To think it is time to secularise all state-funded education?

[fideline]

Just that really.

Johnny- you could look at shaking up admissions law , but that wouldn't eliminate the underlying discrimination in favour of the religious, because it would still mean that non-religious children had to abide by the religious practices of the school they attend. My argument is that enforced religious practice has no place in any state funded school- just as there's no place for enforced vegetarianism, enforced adherence to astrology, enforced support of Manchester City or any other lifestyle choice.

We (rightly) consider discrimination on the basis of protected characteristics abhorrent now, after much campaigning by people who couldn't see any problem with the "no blacks, no Irish" mentality prevalent here not so long ago. We would never accept a state school system which selected according to skin colour, so why is it acceptable to discriminate on religious grounds?

"It's very hard for people who are being intolerant and aggressive to recognise their own behaviour and attitudes."

Could you possibly show me where anyone has been aggressive and intolerant on this thread?

*I still think that worship in schools can have a really valuable part to play in children's educational, social and moral development, I have been convinced that selective admissions by faith schools are wrong.

Is it too much to hope that there might be some rapprochement from the other direction?*

Th problem here is I don't think that about worship in schools. So I'm not sure how there can be rapprochement "oh, OK then, I'm glad you agree abut discriminatory admissions practices- in exchange I won't object to my child being taught that God created the world, and being expected to pray to God as a normal part of the day in a tax payer funded school"

Niminy- what in particular do you think people on the thread are failing to consider?

I don't think anyone has said that religious beliefs should not be studied; as far as I can tell, people agree that an objective, broad, balanced study of world religions is hugely beneficial, because it is more likely that children will then grow up with a better understanding of one another's beliefs and cultural practices. And I'd argue that they are more likely to get a balanced view in an educational environment which doesn't already have a strong bias in favour of a particular religion, especially when that religion preaches strongly about the dangers posed by people not of that faith.

It's a matter of tone, of not listening, of shouting down those who voice opinions you don't agree with, of sneering and snarkiness. As I say, it's hard to see when you are doing this yourself, and easy to see when you are on the receiving end. My mother (a trenchant atheist) once told me 'other people's opinions are like their children: they're not as good as yours, but they love them anyway'. This is hard advice to put into practice, and I do often fail myself, but I try to bear it in mind, and I think it's an excellent principle.

Regarding worship, one of the things I notice on this thread is that people have only the vaguest idea of what worship is about, so I wondered if it would be useful to outline what a Christian understanding of what is going on in worship? While I agree fully that religious education is very important, it seems to me that what you often see manifested is the failure of religious education, since posters often have a wildly inaccurate idea of what Christians actually believe (I cannot speak for other religions) and of what Christian worship involves.

I'd be happy to do that, but have to go out now for a couple of hours. I'll check back on my return.

"It's a matter of tone, of not listening, of shouting down those who voice opinions you don't agree with, of sneering and snarkiness. As I say, it's hard to see when you are doing this yourself, and easy to see when you are on the receiving end."

I really really don't want to do this. Please could you post a couple of examples?

Completely agree. Even non-religious schools seem to have the odd religious teacher in them who feels it appropriate to preach to their students.

There were a few weeks last year when my 5 year old became bible-obsessed because a TA at his (non-denominational) school had taken to telling the kids stories about Jesus who she effectively portrayed as some kind of walking-on-water superhero.

CorusKate has already covered much of my intended response, but she's done it more eloquently than I'd manage.

niminy, if you personally feel bullied on this thread then I can certainly say that was never my own intention, but I honestly can't see any evidence of that from anybody.

If you're referring to perceived bigotry against religious groups or schools, I have to smile at the irony that the representatives of these powerful and influential bodies feel that they are the victims of bigotry whilst perpetuating their own state-sanctioned and taxpayer-funded discrimination against children.

It's entirely up to you how you worship, as long as it's legal and non-coercive. I just don't see why it needs to be incorporate into schools at all, nor why if you insist on it being a vital part of education your religious body isn't fully funding it.

Erk, clause fail in that last sentence- hope it still makes sense.

"So when people say that posters on this, and related threads are being aggressive or intolerant or prejudiced or bigoted, it is perfectly likely that these posters are unaware of how their posts are being received, and of the hurtfulness of their words. It's never pleasant to think that you are behaving in prejudiced and hurtful ways, but don't we owe it to others to at least listen to their experience and presume that they are being truthful about it?

I am happy to listen- but I do need examples. If my child said he was being bullied, I would believe him. But I would also ask him to tell me what had happened, and for some examples of the sort of things that people were saying or doing that made him feel like that.

