gross

KingRollo see post @
Sat 18-May-13 18:54:18 for the answer to your question

X-post Iggy.

DS is 4 and goes to a secular pre-school. At Christmas, they sing songs about how Santa brings gifts and comes down the chimney.

DD is almost 8 and in a primary school where there is 1 hour per week of RE that is focused entirely on Catholicism that would lead to her confirmation in a catholic church next year in a white dress if I didn't take her out of it.

Several months ago, DD asked me if I believe God exists. That was the first time the word "God" was mentioned between us. I didn't answer but turned the question to her instead: "What do you think, DD?". She said "I don't think so, because..." and started explaining. She could have also said "I think so, because...". Then we had a conversation about the different things people believe in different parts of the world.

That is how you let DC make their own minds about these things, imho. Not through being taught by authority figures in their lives (teachers & parents) about one religion or another, or even all of them, at an age when they will just take it all in as fact.

I really don't think DC have suffered by not knowing about the Chinese New Year until now, either, imho.

Oh and seeing how absolute DC's belief in Santa is, I shudder to think how devout they would have been if their preschool taught religion

I do think children at 3 get a lot out of exploring aspects of the festivals of their and their friends' faith communities. Things like having a Chinese dance troupe come in and help them celebrate Chinese New Year with a noisy lion dance - where they maybe make a lion costume out of cardboard boxes, and make their own drums to join in with frightening the "old" lion away. Or making little "diva" lamps for Divali, especially as part of the autumn "festivals of light", which can provide some common ground between the different autumn festivals of different communities.

As I said I think 3 year olds can gain a lot from these activities, mainly just because they are interesting, and it's good to start young with learning about something completely new ! Also it's good to engage with other communities around you, and great to get involved in active ways with some fantastic, ancient stories.

My DCs are in an international school where no religion is allowed in assemblies. RE is taught briefly as part of the PSHCE rotation, the students get about 6 lessons.

Religion is left up to parents- which is exactly how it should be in my mind. I am with SGB in that I think no children should be indoctrinated.

The school manages to teach GCSE, IB and A level history perfectly adequately without the children having been taught RE.

I managed to explain death perfectly well to DS when his granddad died a couple of years ago, without falling back on 'gone to heaven' or any other nonsense. DS understands that the energy that was Granddad is still here in a different form.

When my GM died, I explained it to DD with the analogy of the flowers we put in a vase. How they grow old and die and that is how life is. She was perfectly fine with it.

Then my mum tried to work on her with "She is now a star up in the sky" etc, to which DD apparently replied "I don't think so. That is not how stars are formed" and launched into an explanation of hot balls of gas that lasted until my mum's ears fell off

Apparently though, according to the great introductory exhibit at the Royal Observatory in Greenwich (recommended BTW) "we are all made of star dust" - I guess certain vital elements that make up our bodies were formed in the heart of stars many, many, miles from Earth
Love your dd's response to her granny though Cote !

juggling I love that we are all made of star dust thing!!!!

So I guess Cote's dd could have said ... it's not so much that she's a star now granny, more that she always was, just like we are
(or something along those lines)

YANBU OP. People are religious because religion provides them with a mythic structure, morality, a cultural context and an understanding of spirituality. As most children in this country are not religious, as a society we should be giving them more educational opportunities around mythic structure, morality, a cultural context and spirituality. Instead we teach them RE which essentially makes them spectators of the experiences of a minority of people of people in the UK rather than giving them opportunities to have more of an understanding of their own experiences.

I absolutely support teaching children about minority groups, but the experiences of religious people do not deserve a whole subject in the curriculum. We could just as easily do a whole subject throughout school on gender, race, disability or sexual orientation. The justification that RE teaches these things so is worthwhile is a nonsense. The focus of RE is not history, geography, history of art, social diversity and equality or human rights; it is religious belief. It simply mentions these other things in passing. It is the equivalent of me teaching school children sexual orientation for ten years and then saying, 'oh, but we do cover religion. As part of our sexual orientation course, we teach in year seven sexual orientation activism groups' perspective on whether religion is immoral or not. We're not teaching prejudice against religious people; we're teaching children to debate about whether or not practising religion is an immoral act.'

Religion has a position of privilege in the curriculum which it does not deserve.

I'm not French, but I'm pleased my DS is learning French in school....

I am a card-carrying atheist and abhor compulsory worship in schools and many other things. However, to know nothing about the cultural and philosophical beliefs so intertwined with religious beliefs leaves you pretty ignorant in art, literature, politics, anthropology, history, and many other subjects.

I was worried about religion in schools but luckily my son isnt the type to be bullshitted about anything and says its all just a story,and he hates when they have to go to church he thinks its boring.

and they also say the same about father christmas,weve never really done it,but never said hes not real,they just decided that its just a story,and that is at age 3,4 and 5!

Blu, your children aren't taught more French than English in school though. Children are taught more about many aspects of religious culture than they are of their own culture. I agree that children shouldn't be ignorant of anthropology; it would be an excellent replacement for RE.

I would have the whole subject re-named 'Philosophy, ethics and beliefs', I think.

Actually, I think the curriculum does cover 'their own culture' more than others - again, across the whole curriculum. The war, the industrial revolution, the agricultural revolution - all having an immense impact on the patterns of life and culture in this country - including beliefs about men and women, religion, class, the value of human beings etc.

I was rolling my eyes by the third time they covered Diwali in primary school..but now in secondary, DS's RE homework includes discussion topics on the difference between how a humanist / atheiest would view different situations and a member of a particular religion - over morality, death, leadership, where influence comes from etc etc, so secular morals and beliefs are covered alongside others.

Cote it would be her first Communion at 8.Confirmation comes much later in RC Church.

"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."

You seem to have a lot of preconceived assumptions about how religion is taught in schools. DD is 12 and is at high school, they have assembly, but they don't have religious assemblies. There is no Christian bias at her high school and she has one hour of RE a fortnight. I would hardly call that overkill.

I expect that the way religion is taught has changed a lot since you were at school.

As for many practices of various religions I doubt that the teacher will condone them, they will just be taught as "this is what they do". I don't agree with some of the practices especially the more barbaric ones like circumcision for example, but I am not going to prevent my daughter from learning about it because I think she needs to know. Plus she is quite capable of deciding for herself that it is a horrible practice.

You can ask for your children to be pulled out of assembly at primary school, I am sure they won't be the only ones. And can I suggest you talk to the schools you are interested in and ask about how they teach religion. It strikes me that you are slightly afraid that your children are going to be brainwashed into joining a cult.

I also think that leaving RE out of the curriculum is very short sighted and bigoted. Learning about other religions helps us understand about so many customs and teaches religious tolerance.

Sorry, but I think YABU and haven't thought it through properly.

There are numerous topics my children have only covered in school from a religious perspective. There are whole countries they have only discussed in RE in terms of religion and have never studied in any other subject. They have learned a lot about religious views on karma and disability but have had no secular teaching on disability whatsoever. That time could could have been more suitably used teaching children about secular deaf culture, how sign language is used creatively by deaf people, or about aspects of autism or people who are blind - their historical contribution, current culture, fight for rights, and so on. But to do that we'd have to believe that disability is as important in diversity as religion is.

Those are just a couple of examples of many things that are largely secular and schools can have claimed to have taught through RE, when the religious perspective on them is a tiny, fairly irrelevant part of the overall cultural topic. Adding together the time spent on RE and PSHE would give schools a big chunk of time to teach some kind of social studies course which dealt with human rights and diversity, philosophy and anthropology.