It's very hard for people who are being intolerant and aggressive to recognise their own behaviour and attitudes.

That is a ducking-stool disguised as a sentence nimity

I do hope Niminy will be back this evening. Can I suggest that we don't comment on her post any more? People have said everything that needs to be said, and she may feel unable to cope with pages of replies? I can see why that might be intimidating.

niminy plenty of active Christians (and active followers of other faiths) don't believe state schools should have a religious foundation.

I'm an active Christian. I went to a non-denominational state school which in practice was as close to secular as it was legal to be (and possibly even more so) then later to a Christian independent school with compulsory chapel attendance once or twice a week.

That's how I think it should be. Religious practice is irrelevant to education and therefore to the school day (barring dietary observance), so if you want it you should have to pay for it or save it for the weekend. It is an anachronism in publicly-funded schools.

This is not an argument of Christians v atheists. It is not about removing any reference to religion whatsoever. It's about removing discriminatory admissions procedures from state schools, and confining religion to "about" status rather than "as truth". That's respectful of those of any faith (including agnostic and atheist positions).

I'm not happy that my child is being taught how to pray by school.

Martorana that was very nice of you, and I really appreciate it .

I spent quite a bit of time this afternoon reflecting on my motives for posting, and was coming back to say that perhaps I had mistaken a childish feeling of 'nobody likes me, it's not fair' for intolerance and prejudice. But then I read That is a ducking-stool disguised as a sentence nimity and thought again. Fideline manages to imply that I am persecuting other posters, that I am applying to other posters medieval methods of torture, tortures that are popularly associated with the persecution of women and witches, and were certainly used in the medieval period to determine whether people were slanderers and liars. I don't think it is irrational to think that is a disproportionate response to my sentence.

CorusKate I think your post is actually very helpful. You say This is disgusting. You cannot appropriate the genuine suffering of victims of racism in order to claim immunity from criticism for your powerful, dominant religious and cultural group. You just can't. Don't you see how you look? and it is true, you have shown me what my thoughts look like from another perspective. I had not intended to compare myself to those who suffer racism, nor had I intended to compare posters here to unwitting racists. My thought was to find some analogies that would illustrate how difficult it is for us to see how hurtful our words can be without our conscious knowledge. Your reading of my post illustrates that beautifully.

We all know what it is like to be misunderstood, to have appeared to say things we never intended to say. I remember once saying to someone who was going to sit down next to me on the bus 'oh, I was saving that for my friend', without even thinking about it. This person accused me of not wanting to sit next to a black person, in a loud voice, to the whole bus. It was incredibly upsetting, because I was accused of something awful, and because perhaps, unconsciously I had been racist, and even more, I had confirmed an experience that this person might have had many times, and this person had called me on it. It was a horrible, shaming experience, and quite naturally my first reaction was to be defensive about it. What, me, racist -- how utterly absurd! It was only after thinking about it for a long time, and trying to look at it from the other person's point of view, that I could see that unconsciously and unwittingly I had done something that felt aggressive and attacking to this other person.

There are things I have to say about worship and RE but that's enough for one post!

Oh don't be obtuse.

My point was that it was an unwinnable accusation.

Who would pick a ducking stool as the best example of a torture implement?

The point of the ducking school was that once you were accused of witchcraft you literally couldn't win.

I'm managing to imply you are torturing women?! Pah.

fideline I'm not sure what you mean by an unwinnable accusation accusations aren't things you win or lose do you perhaps mean unprovable?

In any case, you are still associating me with torture and witch-hunting. What I said was that it is hard for us sometimes to recognise when we are behaving badly -- don't you ever find that? It doesn't seem to me an uncommon experience. But to respond to me with oh don't be obtuse isn't the most generous of responses, is it?

You Nimity have managed to compare Christians to victims of racism or homophobia which IS offensive.

And still no-one has pointed to the posts that were bigoted or prejudiced.

Perhaps 'kafkaesque' accusation describes it better.

You are in favour of generous response are you? Really?

I'm sorry, fideline, but I wrote above I had not intended to compare myself to those who suffer racism, nor had I intended to compare posters here to unwitting racists. I don't know how I can say it more plainly than that; perhaps you didn't read the whole post, or perhaps you just didn't understand what I was trying to say. I'm sorry if I have written too obscurely.

I don't want to get into a shouting match about this. I accept that you will not take on board what I have to say. There really isn't much point in me continuing to post if that is the case.